CO129-261 - Public Offices & Others - 1893 — Page 284

CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案 All AI Reviewed

Series Prev Next

282

difficulty in giving way on this point.

Although it is perhaps preferable that the maximum

amount allowed for orders issued on either side should

be the same, and should be limited to 50 dollars, there

will, it is thought, be no practical objection to the

suggestion that the maximum for an Order issued should

be 100 dollars in the United States and 50 at Hong Kong.

With regard to the question raised by the Hong Kong

Post Office as to the necessity of informing the United States

of the amount in local currency paid on each Order, it may be

remarked that this Office in the exchange of Money Orders

with countries where there is a fluctuating currency has

often felt the inconvenience of not knowing the amount

paid in local currency upon British Orders. Some such

communication, therefore, as is desired by the United States

would appear to be proper; but it would probably suffice if

the rate of exchange on the date of receipt of the lists

were furnished in lieu of the more detailed information

suggested by the United States Post Office.

The proposal to expunge the whole of paragraph 3

from Article 10 would, it is believed, be scarcely acceptable to

the United States Post Office, as the arrangements of the Audit

Office in Washington require that a certified copy of each list

despatched from the United States should be returned by the

receiving Administration. Copies of all lists received in this

Country from the United States are returned with a certificate

as to their accuracy or otherwise.

I am to add that no objection is seen to the alteration

proposed in Article 15.

I am,

Sir,

Your obedient Servant,

Edit History

2026-05-27 07:48:33 · NVIDIA / meta/llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct

Live

View comparison

AI Proofread

282 difficulty in giving way on this point. Although it is perhaps preferable that the maximum amount allowed for orders issued on either side should be the same, and should be limited to 50 dollars, there will, it is thought, be no practical objection to the suggestion that the maximum for an Order issued should be 100 dollars in the United States and 50 at Hong Kong. With regard to the question raised by the Hong Kong Post Office as to the necessity of informing the United States of the amount in local currency paid on each Order, it may be remarked that this Office in the exchange of Money Orders with countries where there is a fluctuating currency has often felt the inconvenience of not knowing the amount paid in local currency upon British Orders. Some such communication, therefore, as is desired by the United States would appear to be proper; but it would probably suffice if the rate of exchange on the date of receipt of the lists were furnished in lieu of the more detailed information suggested by the United States Post Office. The proposal to expunge the whole of paragraph 3 from Article 10 would, it is believed, be scarcely acceptable to the United States Post Office, as the arrangements of the Audit Office in Washington require that a certified copy of each list despatched from the United States should be returned by the receiving Administration. Copies of all lists received in this Country from the United States are returned with a certificate as to their accuracy or otherwise. I am to add that no objection is seen to the alteration proposed in Article 15. I am, Sir, Your obedient Servant,

Baseline (Original)

282 difficulty in giving way on this point. Although it is perhaps preferable that the maximum amount allowed for orders issued on either side should be the same, and should be limited to 50 dollars, there will, it is thought, be no practical objection to the suggestion that the maximum for an Order issued should be 100 dollars in the United States and 50 at Hong Kong. With regard to the question raised by the Hong Kong Post Office as to the necessity of informing the United States of the amount in local currency paid on each Order, it may be remarked that this Office in the exchange of Money Orders with countries where there is a fluctuating currency has often felt the inconvenience of not knowing the amount. paid in local currency upon British Orders. Some such communication, therefore, as is desired by the United States would appear to be proper; but it would probably suffice if the rate of exchange on the date of receipt of the lists were furnished in lieu of the more detailed information suggested by the United States Post Office. The proposal to expunge the whole of paragraph 3 from Article 10 would, it is believed, be scarcely acceptable to the United States Post Office, as the arrangements of the Audit Office in Washington require that a certified copy of each list despatched from the United States should be returned by the receiving Administration. Copies of all lists received in this Country from the United States are returned with a certificate as to their accuracy or otherwise. I am to add that no objection is seen to the alteration proposed in Article 15. I am, Sir, Your obedient Servant, from

2026-05-27 07:48:33 · Baseline

View content

282