7. A.W. Brewin so.
24.5.38
will be brought
Ref.6. Enquires if pressure will be
to bear on
H.K.
8. A.W. Brewin s.o.
24.5.38
Ref. 7. Explains Corres, with S.CA. encloses e.
4
X Not will: HK The
comes. will this
Colom Litom
awas exclamped in 1930-31
In a
defarch (in
eply to the Crucisan (2) ds/.724/8737) this for. refurlid thas
the quanti sering A.
was
ex Ruined
I cannot help feeling that this spate of
correspondence is a little premature and unfair
to the Colonial Government.
Admittedly it is
possible that they may have misunderstood Mr. Brewin's
attitude and the letter enclosed in (4) is certainly
altogether irrelevant to the present point at issue,
but as the Secretary for Chinese Affairs is writing
the Caller direct to Mr. Brewin I think at least might have
waited for that letter before making up his mind that
his approach had been misunderstood.
As far as workmen's compensation in
Hong Kong is concerned, no Ordinance on this subject exists, but the question has here the subject of continuous mista.za vankkiadvich extratempta matendo, sundenly, Bufo====
1933 come fondance nu
entire issue rebarally here
see
fount in
MAL
The suggestion in No. 7 that the Colonial
Office should "overrule local opinion" seems to me
somewhat irrelevant at the moment because we have
There
elon
as yet no definite issue on which such a decision
could be taken.
In the first place I think Mr. Brewin
might well wait for the reply from the Secretary for
Chinese Affairs and I venture to submit draft for
conson.
I am not sure what A quevance is.
now sulm thed
10.
*** 18
7 han rather altered in
a
for rent Home 9/6.
9.6
m
draft P. Rogers
2.41.38.
The