68
£12,500 which represents approxi ately the
total of freight charges plus 2% commission
on the admitted Chinese and British Section
claims as revalued by the War office.
3. So far as the British Section's claim
is concerned, no difficulties arise over
Items 1 and 2 which are agreed at the figures
claimed and the War office have added two
further items which were not included.
They are however unable to admit Item 3,
which, as it stands, includes an unspecified amount
for the manufacture of missing parts necessary
for the fabrication of the 600 40-ton wagons,
materials for which were requisitioned from
the Chinese. It would appear from two telegrams
TNS/76308 and TNS/76307 of 26th June 1941
Excl 2=3 (copies of telegrams enal. at (1))
from C.in.c. Middle East to G.O.C. Hong Kong and
C. in. C. India respectively, copies of which I
attach, that instructions were given for the
manufacture of deficient material in Hong Kong
but that buffers and drawhooks were made in
India where fabrication of the wagons was also
carried out. As you will see from the enclosure
to a letter dated 16th October 1941 addressed by
the ar Supplies Board to the Director General of
Transportation at Cairo, a copy of which I attach,
it does not appear that in fact any significant
quantity of missing parts were manufactured in
or supplied from Hong Kong.
In these circumstances and in the absence
of other evidence, in support of Item 3 of the
British Section's claim, the War Office recommend
Evel
(copy of letter evel at (1))
settlement