Mr Stuart
CONFIDENTIAL
Reference.....
22
WORLD COIN CORPORATION INC
1.
Mr McGrath of the WCCI telephoned me this morning after having first spoken with Mr Todd in West Indian and Atlantic Department, from whom he obtained my name and telephone extension as Mr Goodfellow's successor. I had prior warning of this from Mr Todd.
2. Mr McGrath's call proved revealing of his way of doing business. He began by saying that, as perhaps I knew, the WCCI 'represented' a large number of countries in coinage matters. Among them were the Bahamas, the Cayman Islands, the Turks and Caicos Islands, and several of the Latin American republics. The WCCI had recently concluded an agreement to provide coins for the Philippines and 'was on the point' of concluding an agreement with Hong Kong for the design and marketing of a proof issue of Hong Kong coins for numismatists.
3.
Mr McGrath went on to say that in the case of Hong Kong the WCCI had encountered an obstacle in the form of some agreement or rule' which required Hong Kong coins to be minted at the Royal Mint or, as had previously also been possible, at one of the now defunct mints in what was once British India. However, Mr McGrath knew from experience that in cases when the Royal Mint was unable to meet the requirements of British dependent territories in regard to "quality, design, price or delivery", these 'rules' could be waived so that the WCCI could make arrangements for the required coins to be minted by the Royal Canadian Mint or some other minter. This had been
done without difficulty in the case of the Turks and Caicos Islands (WIAD have confirmed that this territory in fact amended its legislation as claimed by Mr McGrath) and Mr McGrath wished to ask me if the same could now be done in respect of Hong Kong. He added that the WCCI was not suggesting that the minting of Hong Kong coins for circulation purposes should be taken away from the Mint' but merely the special proof issue now under consideration.
4.
"
I informed Mr McGrath that what he referred to as an agreement or rule' was in fact the Hong Kong Coinage Order 1936, which formed part of the Colony's statutes. As such it was capable of being amended, but this was entirely a matter for the Hong Kong Government to consider. Mr McGrath said that he was aware of this, but that the Hong Kong authorities were reluctant to introduce amending legislation without first ascertaining that such legis- lation would not be objected to by the FCO. Mr McGrath alleged that Mr Blye, the Accountant General in Hong Kong, had suggested to him that the WCCI should approach the FCO and obtain from us an assurance, which could be given quite informally if we wished, to the effect that we had no objection to the Hong Kong Coinage Order being amended in the way desired by Mr McGrath. I told Mr McGrath that it was out of the question for anyone at the FCO to give an assurance of the kind wanted by him, since this would be to anticipate the proper legislative and constitutional
CONFIDENTIAL
/process