W. Braunsten
1. See last par. of Wo
W.0.
letter
of
با تر ہے
Feb. Cast (at end of annexed printer ), which fold Coast correspondence), appears to imply that the W.O. do not clain the fee simple value, but it appicars from last par. but one
Jour
letter of 2 Dec. (p. 12 of same print) that the S. Coast lands in question were granted in fee
2. Whether then any of
the landrat
Hughing were granted to W.0.in
I
fee, I do not know, as I cannot find 6969/89
that we have a form of
such grants
(see Enc. 3 in 21850/90,
short terms a which t hold law purchas
See also 6789 & guf.27 april.92 by them
7198
いま
Hong Kongs
1289
It is requested that in any further co munication on this subject, the above Number may be quoted; and the Letter addressed to
100
The Under Secretary of State, War Office, Pall Mall,
774/2
London,
(S.W.)
C.O.
5785
• 24 MAR 32
F&T 1000 1-92
WAR OFFICE, PALL MALL, S.W.,
23 March 1892.
Sir
With refercive to
348
the
the i
& reference to your letter dated 10 February 1892. forwarding copy of a despatel which Lord Knutsford has now sent to the Governor of Hong Kong relative to the disposal of lands aled buildings occupied, by the War Departureat in that Colough ; Jam directed by the Secretary fattate polther to- observe that it would scarcely be advisable difference
to call in an Arbitrator to settle a
Colonial
of opinion between the Coloved and War
The Treasury would appear to be
offices.
"The proper Arbitrator.
the
The e
2. case seems to Mr. Stanhope very simple. The Colony assigns to the War Department lands for its absolute long as required for defence. ots
user as
be Nuder Secretary of State
Colonial Ofice.
long