File 50/1914 Pt 10 'Persian Gulf: Lighting and Buoying; Supply of Lighthouse Tender; the Nearchus' [‎37r] (78/470)

India Office The department of the British Government to which the Government of India reported between 1858 and 1947. The successor to the Court of Directors. , London,
2nd April 1915.
i a
Political,
No. 34.
To His Excellency the Right Honourable the Governor
General of India in Council.
My Loud,
In continuation of my Political Despatch No. 57, dated the 5th June
Lighting and Buoyage of the 1914 , as to the provision of a lighthouse
Persian Gulf The historical term used to describe the body of water between the Arabian Peninsula and Iran. . JLs* to cost of the tender (the Nearchus) for the Persian
lighthouse tender Nearchus. Gulf, I forward for the information of
Your Excellency in Council copy of further correspondence'^' with the Foreign
Office, showing that the Lords> Commis-
'* To Foreign Office, No. P. 4443, dated . -», r • . ? m i
13tli January 1915. sioners ol 11 is Majesty s Ireasnry have
From ditto, No. 13,893, dated 9th Feb- accepted a revised estimate of 37,0005
ruarv 1915, with enclosure. . . . ,
for the total initial cost oi the vessel,
including war risk insurance and other incidental expenses.
2 . With regard to recurring expenditure in connection with the Nearchus.
it will he seen that the Lords Commissioners have asked for further
explanations of the increase of Rs. 9,962 (6645) per annum over Mr. Hood’s
estimates, which was sanctioned by my telegram of the 12th January 1915. I
shall 1 je glad to receive by mail, for communication to their Lordships, any
observations you may have to offer on this subject in supplement to those
contained in 4 our Excellency’s telegram of the 13th November last.
3. One point calling for explanation appears to be the discrepancy between
the cost of the proposed establishment of the tender as estimated in your
telegram of the 13th November, viz., Rs. 43,956 (2,9305 8 s.), and the
original estimate of Rs. 40,000 (2,6665 13s. 4(5) given in your telegram of
the 2nd November 1912, which provided for a complement of equal strength,
viz., that recommended by the Director, Royal Indian Maxine, m paia-
graph 4 (12) of his letter to this Office No. 5968 of the 31st August
1912.
4. The increase in the present estimate (2,9305 8 s.) over that given by the
Director, Royal Indian Marine, in his letter No. 400 of the 18th January
1913, viz., 2,3685, is presumably to be accounted for by the difference m
the strength of the complements on which the two estimates are respectively
based. But I should be glad to be informed more fully of the reasons which
led you, m November last, to discard the cheaper proposals favoured by
Captain Lumsden in January 1913, and to revert to .a scale of establishment
practically equivalent to that contemplated in 1912.
5 Copy is enclosed of two Minutest by the Naval Architect to this Office
t-ioi n/r i ioi“ discussing the above points,
t Dated 4th and 12th March 191i>. &
I have the honour to be,
My Lord,
Your Lordship’s most obedient humble Servant,
(Signed) Crewe.
J. 207*.
Vt