Government imposed a special tax on shipownets. Sir G. Grindle was prepared to admit this, but he pointed out that this was a disability shared in war-time by Hongkong
ith home shipowners, wnd that it could not be avoided, Es observed that it was only for technical reasons, hot specially affecting HongKong, that it had been decided hot to apply the Imperial Indemnity Act to the Colonies, nd that as a matter of fact such a course had been vETY eriously considered. The HongKong Ordinkuce was a piece f Imperial policy, which no Secretary of State was likely jo reverse, and it was inconceivable that it should be isallowed, He added that, to put matters quite bluntly,
e disposal of the profits was imaterial so lug as he object - that the shipowners should not get them
is attained,
Some discussion followed, arising out of the point at the profits had not been paid into general revenue (as ere) but were held in a suspense acocunt. Mr.PurI QUŠAS htimated that his firm (a hanghai one) right have
Quiesced in the money being spent on definitely "war" argoses, but that when a proposal was made that it should
devoted to housing the poor of Kowloon, they were roused.
to testing the legal position, Hence the followme case.
ir G, Grindle however took the view that this was in fact
rely a point of accounting and not of any real imporsance.
Mr. Borrowe and Mr. Sur:111 then coverted to the
int of war risk insurance. Mr. Burkill said that heavy
guenta were made to insurance companiec, his firm having
knowledge that the Government would insure. He denied
korledge of any letter such as that in 34042/18
enclosure
745