doue sa wattos no betwłoɑre no betarimon yaled to"
COPY.
4.
206
‚"azanarak [31sted no 18ganak Istened dnsmannaq"
Colta to bro sit te bebba ed abrow yatwolio? ed+ tadt (b)
- 18+£
datelna s tom at offw xbareg on jadi ayawla bebivorï*
sideato ed emit vra da 70 twaye yua mi [Lariu ésot dua”
."wotosmli a na maitoa mo betogie no betuloqqa yuted to"
sloltza to bee sit da bebba ed abuow yakwodlot uit taft (»)
"toutɗva dalšing a od ot asaseo erf 11"
valoremmoa TVI .ON SIOltma mi arodsend af abrow ada sadr (4)
aowatt bra abrow afi Kiku yaibro bus § omii ni 'tooldus' f#2#
abrow watwo[[o] sit taft bra botomimiła od 8 su21 mi "85[ bwa **
MO ATII, tal eft ut fy«2tosk Lan?red' abrow edt vedta bebba eď
-ITTI SIDERNA 30 35 snag
fatmauszą anait delu taotatumoo guted dom"
bazluper eft yď beansę od moltɛloses svoda erið bluoda
Inloveă a as coldammitsoo 40% bettindum að £££m #1 y#1%), am
sɗ ILkw Hotdw anttosu yranlbroandel brossa a os moltulous
.bṣKOTZoo täsmeʊpender a
,erotosmid to braod ad tão rebro ya
•
LIANOGDAN . J
* MOMLADO
Hon. Solonial Secretary,
1. I attach a letter, with one enclosure (the draft articles),
from Messrs. Deacon, Looker, Deacon & Haraton relating to this
ship. The letter explains the difficulties which have arisen.
That the company want now is (a) clearance and (b) a letter from
the Registrar of British ships here, to the effect that he has
provisionally recognized the company as entitled to own a British
ship. This letter would be shown to the British suthorities at
any port of sall in onse they should raiss any question on the
point.
8. The matter is somewhat complicated by the fact that the
ship is probably at the moment technically liable to forfeiture,
sa the beneficial owners at present are the two mor-British
Chinese who provided the purchase money. I do not anticipate
that there will be any desire to take advantage of this liability
to forfeiture, because the purchase in the name of IP. Maodonald
was only for the purchase of a transfer to a company which would
have been extitled to own the ship but for the British ship.
(Transfer Restriction) Act, 1916, which did not come into operatio
until the 23rd. August 1916.
5. I should add to the information contained in the above
letter from the solicitors that another alteration of the
articles will provide that all the directors must be British
subjects.
4. Monara. Descom, Looker, Deacon & Marston argue that when
the articles have been amended the voting power of the share-
holders will be non-existent so far as the immediate control of
the ship is concerned, and that as there is for that purpose
practically no voting power whatever it sannot be said that "the
majority of the voking power is in the hands of persons who are
mot British subjects". In other words, they say that you cannot
have a majority of a class which has for the time being become
non-existent.