16
70
(23)
541
"I recognise your difficulites in this matter, but nevertheless I should have hoped that as the charges in question were taken into account when the financial settlement was reached with H.M.G., the terms of which as stated in your telegram No.526 were accepted by the Legislative Council, it wold be recognised that opposition to additional taxation could not be justified on the grounds indicated,"
Reduction in expenditure.
As I mentioned to you there would be advantages in making this despatch comprehensive, and perhaps you would agree to the following additional paragraph 8.
"18. Finally I would refer to the question of possible reductions in expenditure. This
w was eft in para. 32 of your despatch No.100, and I adoras“ that reduction in the present rate of expenditure will be effected to as great an extent as in those cases there egon is justified, even in advance of the visit of an efficiency expert."
་
If you agre e with the above, the additions might be incorporated in the draft which could then come forward as an agreed Wallace-Bancroft-Palmer draft!
A PALMER
22nd September, 1948.
I have sparken with th. Pulmer, who has been
patient with
•
I hit like
candy I
1
very
with me
the suggested The first two support that we
additions
reluctant faccept
what the fremor all was
fact, howwer exaspending a fact the third is
store.
just that whi
hoped & aroid
Crest subience
delay.
•
All together I fear that they import
Whitehall pomposity which dried
?
But the addition
The shelf
are not
ク
and don't jurting further anymont
In the Treasing (which it Tooled pills)
is now purposed toe Hay King
in ressed ins
round for
Mr. Parkin.
that Th. Bundillon need wit be
M. Sidebs them.
من
a for added Mr. Cemen
the ed
арли
Nor werd
The Treasury Contact
5+126/5/18 is waiting for this me, accoun
Women
dusṛelet m
J a css-reference to it
Tresmy
Issue
with ink amendments.
Mr. Shum
Been Wa
3579
་
f
in draft &
I see often inne.
Im
2319