CO129-243 - Public Offices & Others - 1889 — Page 211

their Lr wish, further engring shall be made of the

forr but the same

~ for of

our hitte shows that there

are marims grounds on which the Colony might susist the

Lurral

Claim & repay £9000 has spurt o

Years

ад

without constellation with them, & in the mean

-time the demand on the £40000 will be delaysi

counter

and the (dony may raise the claims which soned canan

&

fasten delay, & Großibly may allege that they ought: Receive Inbstantial confinsertion for the benefits giver by the eramunks &. I.M. forces, beyond the abandomuto of a claim for £ Don which on the

fan fit is

Disputabl

84.31/12/89

Draft XW5.0. & Jumoury dras Ind

al 903/1140

六

In the reply to this Letter the following

Number should be quoted.

16519

89

0.0.

209

23526

TREASURY CHAMBERS,

گرم

RESE 6 DEC 9,

December 1889,

Jes

19261

Frees 16014 Prait

sir,

I am directed by the Lords Commissioners of Her

Majesty's Treasury to acquaint you, for the information of

1

the Secretary of State, that They have considered Mr

Bramston's letter of the 17th October on the Military

Contribution to be paid by the Colony of Hong Kong

The Secretary of State demurs to My Lords' proposal

that the Contribution of £40,000 a year should be fixed

for two years.

He refers to the letter from this Board

on the subject of Singapore, in which My Lords named three

or four years as the period which the two Secretaries of

State and the Chancellor of the Exchequer had fixed in

conference, and in fulfilment of this agreement Lord Knuts-

-ford proposes to fix the said contribution for five years.

The Secretary of State therefore departs from the Agree-

mant as much in one direction, as MyLords departed from it

in the other direction. It must however be recollected

at, at the time when the letter of 10th August respecting

Singapore was written, the Chancellor of the Exchequer had not agreed with the Secretary of State to ask Her Majesty's

Advisers to refer the question of these Contributions to a

Cabinet Committee. It is obvious that the opinion of such

an a Committee, if accepted by the Cabinet would supersede the Agreement made by the three Ministers above named, and it would be desirable that duration should only be given to

that,

The Under Secretary of State,

Colonial Office,

that

i

BC: