SECRET
Ministry of Transport,
Berkeley Square House,
London, W.1.
With the compliments of Mr. D. Haigh (MO.T.
73.
105
OCIVE
+
31st May, 1948.
68
Dear Jerrom,
2 JUN 1948
0.0. REGY.
(68) I have received a copy of the letter you sent to Severs,
:
Admiralty, on 24th May about Hong Kong denial claims.
I have
also received from Severs a copy of his reply, in the terms of which I concur.
So far as I am aware nothing was said at the meeting at the Colonial Office and there is nothing in the circulated telegrams to suggest that the Service Departments are committed to liability in respect of denial claims at Hong Kong and you will see from the enclosed copy of our telegram to the Ainistry of Transport's Representative at Hong Kong that we have been careful to emphasise that at this stage he is to do no more than collaborate in the collection of information without committing the United Kingdom Government to liabilities.
My remarks at the Colonial Office were intended to indicate that in my view the United Kingdom Government could not contemplate disclaiming liability to compensate for a vessel which was properly requisitioned under the Defence Regulations purely on the ground that it was lost by reason of scuttling to deny it to the enemy. I still adhere to that. We have settled any claims in respect of vessels scuttle whilst in service under requisition to deny them to the enemy and I can see no logical reason for dealing with
After all if we were to attempt Hong Kong vessels differently. to claim that a requisition was frustrated by the necessity for scuttling to deny the vessel to the enemy why not claim equally that a requisition becomes frustrated by the sinking of a vessel which strikes a mine? We must, however, obtain details of the
/circumstances
T.C. Jerrom, Esq.,
War Office, S.W.1.