-་་་་་་་ -་
>
b
1.
In 1946 the Hong Kong Government reported that certain Chinese Charitable funds, certain deposits in the name of the Supreme Court and .certain security deposits, all of which were in the custody of the Hong Kong Treasury at the time of the Japanese occupation had been confiscated by the Japanese, and that legal advice was that the Hong Kong Government must meet the claims in respect of these monies. (See 1 and 2 on the 46/47 file). In March 1947 we replied that the decision as to whether the sums were a legal liability of the Hong Kong Government was primarily a matter for the Governor's decision and that any claim in reparations against the Japanese in respect of these sums would seem to be for the Hong Kong Government (as holders of the deposits) to lodge and not for the individual depositors (see 9 on the 1946/47 file).
With
2. In 1 the Governor reverts to this matter. the exception of one trivial sum of $4,000 the Supreme Court deposits were not confiscated by the Japanese. As regards the Chinese Charitable funds, (referred to as Trust Funds) the present trend of the Governor's legal advice is apparently that Government is not liable to make good, whereas as regards the Security Deposits the advice is that the Government's case is far from strong. The Governor says that, before admitting liability for the Security Deposits, he would like further advice from here.
Sidney
3. As I read Sir Abrahams' minute of 1/6, his advice is unless the Hong Kong Government can establish the points mentioned at X of that minute there is a liability it to make good, not only the Security Deposits,but the Trust Funds also. I presume Sir Sidney agrees that there appears to be no liability to make good the small Supreme Court deposit account of $4,000 which, like the other Supreme Court deposits, was placed in a special account in the name of the Registrar of the Supreme Court. Perhaps Sir Sidney will confirm this presumption is correct.
4. There seems nothing for it but to convey this advice to the Governor.
5. Although the Governor specifically makes this a legal reference and therefore deliberately excludes a statement of the amounts involved, I think I should draw attention to the extract (filed at 2) from his despatch No. 292 of the 12. 194) Hong Kong's
ef financial liabilities resulting from the war. It will be seen that the sum involved is very considerable approximately £500,000. I should also point out that Hong Kong telegram No. 487 of the 20th May, 1948 (copy at 3), which sets out known war expenditure liabilities and says that, except for one item, these can be met (as a result of the recent financial settlement) from revenue, naturally does not include the doubtful item we are now discussing. So here is one more considerable liability, to meet which Hong Kong has got to find funds from somewhere.
6.
I do not think Mr. Kelvin-Stark is now directly concerned with this case, but I pass through him in view of his earlier connection with it and of its general connection with reparations.
J. wee
There
no
wstexcription of the Supreme Court defponits & the foot cannot be held responible for confineation fablets