CO537-4320 — Page 10

Li Salehaus

fyre should I think see the sestien a 6

2

bother? allernative courses of action purposse

wills

верт

Muless you

༡༦་

i ho 3

any lyal objecten Jam disfired to ague that, with wis we shouls

wishe встрия

ари

agree litter I-th- fost preceding, as snoposed ho'd & the oft Bill auwred kit complinth

a comment on the bries of

A

بیجار

6/10

Thi Wallaces humaniti

• Boy hittills mom?

*

olur.

m2 Sibbs them

is have discussed this. It news

"

To we that the invention

this awandement

of the

X [en the Grohmance would create

important obligation

as a condition on

which

granted

what the concorsion of wo

in asendance with which it is operated

(vide xes +3

a

of the

case

the Ontwance 9 of 19257). Pranamatly referral of compliance with

requation under the proponed reation 55 A would have to be met by some Find

of action otherwine thin order would be maffective (Faufponerection 45 or 46 (or both) of the Bromance would be uworked. The Company winglet wall complain that to legulate in this way

To something vary much like a breast of contract introdusal after the agreement under which

the Степянками

двай

на домб

granted, & colieke because

X it is barbation they are powerless to prevent

Ithink wast

go back & put it to the Journon Tobnance in pares of public

objection mig let be rained. The despatah might

Page 10Page 11