CANADIAN AND PACIFIC CABLE.

Hokitika Guardian, 19 November 1925, Page 1

CANADIAN AND PACIFIC CABLE.

[Australia & N.Z. Cable Association.] LONDON, Nov. 17. The Pacific Cable Board was thrown into consternation by the receipt of a communication from the Canadian Office to the effect that the Candaian Postmaster-General, Air Murphy was recommending the withdrawal of Canada. from partnership .in the Pacific Cable project, in consequence of an action of. a majority of the Board in connection with the awarding of contracts for the duplication of cable between Bamfield, Fanning Island and Fiji providing for an expenditure of £2,260,000. .Mr Murphy points out that Canada’s interests in f he contracts, which have been made despite her protests, and in defiance of the Board’s law and established practice, exceeds six hundred thousand sterling. Air Murphy says that the decision to invito tenders was taken in tho absence of the Canadian representative. Mr Afurphy has therefore cabled Canada’s willingness to withdraw From tho partnership as the original purpose for which Canada entered had long since been accomplished. ITe suggested that Canada receive her share of the surplus, as otherwise more than six hundred thousand sterling of her money will ho illegally speni, and in total disregard of her wishes. He pointed that the main purpose of the cable is to link up England with Australia, and New Zealand. Belli Australian and Now Zealand are commercially interested in tho cable because of flic facilities it gives them for business. Canada has no such commercial interest, and in the meantime demands five eighteenths, being her share of tho accumulated reserve.

The Pacific Cable Board lias replied to tho effect that compliance with Canada’s wishes would acquire tho passage of another Act. Tfie Board was not empowered to pay out of the funds as the Act directs that the funds shall he only employable for laying the cable. The jManugemeiil' further contends that Canada, lias no title to any part of the Board’s savings, as she paid no part of the original capital, which the National Debt Commissioners of Grout Britain wholly advanced. Air Alurphy, in reply, contends that Canada is entitled to her share in the assets, and that the Board, in citing Canada's agreement in 1921, to the duplication of the cable between Honolulu and New Zealand, wrongly assumes that this authorised the present expenditure. The Board has also hound Canada to file duplication of tho cable from Bamfield to Fiji. Air Alurphy maintains that it referred only to the duplication of the line from New Zealand to Fiji. LONDON, Nov. 17. Regarding the Pacific cable, it is stated the Board is hopeful that Canada. will not pursue the subject to the extent of disassociating itself with tho Board. 'The matter probably will be discussed at next meeting, when the Canadians’ final word will he expected.