TNAG-0490-FCO40-555-Allegations-of-bribery-and-corruption-in-Hong-Kong-police-an-1974 — Page 59

L

to the Commission in Hong Kong or, if he prefers, through Hong Kong & Indian Ocean Department of the FCO.

Turning to the question of the "wider administrative abuse" to which Mr Ellis referred in his earlier letter to you of 7 December and which he alleges led to the termination of his appointment in Hong Kong, I, too am anxious that Mr Ellis should accept that everything possible has been done to investigate his allegations. I hope he can come to accept that, any question of corruption apart, the Hong Kong Government were within their contractual right to terminate his probationary appointment in the way that they did. The core of his case is that the reasons for his discharge were distorted by corruption. He himself stressed this in his interview with the Overseas Police Adviser. I can only urge that if he has fresh and conclusive evidence on which the Commission could act, he should let them have it.

In another letter of 7 January Mr Ellis refers to the Warren Hastings trial of 1788 in connection with the Godber case. Our legal advisers have looked into this. The Act of 1793 to which Mr Ellis refers was repealed by the Government of India Act 1910. The particular provision he had in mind was reproduced in Section 124 of the 1910 Act but that section applied only to India and in any case was repealed without replacement in 1935.

In his earlier letter of 7 December Mr Ellis also raised two questions, one of which dealt with exports of gold bullion from the United Kingdom. We have no evidence of the ultimate destination and use of gold exported from this country. Gold transactions in the United Kingdom are governed by the provisions of the Exchange Control Act 1947. Provided that

/a non-resident