2
211
Mr. Bevin and Mr. Creech Jones, had their full support and
◄ letter was sent to the Treasury by Jir Thomas Lloyd enclosing
a copy of the Committee's Report, endorsing their recommendations,
and proposing that, very broadly, there should be a fifty-fifty
division as between the Colonial contribution (including Colonial
Development and Welfare) and a special United Kingdom contribution.
On this basis the Treasury were asked to agree to a capital grant
from United Kingdom funds of £500,000 and an annual subvention of
£30,000 rising to £45,000. The Foreign Office also sent
supporting letter.
After some delay the Treasury replied on the 12th August,
to the effect that although on the whole, with some reservations,
they felt sympathetic towards our proposals, this was the seagain. ↑
of scheme which would have to go into abeyance during the present
economic crisis.
It was felt however, that there was need for a more definite
assurance than this, since considerable public interest had been
shown over the proposal to re-establish the University on an
extended basis, and a complete abundatawunt of the soleme would
lead to aøvere criticism as soon as the precent difficulties were
a little less in the minds of time people. We therefore asked the
Treasury for an assurance (a) that favourable consideration would
be given to the proposals as soon as the financial situation improves
and (b) that if we were able to find funds from sources open to
the Hong Kong Goverment towards meeting part of the cost of the
ro-establishment of the university, which was to have been made
from United Kingdom funds, any such expenditure would be repaid
from United Kingdom funds at a later date. But in the Treasury
reply it was stated that they would not feel justified in accepting
this deferred cœmitment (see No. lil on the file),
In a recent discussion we told Dr. Sloss (who is in this
country until October 20th), that the latest letter from the
Treasury seemed to us to dispose of any question of our being able
/to