8
provision has not been made in the approved Estimates, or (6) additional non recurrent Expre for which
In our despatch of the 24th September,
1930 (No. 2 on 72894/30 Hong Kong) the limit
within which the Governor could sanction payments
of a casual or non-recurrent nature not provided
for in the Estimates without the prior authority
of the Secretary of State was raised from $1,200
to $10,000, and he was then informed that the
Secretary of State expected this limit to be more
carefully observed. That expectation has not been
entirely realised, and in paragraph 5 of No. 25
on 33753/34 Hong Kong, the Governor asks to be
allowed a measure of discretion more especially in
regard to extensions to Votes which have been
approved by the Secretary of State in principle,
"as telegrams are frequently inadequate and
circumstances do not always allow of the long
delay consequent on reference by despatch. The
excuse appears to be rather flimsy, and I am
inclined to agree with Mr. Howell that the discretion
should not be given.
In the case of Palestine, the High
Commissioner is empowered to authorise without
reference to the Secretary of State non-recurrent
(ay
expenditure in respect of services for which
provision has been made, to an amount not exceeding
£1,000 in respect of any one item, on the understand-
ing that the expenditure in question will be met
from savings on the same head or on other heads
of the Estimates, and that no question of importance
and/or principle is involved.
As far as I can see the Governor of Hong Kong
is