CO129-354 - Public Offices & Others - 1908 — Page 263

Sür C.- Lucas

I trust that

Col: Seely

lut Cochrane that the

will fill

matter

S

ame

in

which

caurst

the decision

the

possibly interfere with

foot of the local fast-

his int extention world h. noth resented

tu

havi

the Colary.

The

wo

expired for 20

thry

(as

-a^

guavance.

тве

20 years

their am

sharing-

Their lease has

hart sujoyed

at

a

have no reason

as a matter

Enjoyed possession tigting rent a

to expect Reneral

course.

The

that they have always

argument that the

complied with fort regulations

akurd. If they hadn't

they

han hats been dealt with as

law directs.

Col: Seely

BY

2.

I think that the answer should be that

this

Newwe

tre

we will send out a copy Statement but that Lord trewe cannot interfere with the discretion of the colonial

in the matter. I think the

sent

hirst post of the statement is the last. It is an impertinence to suggest that

18 years

bwe should called recommend a renewal. The Icanna see that

they have valid ground of complaint

Ci

24

کے

260

Write as Sir C. Lucas suggests in the first

five lines of

his in minuter.

but I should

with the reply to be particularly polite, partly because Mr Cochrane as an old friend, and

partly because the more

more

Easy

2

polite one is the

it is to be emphatic and definite

in a refusal. The letter must be for my

Signature of

Wember

の

Course

because the writer is

Parliament.

JS.

3.9.