is mainly a development which will attract foreign students and extend the sphere of influence of the University outside the Colony - which are not legitimate objects of C. D. & W. assistance. The other was that before the war a proportion of Hong Kong University students came from Malaya. because there was no University there. The present .project for a Malayan University should mean that
in a few years there should be no more Malayan students going to Hong Kong University, thereby prima facie reducing the number of British Colonial students attending the University.
5. It was understood that the minutes of the C.Ụ.G.A.Ç. will not refer to Hong Kong, but in view of what passed we are undoubtedly in 'a position to warn the Governor that C.D. & W.
assistance for Hong Kong University is very unlikely and we certainly should so warn him.
6. There is obvious difficulty in telling the Governor on the one hand that H.M.G.'s grant of £250,000 is intended for development and on the other hand that there is very little hope of supplementing the development expenditure from C.D. & W. funds and this to my mind makes it all the more improper to adopt Mr. Serpell's "take it or leave it" approach.
7. I have amended the telegram on this file and substantially redrafted the telegram on 54403/2/48. 8. (We must bear in mind that H. M. G. assistance for the 1946 extended University scheme has not been definitely refused. Consideration has merely been deferred, See (44) on the 1947 file where the Treasury say (under date 27th September 1947) "the most we can agree is that we should review the project next year". See also the Secretary of State's statement of the 7th April 1948 in the House (P. file 54147/P. 2/48 below), which says -
its (the Committee's recommendation) has unfortunately had to be deferred owing to the present conditions in the U.K.". But I don't suppose that in sober fact there is much likelihood of getting reconsideration in the near future).
1.W
29.5.48.
27