206
absence of a few Hongkong convicts at Port Blair. This point does not appear to have been previously raised.
I think that the Indian Govt would have had, at the time of the transfer, the right to call upon Hongkong to make some arrangement similar to that with Ceylon. But they did not do so. They sent in a claim to the Treasury, who recommended them to resist the claim, and sent it on to us.
shall we ... of ... or send it out to the colonies, allowing them to fight their own battles?
Mr Hebut.
This is RS.h 14/11/72.
a curious procedure on the part of the India Office - they fire off a demand for £2503.10.10 at the Treasury - why, I am unable to divine the meaning, seeing the matter related in some way to a Colony, recommend an application to this office, which is accompanied by no particulars, but with grounds for the claim.
an application to the Treasury on behalf of the Crown, which has now been made to this office, should be met with a request to return the papers, saying that Lord Kimberley begged to pay in future to entertain on behalf of the Crown the ... that conscientia.
The demand now made does not appear to be in conformity with any existing arrangement. This leaves it open to the Govt to argue again if they have any better case.
it is probable that this claim may have grown out of the negotiations which are being carried on between his Lordship and the India Office.
But there is nothing in the letter from the India Office to show the history or origin of the claim.
I think the course suggested by Mr Meade is the best course to pursue. We should stand between the Colony & such a claim at all events, not allow ourselves to be the medium of its transmission unless it assumes a more definite & precise form.
YAK 10/1/72
will me minute K Nov 21/72
Law Officers
206
busence of a few Hongkong convicts at Port Blair. This fount does not appear to lave, beviously raised.
I think that the Indien Gort woud have hard, at the time of the transfer, the right to call upon Hongkong to make some arrangement Similar to that with leyton. But they did a back claim to the not do 30. They send in
enforial Treasury, who recommend them to resist the claim,
Send it on to us.
Brall
we
A
of
or send it out to the colomines, allowing them to fight their own battles?
Mr Hebut.
This is
RS.h
14/11/72.
une ou
curious purcedure
The
part of the India Office - they fire offa bemand for £2503.10.10 at the Treasure- why, I am alloy there unable & divine The measing seeing the matter related in some way to an Colony, recommend and application to this office, which is accaduty
particulars make but with
gerunds of
the
no
Claim.
an
to the
Should be mistined to retume the
me and at
Papers sazing that Li fimberley begate to pay
in inmatre to entertain
on
hehalfof
The
Crony
the
hat conscinta.
application noww made has the Frendigen the
the
Ja mitte to admin the justice
تیرے
demand Joop tof
to be in conformity
which does not appear to be in
with
any
Wirting arrangement. This leaving it
Lave
o the 2.0. Bunite again if they have any better c: this populle that this claime may
us
the negotiations which sie
being carried on
that I
grown out of 4.O. tre between his font L.
But there is
India
in the Vague.
nothing in
litter from the India office to show the history origin of
the claim.
Ru
I think the course suggested by Mr Meade is the best conice to pursue. We should stand between the Colmy & such a claim sat all events not allow ourselves the the medium gits transmitror
definite & precise from. unless it apumis a more
YAK 10/1/72 Разли
wille
me monste
K Nov 21/72
Law Officers
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.