ì
ม่า
지
Mr. Peck
We spoke.
Please see Mr. Anderson's minute of 31st March for the background.
(
The legal problem is not at issue, in that both in Mr. Rushford's and my opinion the advice given by the Attorney- General of Hong Kong is sound i.e. that the Company cannot at law claim the return of the premium and that any refund is a matter of grace.
But Hong Kong's proposals in this respect are very 'tough' since they mean that the Company will lose about $375,000, and I do not see the Company agreeing to this without a fight.
In view of the above I shall be glad to know whether you think that the Colonial Office or the Crown Agents should handle these negotiations, which may become protracted and
possibly devolve into an interchange of solicitors letters. (In this respect, please see paragraph 5 of Mr. Anderson's minute.) If you think that the Colonial Office should do it, would you please check Draft A which opens the negotiations?
I have spoken
J. E. Hofkumain.
t
Mr Pack about & in
2/5/51 fis K. Robert, Wray
my minute, a that the
camilers that
the C.O.
Sin K. Robats. Wany camilers
should handle the negotiations. If Company refute the legality of
tention
he states that it
to ark the C/Agent,
Over
巴
the
le
con-
intimat
behalf, but for the present le he comidery that this is not
J.E.H.
3.5.5.
I have made this Inmedente as the Company
xl Ma positivi.
3 deft hem th
neceromy
one roximes to know
In view of X abwo I have signed the letters for M' Hall, in his absence.
Jid Andurm
-1/5
10/5 tie