206
absence of a few Hongkong convicts at Port Blair. This point does not appear to have been previously raised.
I think that the Indian Govt would have had, at the time of the transfer, the right to call upon Hongkong to make some arrangement similar to that with Ceylon. But they did not do so. They sent in a claim to the Treasury, who recommended them to resist the claim, and sent it on to us.
shall we ... of ... or send it out to the colonies, allowing them to fight their own battles?
Mr Hebut.
This is RS.h 14/11/72.
a curious procedure on the part of the India Office - they fire off a demand for £2503.10.10 at the Treasury - why, I am unable to divine the meaning, seeing the matter related in some way to a Colony, recommend an application to this office, which is accompanied by no particulars, but with grounds for the claim.
an application to the Treasury on behalf of the Crown, which has now been made to this office, should be met with a request to return the papers, saying that Lord Kimberley begged to pay in future to entertain on behalf of the Crown the ... that conscientia.
The demand now made does not appear to be in conformity with any existing arrangement. This leaves it open to the Govt to argue again if they have any better case.
it is probable that this claim may have grown out of the negotiations which are being carried on between his Lordship and the India Office.
But there is nothing in the letter from the India Office to show the history or origin of the claim.
I think the course suggested by Mr Meade is the best course to pursue. We should stand between the Colony & such a claim at all events, not allow ourselves to be the medium of its transmission unless it assumes a more definite & precise form.
YAK 10/1/72
will me minute K Nov 21/72
Law Officers