-12-
It should noted that the original records taken in 1946 did not distinguish betwcon losses due to requisition, denial action or plain enemy or allied action so that it is difficult to determine, where alternative evidence is not available, whether any particular loss is due to one or other causes.
Also the following Foreign Flag vessels appear to have been sunk in the course of denial action:-
37. STANLEY (Ch) Han
Han Tai Siang Co.
459 (1904).
$380,000
Scuttled on H.M. instructions
Claim by Johnson Stokes and
and salved by Japanese. Left Master Solicitors. in Hong Kong on 1.1.45 and believed sunk in harbour; not recovered.
38. FLORINHA (Pan)
Compania Altumar.
263
$50,000
No particulars of sinking
39. LINDINHA (Pan)
-do-
263
$50,000
-do-
No records.
-do-
N.B. The potential claims from these sources, which are unlikely to be admitted, appear to be as follows:-
(a) Under (ii) above, against the M.O.T. in the first instance, or failing them against the Hong Kong Government, à
maximum of about £155,000 or a minimum of £125,000 equivalent to $3,000,000 or $2,000,000 respectively.
(b) Undor (iii) above, against the Hong Kong Government a maximum of about $3,500,00.
The above disregards interest.
(iv) Small Craft Known or believed to have been sunk as denial action.
Although the then Harbour Master clearly calls that sono 200 craft were scuttled as donial action, in the list of Claims kept by the Marine Department thorò is a record of only one reported case of donial action:-
Mar. Dept.
No.
Name
Type
11 41.
KWONG FOO
Steam launch
Tonnage
Valuc
25
$20,000
Remarks
Scuttled 15.12.41 by 4 British officers.
No single case is recorded in the lists of craft under 500 tons prepared by the Reparation Claims Registration Office. that, in the event of any hint of admitting liability in cases of denial sinkings this list would grow very markedly. given for this potential liability, which is not likely to be admitted.
It is obvious No. figure can be
6,7