MINUTES.
have two Law Officers' "furiSAND (8585/30006/20 Dom? and Bt of i
MINUTES NOT TO BE WRITTEN ON THIS SIDE.
84.4+/20569/21 Union).
At the same time the 1.0. did not
J
quote authorities for their views, while
the second occasion their junior took The exactly of perite vow
on
a number.
of
authorities
and stis quote
the vow has not leven testad
J
in the Counts
noturth standing
heee).
(So far as
I think that
2
L.O.
the rule that
opinions should not be sent to the Colonies
Ou
it would
this occasLED FRON
live well to
send out the opinions to H. Kong
Conf. def.
>
'first of all however w
had better send copy to Bt of f
letter on
36177/21
matten should again
But the
I be considered by
Treaty Execution Pommittee,
· Woud face on Cl. Celtic cust
funds. [J
[0 36177/21
Suice
any
14/3/22
Sir S. Grindle exfinerred this
opinion that we should eventually
вести
th
Treasury]
fet an
indemnity
M./B.
17/3
I leserve
my view on his
1113
AE@
173
Jes: when it is considered by the the lion make it dear that it. Kong will look totthely for con cinchamity, Lefore
I think we
L
we wihust. ft. King
moet get that
indemnity from the theaney
6.4.12.120
This was considered at /Treaty Excention Committee
that 24 fund. It was Marked
-
clearing office shoulet consult Inearung
endamisty and the
ww marwat
Bung
26/2/22
N° 37
Gov 36144
L.
भ
7
Sir,
49
11604
TU MAR 22
GOVERNMENT HOUSE..
HONGKONG. 23rd January, 1922.
I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt
of your despatch No.336 of the 12th October, 1921, regarding shares on the Shanghai register of the Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation held by German nationals.
2.
I enclose a copy of a letter received from
the bank, from which it will be seen that the bank feel that they must in their own interests contest any application for a mandatory order, taking the case if necessary to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. They are prepared to register the Custodian if they receive an indemnity, and in that event they will be prepared to pay to the Custodian
the value of the rights to the new shares which were offered
to the shareholders recently. This sum would amount to
about £10,000. If the indemnity is not given the bank will
not be prepared to pay this sum to the Custodian, and
apparently he will have no claim against the bank in respect
of the new rights, because those rights have now been
forfeited as between the shareholders and the bank and the
Custodian can only stand in the shoes of the shareholders.
If the Custodian were to apply for a mandatory
order and were to succeed in the Privy Council, the bank
would have been put to considerable expense, by no means unreasonably incurred. If he were to succeed solely on the
ground
3.
THE RIGHT HONOURABLE
WINSTON CHURCHILL, M.P.,
80..
80.,
&c.