CO129-542-3 Foreshore and Sea-bed Works Bill- correspondence 9-1-1933 - 16-8-1933 — Page 28

28

VES

%26ode

T.. Oode (X.0) -21,

-31,

assoud

Looker

Achs. (23) with thanks. The question

Consideration

will Corne

at

a

27.6.

uch for

meeting

the China Association Committee to

be held on

Monday wert.

DESTROYED UNDER STATUTE STATUTE

༤༽ ཡ, ་

DESTROYED UNDER STATUTE

་ ་ ་༽ ཅ་ཅན་

No action is necessary on (26) which can be putity

Hangmeson

30/6/33

-30/4/13

-30/4/23

There is little of serious consequence

in these objections. The first complaint is that,

owing to the wording of the Bill, if a claimant

puts in a claim to the Governor-in-Council for

£1,000, which amount the Governor considers

excessive, he refers the matter for the decision

of one of the Judges, who may award any amount

up to £1,000. The Chamber considers it a

hardship that the claimant may not alter his claim

before the Judge to some greater amount.

In practice there can be little in

this, as Counsel for the Crown, whatever the new

claim might be, would invariably bring out the

fact that a few weeks earlier the claimant wonla

have been satisfied with a much smaller amount,

and