CO129-370 - Governor Sir Lugard & Public Offices - 1910 [12] — Page 500

In the reply to this Letter the following

Number should be quoted.

3969

10.

0

6765

Rref 7 MAR 10,

TREASURY CHAMBERS.

March 1910

493

In the

somewhat on the lines of my previous minute.

meantime we might telegraph to Sir F.Lugard that the

Treasury have agreed to the insertion of £9,000 on

the Estimates of the coming year, and that corresp.

is proceeding as

to

an arrangement for three years.

1 is quite clear that the present £9,000 is

not a Grant-in-Aid. The Treas. have not included it in

the Grants-in-Aid but have inserted it under a new

Subhead for Opium Revenue Compensation. H. Xong..

Fut since they have not agreed to take the actual loss

of Opium Revenue as the sole basis of compensation, and 144

we must send them the Estimate papers for the current

year in support of our representations for a three

years arrangement, it will be well,

to make it clear that there is no question of an ordi-wile

Shave

as Mr. Fiddes says,

nary Grant-in-Aid.

Arc

11/3

She had better Veganything The print.

been kept Courant of strangeruts be af

Yes, drust

I agre

A

there hasier

可

11.3

34 29387/09

2013/09

Sir,

I am directed by the Lords Commissioners of His

Majesty's Treasury to acknowledge the receipt of Mr. Cox's letter of the 24th ultimo (5558/1910), on the subject of the Compensation payable by the Government of Hong Kong

in respect of the closing of Opium Divans, and of the grant to be made to the Colony from Imperial Funds as a Contri- bution towards making good the loss of opium revenue directly resulting from measures adopted under the instruc- tions of His Majesty's Government.

2 Their Lordships desire me to request you to ex- press to the Earl of Crewe Their regret that an earlier reply has not been sent to the previous letters from your Department on the question of the grant. They had hoped

to be in a position to deal at the same time with the ques- tion of the suggested relieving of Hong Kong revenues of the cost of the Postal Agencies in China, which has been the subject of a long correspondence. The connection between the two questions was alluded to in the letter from this Department of the 2nd September last (12942/09) regarding the Agencies, as also, from another point of view, in your letter of the 26th January on the subject of the opium grant; and in view of differences of opinion

The Under Secretary of State,

Colonial Office.

88

(1390), Wt, 20024-26, 15000, 11/08, A, & E, W,

(8327).

13

1081-7. 6000, 4,09.

"