CO129-604-2 Crown Leases 23-2-1948 - 6-11-1948 — Page 16

Las

not

pobey

77

that

Ly

view

Convinced

para 30%

No 2

of 1445

aot

bur16

that

cre

ف

wrong,

attitude

able to pursue the

Lebarena

д

سعد

we

matter further.

I agree

•H.T.B 27/10

are

Mr. Sidebotham wondered whether it would be possible, by inserting a last date for the concession in the amended paragraph 5 of the public announcement, or by any other means, to limit more effectively the operation of the terms to which we are now agreeing.

-

2. The proposed public announcement (enclosure 1 to (1)), the despatch at (1) and the terms we are discussing all relate only to one class of Crown Land lease viz. the non-renewable 75-year leases but relate to all leases in that class. This class of lease was issued during the period 1880 to 1898 and the number of leases in the class is relatively small. (See the late Sir Edward Gent's minute of 22/2/41 on the 1940 file). Most of them were issued during the '80's, but there was one issued in 1856, one in 1861 and there were a few as late as 1910! (See last sentence of paragraph 1 of Memorandum by the Financial Secretary Hong Kong Mr. Butters which forms enclosure 2 to (6) on the 1940 file). The position then is that relatively small numbers of leases affected by these terms are due for expiry at various dates between now and (with a very few exceptions) 1973. A special concession with the last date (16th June 1947) has already been offered, taken advantage of, and finished with (see paragraphs 2 and 3 of (1)).

It is not the Governor's intention to offer now another time-limited concession, but to announce terms to be applied to the generality of the remaining leases in the class. We could, I suppose, suggest that there should be a time limit on these terms, but I am sure the Governor would go on arguing that and we should have to yield in the end. I suggest we do so now and let the substance of our savingram stand.

I think however we might wery well suggest that the public announcement should state exactly the type of lease dealt with. (The 1946 press release, referred to in the present draft announcement, was specific on this point - see paragraph 1 of first enclosure to (1) on the 1947 file). I have added a third paragraph to our draft savingram accordingly.

3. The further examination of the files now car ied out leads me to think that we may have been led into

error