CO129-489 - Governor Sir Stubbs & Sir Clementi - 1925 [8-12] — Page 536

them in a

formal desp.

im

which he

and

should allude to the larger items

give any

supplementing explanation which

Le considno might be of assistance 16 S675.

This

is specially

Rennsilving

L

give

ما

form which

desirabl

simen the Minulý

info.

auf

for

sabaritied

would not accepted.

Love critical

Critical Council.

(2)

hurnals

The schedule accompanying

should

in which references

A

contami

A

further colema

K

any

showed he inserted.

IL- Sys

hot

Jan

only facilitati

with

This wit checking but with

facilitate checking

from going

K

unnecessay

length of approving expenditure twice.

Where the figums of exp. seperately

reported

and apprend

Arc

ab night

(in this cam, Ag. Queen's Sarday, they

require further explanation)

the remainder,

only approve the

huugh

and

out it

not be foogstien that we want to

In courage

HK

to Blain the soft's prior

approval for any

of sucking it

substantial expo. intial

months aftermals with the submission of

the Financial Minutes destroyed all

Criticism.

when time has

ale opportunity for effective

The whasuck

8126

Mr.Beckett,

530

Two pointe should be borne in mind in

this connection, vizt:-

(1) that the despatch from the Secretary of

State to the Governor of Hongkong (No.98

of 19th April, 1916), in which the use of

Quarterly Returns was insisted upon, is

still operative and lays down (in para-

graph 4) that all excess expenditure over

a limit of $1,200 requires the prior

sanction of the Secretary of State; and

(2) that the Governor has recently undertaken

(No.331 or 26th August 1925 in Hongkong

44433/25) that all excesses shall be

covered by Financial Minutes.

In the somewhat peculiar circumstances

in Hongkong it seems to me that what is required

is a form of quarterly Return (Colonial Regulation

396(viii)) which will clearly record all excesses

requiring the sanction of the Secretary of State

and which, at the same time, will give the

necessary reference to the authority for such

excesses which has already been given by the

Secretary of State (where necessary), the Governor

and the Legislative Council.

I enclose a form which, in my opinion,

would meet the requirements of the case and I

suggest that the attention of the Governor should

be drawn to the Secretary of State's despatch

No.98 of 19th April 1916 and that he should be

instructed