that the W.O. had coolly $4 misquoted the amount "stated by the Colang to be due to this Dep?". I do not think it will be wise to pay them anything
more until the
amount of the balance is really
matter have taken 32m
diserer a furthin
fixed. As the Whitter, they be accordingly
to
Toulmit draft to which explains trelf
S.W.8.704.1891
доваз
không đáng
4388
It is requested that in any further com- munication on this subject, the above Number may be quoted; and the Letter addressed to--
The Under Secretary of State,
War Office,
Ea
11628
Pall Mall,
London, (S. W.)
Sir
C. O.
19125
Qe 28 SEP 31
F & T 1000 3-21
WAR OFFICE, PALL MALL, S.W.
247
189/
26 September 1991.
With reference to your letter dated 25th June 1891 forwarding copies of two despateles from the Officer Administering the Government of Hong Kong on the subject of the expenditure the Defence Work's it that station, and
whother Mr Stanhope sees any objection to the balance which is still due to the War Depentiment on this account remaining unpaid Jame directed until the beginning of 1092
inquiring
to aequainst you for Lord Knutsford's inforus- -ation that Mr. Stanhope is prepared to accept the amount £3920:7:11 stated by the Colony ble due to this Department, and at the time proposed right the beginning of 1892.
2. With regard to paragraph & of your
I am to state that a report letter under reply
The Under Secreting of state,
Colonist Office
3
has