CO129-329 - Governor Nathan - 1905 [7-12] — Page 49

For Olivier

thas nothing been done in G. Coast Subsequent to 3500lyos

Nur Fiddes

?

Dr.1818

No _ we told the then Gors. to send then obson- duset & g.C. and it looks as

if they had mutted

to do so and the matter had consequently ben

hang up

you

in the SC

a eventually forgotten. When

have done with thepp I thich bey hd be

iniciculated for couson wheller of

write to OAG. GC.

we shed

in

баги

19

I think as regards inheritance, the views taken

for /32.609/ Maniting applies have, for the

picsons concerned have comme

viče veraa

fet

5. Leove

to the Andravi

? We might hind him copy of the oft Ordre

4289 35006 Glood [saging that it has

Rafely

onit

been passed]: refer him to the Stails to

lens (we are doubtlers in his possession):

Cayton Lens (we.

for his come

to inheritance haved him a copy of the dash on

32609

Any

kittare.

showsing the Views Catter the S. gs. in

Dr. 1918

Mereas

The Waf deft seem

Jam

the same

47

pinion which

Texturessed in my minute on Mauritiis

shie

of the

32609/04. When

country

& custom,

we take

Foreign

where there is native law

དངཆརི་ཅན།་ ར་་

it has always been

jespect it o

สน

other

for hig

wise

to alter it gradually, if

at all. But it is a

different thing to

set of an other native law reaston

hite

Lending

CPE

of immigrants If we did so

we

and to recopise that,

Send the

to have

Send

overlooked the fambia Ordce no 10

91903 which I send on

herewith.

before long

sha have confusion

The difficulty in store kone wibe to distinguish between natives o

im migrant Chinese

difficulty Spear

au

insuperable

so we must either

let the establish offhinese law

alone or

affly it to all Chinese whether Domiciled in Hong Kong

or not; Iwonee but the difficulty to bi M. Nathan and ask for his obsons. asal present

I think there might be less

than in Maun this A Br

adrioel objection in Stone Rome

C.P.L. 21 atonce To