CO129-538-6 Naval Armament Depot- correspondence 19-6-1931 - 31-3-1933 — Page 13

13

Was Office (30)

Rigan is (18).

DESTROYED UNDER STATUTE

20ch Buccnded, 1938.

I can trace no detailed information

regarding the Hong Kong Government's proposals

for the provision of alternative magazine

accommodation for the Army, or regarding the

failure of the Hong Kong Government to implement

such proposals, to which the War Office refer

in (18). In para. 6 of his confidential despatch

of the 4th September 1930, (6 on 72779/30) the

Governor informed us that his Executive Council

had agreed with him that the question of removing

the Military Magazines might be deferred for the

time being. In para. 3 of his secret despatch of

the 29th of December, 1931 (in which despatch the

question of the Ropeway was first raised), the

Governor stated that the question of the removal

of the Military Magazines had been explored

concurrently with the negotiations for the transfer

of the Arsenal Yard, but that their removal had

been indefinitely postponed. It is, I think,

clear from this paragraph that the Military

Authorities

raised the question of the Ropeway

on account of the decision to postpone the

removal of the Kennedy Road Magazine.

The War Office consider that it is

"neither equitable nor reasonable that the

War Department should be mulcted in heavy

expenditure" for diversion of the Ropeway or for

compensation, and on the information at present

before them they are unable to accept such

liability. This is much as anticipated in Mr.

Calder's minute of 16/6/32. There appears,

however, to be room for compromise, and it looks

as if the best method of settling this dispute

will