Mi
Graft, i. Preme 24/5
54126/6/48
Wallace 2575 (Michnadellen has seen
In Sidebottam 25/CODE✓
alice
Trensing agrec
120
ms)
"hurst
TELEGRAM IMMEDIATE
Confidential
65]
bowculatin
No. 657
as
in
(cc. fel No. 4€
487
from 16K J
i
62]
TO
GOVERNOR. HONG KONG.
No. 589
CONFIDENTIAL.
Ansd. (76).
Your telegram No.487.
Roded & sent
7.
13.456
25.5.49
1. I have the following comments to make on your
proposed replies to the questions to be asked on
26th May.
2. A. I agree as the grant was not intended to be
related to any specific liabilities.
3. B. AND C. I am not, of course, able to check the
amounts in question. As regards particular items I
4.
am not aware of what is involved in item (h) repeat (h).
Item (g) repeat (g) if it is in respect of craft referred to in paragraph 31 of your despatch No.292
seems to be in a different category from the other items,
in that it represents a debt for goods supplied, whereas items (a) to (f) represent expenditure for which
the Government has received no direct return. In other
cases doubtless the Hong Kong Government in post-war
conditions has had to purchase stores which are not entirely suitable for its requirements or at higher
prices than normal and to that extent a certain part
of the expenditure might be said to "arise out of the
war". You may consider therefore that this item does not strictly come within the terms of questions B and C. 5. I assume the phrase "all/remaining liabilities" in
the third sentence following the phrase "The position
regarding these liabilities is as follows" should be
"all the liabilities referred to above".
6. As regards item (i) and the sentence beginning "So far as can be seen" I would refer to paragraphs 1,
3 and 4 of my telegram No.533. The extent to which
the Hong Kong Government is legally liable to meet
"denial"
-P.T.O