CO129-610-1 Rehabilitation of Hong Kong University 3-1-1947 - 29-12-1947 — Page 181

valuable both to the Colony itself and to the whole

British position in the Far East

•

That the maintenance

of a University institution of high standards is of great

advantage to the inhabitants of Hong Kong needs no

argument.

We and the Foreign Office believe also that such an institution,

at which students from all parts of China and indeed from

other countries in South Eastern Asia can, acquire a British

education will have value for British influence and prestige

which can never be exactly measured but is certainly worth

paying for. On a wide view it is arguable that it is by

such means, by the spread of knowledge of the British way of

life and British habits of thought, that influence in the

world can most effectively be maintained.

It was in such a

spirit that the Hong Kong University was originally founded

by Lugard; it was in the same spirit that plans were prepared

revivification

in 1939 for its extension and unification; and it is with the

same object that we now want to re-create the institution after

its temporary eclipse. I do not want to overstate the case,

9

but the effect on our prestige of failure to re-establish it now

is obvious.

interests.

The financial proposals envisage contributions from the

Colony's own funds, and from Colonial Development and Welfare

funds available for the promotion of higher education in the

Colonies themselves, and also additional contributions from

the United Kingdom Exchequer to correspond with the wider British

Although there are many other calls both on Hong Kong's

own resources for the Colony's rehabilitation and future development,

and on C. D. and W. funds for the promotion of higher education in

the Colonies at large, we have felt justified in proposing very

substantial contributions from those sources in view of the direct

value of the University to Hong Kong itself. There remains, however,

a large balance to be met from other sources on the ground of the

wider considerations described above.

·

Very broadly, what is proposed, therefore, is a fifty-fifty

division between what we may call the Colonial contribution, including

Colonial Development and Welfare funds, and the special United Kingdom contribution, based on the value to the general British position

in