CO129-474 - Governor Sir Stubbs - 1922 [1-4] — Page 52

L

!

A

盅

50

ground of the certificate, the bank might still be sued at Shanghai where the certificate would apparently be no protection. If on the other hand the Custodiam were to fail on the ground that the shares were situate at Shanghai, and that the certificate was not inclusive, the Custodian at Shanghai would have to begin all over again, and presumably the Custodian in Hongkong would have to pay the

costs of the bank.

4.

The suggestion about the certificate is that

the words of Article 1(xvii)(occo) of the Treaty of Peace Order, 1919, as enacted by the Treaty of Peace (Amendment) (No.2) Order, 1920, must be read in some limited sense, 18 otherwise they would cover a case where the property certified was obviously outside the Colony, e.g., land at

Shanghai, or was in clear law situate outside the Colony. }

However this may be, the objection to applying for a

mandatory order does not rest solely on this suggested

doubt as to the effect of the certificate.

D.

I would suggest that the request of the bank

for an indemnity in this case is reasonable and ought to

be granted, but of course any indemnity given by this

Government would be entirely on behalf of His Majesty's

Government, and as between this Government and His Majesty':

would involve no liability on this Goverment.

I have the honour to be,

Sir.

Your most obedient humble servant,

7.2. Stubts

Governor, &c.

Spa

4