Sir C. Lucas
I trust that Col: Seely and Mr Cochrane that the matter will fill in which caused the decision possibly interfere with the foot of the local fast- his int extension world h. noth resented tu havi the Colary.
Their lease has expired for 20 years (as a guavance. They have enjoyed possession sharing- at a rent and have no reason as a matter of course to expect General that they have always complied with fort regulations akurd. If they hadn't they han hats been dealt with as law directs.
Col: Seely BY 2.
I think that the answer should be that we will send out a copy of the Statement but that Lord Crewe cannot interfere with the discretion of the colonial in the matter. I think the sent hirst post of the statement is the last. It is an impertinence to suggest that after 18 years we should recommend a renewal. I can see that they have valid ground of complaint.
Write as Sir C. Lucas suggests in the first five lines of his minute. but I should with the reply to be particularly polite, partly because Mr Cochrane is an old friend, and partly because the more polite one is the easier it is to be emphatic and definite in a refusal. The letter must be for my signature of course because the writer is in Parliament.
JS. 3.9.