Mr Clauson Mr Ellis

8

I have set out the chief points of the present

Hong Kong proposals for changing the basis of

assessmen

ent, and the Treasury and War Office views on them.

I agree generally with Mr Caine. The

fact is that the Home Government will not give any

serious consideration to any proposal for revising

the system of assessment unless they can be satisfied

that there will at least be no decrease in the total

sum payable by the Colony, whereas in the "reserved

claims" simultaneously put forward on this occasion

by Hong Kong the cloven hoof appeared and has

frightened the Treasury and the War Office away

pretty completely.

My own view is that if it is necessary and

equitable to require a Colony to pay nearly 1/5 of

its total revenue away as a contribution to the War

Department towards the cost of its De fence we shall

not avoid bitter resentment by the Colony from time

to time simply by changing the basis of assessment:

and I agree with the Treasury that the resentment

To be

will be more likely increased if the assessment is

A

focussed on so particular a basis as the annual

valuation in place of general revenues.

The War Office and the Treasury make it

clear that they will not consider any change or any

claims for exemption except such as involve virtually

no decrease in the amount payable.

The Hong Kong

Government, or in any case the Unofficial Members,

will see no satisfaction in that.

As I read the War Office memorandum the

War

Page

Page

9

The Inter

any ment

we apply to

acnotiomes!

But there are my reupl from aprodhones

premit in it.

Quile, why not?

War Office does not seem prepared to favour a

inrespect of

concession to any of the particular classes of

revenue in which claims are made by the Governor

except that the net receipts instead of gross

receipts should be artessable in the case of

wireless telegraphy since that is a class of

revenue not existing in 1895.

It seems that they are further prepared

to consider the exemption of 6%, in place of

4%. of the capital expenditure incurred in the

establishment of "railways, telephones, or

other public undertakings, the cost of which

was de frayed out of the revenue of the Colony

and not by means of a loan".

They point out that such a concession

It is not difficult to undusland Would properly have to be applied to other

the w.o. apprehensions a accomml", this

ine

Colonies al so.

I suggest that before we pursue the

question of an inter-Departmental Conference,

we should draft a despatch to Hong Kong (who

have now asked for an early reply to "the

questions at issue") setting out the principles

from which His Majesty's Government cannot

depart in any review of the present system of

assessment: and refer to the percentage of

capital expenditure on railways etc. (as in

§ 3 of the Ordinance) and to the position of

such classes of revenue as Wireless Services,

which were non-existent in 1895; but add in that

respect a statement of the principle which I

have marked in paragraph 17 of the War Office

memorandum - I think it is a perfectly good

one

age 9

age 9

Page

Page

ge 10

10

Still less is is likely to put on To the ILK any increased bunden undu this head.

one ; and say that of the reserved claims put

forward in the Officer Administering the Government's

confidential despatch of 28th July in 52802/28

these are being considered as affecting both

Hong Kong and other Colonies where a defence

SS

contribution is acessed under a like system.

The draft should go to the War Office

and the Treasury for concurrence mentioning that the

Governor has urged us to give a reply, and saying

that the two matters mentioned as possible points

for concession to Colonial Governments paying

Military contribution can be considered thereafter.

(Signed) G.E.J. Gent.

30.9.

I am inclined to deprecate the mild '"defatiom' of Mr. Gent's batte min-

༡ -ute. I agree that the 'ratiable value' proposal sht be dropped, but I think that the Col. Goot has are admirable case on most

of t points in which they want to the items knocked out of the

gross revenue.

I am not alarmed by the "W.O. dictum that an alteration of the basis of assessment she be accompanied by an increase of percentage. No Goot, least of all the present one, is going

to ask a fol. to pay more than 20% in defence of it's revenues away

contributions.

I think that we she have a

ally conference stry to put acfol's

case as strongly

strongly as we can.

G.L.M-Canson

1/10/29

ge 10Page 11

19

Share This Page