- 3.
opinion, purely for the convenience of the Admiralty and it would therefore appear, if my contention is
correct, that the Admiralty would have priority of
claim to any accrued interest. In this connection, I
would refer you to enclosure in C.S.0.2921/25, a copy
of Parliamentary Debates, House of Lords, Vol:61, No.58
of 1st July, 1925, page 909, the Civil Lord of the
Admiralty, Earl Stanhope, is quoted as having said "As
"to the generous gift of £250,000 by Hong Kong, that
"money was given under no conditions except that it
"was naturally for the development of the base. X X X X”
4.
As a considerable time has elapsed
since the gift was made, and considerable changes in
the personnel have occurred in the Administration of
the Government, I hope you will not consider it out of
place if I make a few remarks regarding what, I believe,
was the underlying principal which prompted this Colony
to make the gift to the Imperial Government.
During the late War there was a scheme
of local shipping control from which a very considerable
profit accrued to this Government, amounting, I believe,
to about two and half million dollars. After the War
there was a diversity of opinion as to the rightful
ownership of this profit, which led to some controversy,
but which happily since the gift was made for the
Singapore Base, has relaxed, with the exception f an
occasional reference by a few of the "Diehards".
I
believe it was, therefore, considered more politic to
place the money at the disposal of the Imperial
Government to be utilized imperially, rather than retain
it to meet local expenditure.
84
5.