'File VII/1. Telegraphic Connection to Kuwait.' [‎262r] (553/574)

to. Very soon after Champain’s appointment the question of his headquarters
arose, the Government of India proposing that these should be at Bombay.
Major Champain, however, vigorously opposed this proposal; he pointed out
that the interests of the line were intimately bound up with those of the Indo-
European Telegraph Company, in conjunction with whom our traffic was
carried, that he had constantly to consider questions that affected the Company
and the Department alike, and that he had much correspondence with other
telegraph administrations which could not be conducted from India without
serious inconvenience and loss of time. He also referred to the difficult ques
tions which arose with Persia in relation to our treaties, which had to be dealt
with in communication with the Foreign Office. The principal traffic office must
necessarily be in London, where cash was received for every message sent to
India and the accounts made out for the shares due to other administrations.
These arguments prevailed and the headquarters of the Department were
fixed in London, but the control of the Department was shifted from the
Government of Bombay From c. 1668-1858, the East India Company’s administration in the city of Bombay [Mumbai] and western India. From 1858-1947, a subdivision of the British Raj. It was responsible for British relations with the Gulf and Red Sea regions. to the Public Works Department of the Government
of India.
Sir John Bateman Champain, as he afterwards became, held charge of the
Department till his death early in 1887, when he was succeeded by Col. Murdoch
Smith, the Director of the Persian section. The question of the future adminis
tration of the Department was again taken up, and although the arguments
that Col. Champain had advanced in 1871 had lost none of their force they
were now disregarded, and, in the hopes of effecting some small economy, it was
decided to abolish the appointment of Director-in-Chief and transfer the Depart
ment to the charge of the Director-General of the Indian Telegraph Department.
This was carried out early in 1888 when Col. Murdoch Smith retired, but it
did not prove successful. Col. Mallock, the Director-General of the Indian
Telegraph Department, travelled over the whole system from Karachi to
Teheran, and in 1890 submitted an exhaustive report to the Government of
India, in which he strongly advocated the resuscitation of the appointment of
Director-in-Chief in London. He pointed out that the addition of the Indo-
European Department placed an intolerable burden on the Director-General
in India, who had already a very large and responsible charge, and he showed
the necessity for the head of the Indo-European Department to be in London,
where he could be in close communication with the commercial cable companies
with whom the interests of the Department were inextricably bound. His recom
mendations were accepted, and in June, 1893, the control of the Department
was transferred from the Government of India to the Secretary of State and
Mr. Flinch, the director of the Persian Gulf The historical term used to describe the body of water between the Arabian Peninsula and Iran. section, was appointed Director-
in-Chief with headquarters in. London. This organisation has continued down
to the present time, Mr. Ffinch being followed by Sir Henry Kirk and Sir
Rayner Barker, whom I had the honour of succeeding about three-and-a-half
years ago. It is still the case that the successful working of the Department