MEMO. ON TELEGRAPH CABLE COMMUNICATION.

Globe, Volume VI, Issue 608, 31 May 1876, Page 3

MEMO. ON TELEGRAPH CABLE COMMUNICATION.

(Per Press Agency.')

The following is the memo, referred to in the news by cable this day : The Commissioner of Telegraph 3 is very much impressed with the necessity which exists for the Australasian colonies coming to a common understanding, and acting in concert in future with respect to cable communication with other countries. At a recent telegraph conference at St Peters burgh they were not represented, though subjects of great interest to them were under consideration, and some resolutions were arrived at from the effect of which they already suffer. The commissioner specially alludes to the ten-letter-per-word regulation, and to regulation imposing an increased charge for inquiry concerning and correction of mistakes. It is believed tha 4 ; outside Europe these regulations w<:re left to the discretion of the companies, but it is a significant indication of the little consideration these colonies have r ceived that even the result* of the conference do not appear to have been officially communicated to them. The commissioner doeß not doubt that if the attention of the English Postal authorities be directed to the subject, arrangements will be made to admit of the Australasian colonies being represented at the next conference. To enable this to be done, however, it is necessary they should arrive at an understanding between themselves. The commissioner is under belief that by means of these conferences the various governments of Great Britain, Europe and India exercise great control over the cable companies; the two companies communicating with India, as also the one which from India communicates with Australasia, are certainly to a considerable extent under the regulating influence of the Government of India. It was alleged to the commissioner during his recent negotiations in England, that the Indian Government would not allow the two companies working between India and Europe to compete with regard to prices, but insisted upon a certain tariff not being reduced. Probably the action of the Indian Government was not correctly described, or there is some good reason to justify it, but it would be important to these colonies to understand what that action is. The Government of India always shows courteous attention to these colonies, and doubtless would answer any enquiries, but it would be better that the enquiries should proceed unitedly from the colonies than from a single one. It would be still better if the Government of India would de pute some one to represent them at a colonial conference. It is not too much to say that Australasia is dependent upon India for the nature and facility of its cable communication. At the conference of the Australasian colonies held at Sydney in 1873 the opinion was entertained that it was undesirable that the charge of cable communication between Australia and England should be in private hand?, an(%the whole people subj cted to heavy Charges to profit shareholders in joint stock companies. The idea wa<i that the Imperial, Indian, and Australasian Governments should jointly raise the money necessary for either purchasing or constructing a through line, and that while each country and colony should retain the revenue received in its hands, each should contribute to the interest, maintenance, depreciation, and charges, in proportion to the revenue derived. This proposal found no favor in the eyes of the then Imperial Government, and there does not seem to have been any communication with India on the subject. But the policy of the present Imperial Government is widely different, and a project which would give to Great Britain, India, and the Australasian colonies a national line, would probably not be unacceptable to a Government that has shown so much interest in keeping open the road to India and Australasia. The purchase of the Suez Canal shares, with the presumption it establishes that England will at least insist upon the neutrality of that highway, affords the means of an unbroken communication between England, India, and Australia without passing through any foreign country, the Lisbon station avoided, and the canal neutral, the through route of the Eastern Company might be considered free from any foreign complications; and by avoiding Java, the same would be the case with the Eastern extension route. At any rate the subject is well worthy of revival. Considering that the interior systems of telegraph of Great Britain, India, and the colonies are all in the hands of the respective Governments a connecting Government cable appears to be a natural consequence, whilst to allow the cables to remain in private hands seems to be wholly inconsistent. Another point, apparently not of much present moment, but one that with time will gather importance, and which cannot be too soon dealt with, is that of the naming of towns and cities. When a telegraph station has a name of which there is no duplicate in any other part of the world, the expense of designating the part of the world may be avoided in transmitting a message; but when it possesses a name similar to another elsewhere the cost of sending messages to it is always enhanced, and with a rate of 10a 6d a word the consideration is not a slight one. For example, for messages to Auckland, Dunedin, aud Christchurch, the name of New Zealand is unnecessary; but for messages to Wellington it is otherwise. There are Wellingtons in other parts of the world. Even in New Zja land itself there are several cases of two towns of the same name, and there are similar examples on the Australian conti nent. The transmitter of a message to Maryborough, for example, would have to designate whether he meant Maryborough in Victoria or in Queensland. A simple precaution, would prevent the duplication of name* in ffcfure. There aTe other matters relating to both international and external telegraphy,

such for instance as tariffs, conditions, regulations, &c, about which uniform actiou by the colonies is most desirable, These various considerations | oint in the opinion of the Commissioner to tlie desirability of the Australasian colonies coming to some understanding in relation to the telegraph. It might be desirable to have a conference or else for the colonies by correspondence to take united action. If the other colonies agree that it desirable to move the Imperial Government to admit the colonies to representation at the next conference, and to obtain from that Government and from the Government of India information as to their views upon the points herein raised, such request might be made by endorsing this memorandum without the necessity of an immediate conference, and the conference could be held when the answers had been received. The Government of New Zealand on receiving an intimation to that effect from the other colonies, would, on their and its its own behalf, make the necessary representations to the Home Government. Probablj however as the colonies of Victoria and New South Wales use the telegraph most largely the representations might best be made by them jointly ; besides that, they could more conveniently seek the views of the neighbouring colonies, and make arrangement! which would in the future result in commc n action by all these colonies in telegraph questions. (Signed) Julius VoGEL. Wellington, April 4th, 1876.