LETTERS TO THE EDITOR.
THE EAST AFRICA COMPANY.
[To THE EDITOR OP THE " SPECTATOR:1 io,—Your article on " The British East Africa Company," in the Spectator of June 3rd, states that the Report just issued to the shareholders of the Company, taken in con- junction with my remarks at the annual meeting, held on May 29th, must be interpreted as "in effect a complete con- fession of failure on the part of the Company to do any of the things expected of it."
I would reply that the British East Africa Company has not failed to do its work, but that, on the contrary, its task, which was broadly and generously conceived at the outset, has been efficiently carried out as far as has been possible up to date, and there is not now—and, indeed, never has been— any proposition to "fling up the sponge." It is not correct to say, as is said in the article under notice, that the action of the Company has "pushed us on to Uganda, without having made up our minds whether we wanted it or not." It was the attitude of the Government and the pressure of public opinion which pushed the Company into Uganda ; and I say farther that the question, "Do we want Uganda P" was practically settled long before the names either of Portal or the British East Africa Company were ever heard of in Zanzibar. If it were not so, what, I would ask, was the meaning of her Majesty's then representative at Zanzibar, Sir Charles Euan-Snaith, being so eager and anxious to establish English influence in Mwanga's dominions, while the initial operations of the Company were still confined to the coast zone P What was the object of the delimitation of spheres of influence, and the Anglo-German Agreement of July, 1890 ? Had England hesitated to occupy Uganda, others would certainly have done so; and I venture to think that now, as then, the Occupation of the lake districts and head-waters of the Nile by a foreign Power would be intolerable to the British public. We may therefore brush away the cobwebs which have been eo ingeniously woven, and boldly face the situation. What- ever be the future of the Company, Uganda and the British sphere of influence must be permanently occupied by Great Britain. The directors themselves have never formed the wish to sell any of the rights they have acquired to any foreign States, however anxious these may be to purchase. The directors have waited patiently for two years in the hope that a definite decision might be taken on the subject by her Majesty's Government, and what they now say is that if Uganda is to become a political derelict, it is better that the Company should be left free to make its own terms, and that the country should pass under the influence of some strong civilising Power, rather than that in deserting and turning our backs on the native tribes who have trusted us, we should abandon them to the cruel fate to which they would be sub- jected by the slave-hunters and Arabs.
If, on the other hand, the retention of Uganda be decided upon by her Majesty's Government, what can be the justikca- tion for refusing the Company fair compensation for the money and labour expended in acquiring the territory, as it was actually compelled to do by the pressure of official and public opinion P A careful reader of the Company's Report will learn that the British East Africa Company is still ready to carry on its enterprise with every hope of success. The directors are, as they always have been, desirous of framing their future policy in the manner her Majesty's Government may deem best in the public interests; but what they justly demand is that, if effective administration be required of the Company, its charter should be made a practical reality, and that it should not continue to be, as it has been in the past, a mere name; that the Government should at once grant to the Com- pany the power of taxation, wherewith the requisite adminis- trative charges can be met, which powers have hitherto been withheld ; and that the Government should by some means protect the Company from the threatened ruinous result con- sequent on its ports being put under the Free-trade zone, not only in respect of an apprehended loss of revenue, but from the already realised issue of the rendering of the Customs revenue valueless as a security for raising the required addi- tional capital.
Should, on the other hand, her Majesty's Government deem it expedient that the Company should terminate its existence, the directors contend that its assets should be taken over at cost, and that the Customs revenue created by the Company, and which has now been taken away from them in great part, should be capitalised. If this were done, the shareholders would receive back the full capital invested, and the country would receive a more than adequate return, with large future and profitable possibilities.
This demand could hardly be considered as extravagant or unreasonable, if the undoubted fact be recognised that it would entail absolutely no sacrifice whatever on the British Exchequer, and would inflict no personal loss upon the present Sultan, or injustice upon the Sultanate.—I am, Sir,
Previous page
