Fate ecretary
89
to himself (the Sef S. for the Colonies), in order that the question may first be submitted to this Beard and the Army Council. This cendition was definitely reported to_the Colony in C0. despatch of 15th August, 1911, to the Governor of Hong Kong. The second portion of the Section can obviously not be applied unless it has been previously agreed that an undertaking should be troated under the first portion of the Section as a "productive undertaking".
The fact is that the Section of the Hong Kong Ordinance quoted by the Dopty Treasurer is only ol' a permissive nature made wide in its toms to obvate the necessity of ameuding ordinance. It is not general in its application to a produstavo undertakings in a Colony and neither the whole of the Section nor a portion of it, can be extended to any particular undertaking, not previously approved for treatment on net receipts, without the prior authority of His Majesty's Government. There has thus bee no error in law in the past treatment of waterworks receipts in Hong Kong.
War Office.
August, 1931.
T
Page 90Page 91
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.