The
would, inter alia, ensure that the requirements of the Council's charitable status were fully met not least for tax reasons. Council also argued that they should have power to use both capital and income of the Trust Fund (folio (5) of HKD 286/1 of 1989 : AB Davidson's (British Council) letter of 9 January 1989 to Morris
(HKD/FCO).
20. FCO's initial reaction was that the Council were trying to assume an excessive degree of control of the management of the funds and should be required to consult FCO before taking any major steps AC(folio (8) of HKD 286/1 of 1989: Morris's minute of 1 February 1989
to Long (CRD)).
21. FCO (Mr Morris, HKD) spoke to the Institute of Cancer Research who responded enthusiastically to the prospect of benefitting from I Sir S K's gift (folio (16) of HKD 286/1 of 1989: Briegel's letter
of 23 January 1989).
22. FCO (Mr Morris) drafted a letter covering the suggested conditions for the donation to the Institute of Cancer Research and AD sought the FCO Legal Adviser's views on it (folio (7) and (9) of HKD AE 286/1 of 1989: Morris's minute of 1 February 1989 to Legal Advisers
and draft letter of 30 January 1989).
23. At the Legal Advisers suggestion HKD wrote to the Hong Kong Government seeking further details of Sir S K Tang's will and of evidence of the circumstances and conditions surrounding the gift AF (folio (12) of HKD 286/1 of 1989: Morris's letter of 23 February
1989).
AG
24. This eventually produced some of the evidence required (folio (14) of HKD 286/1 of 1989: Leeks' letter of 27 April 1989).
25. The FCO Legal Advisers found the situation unclear and unsatisfactory and recommended that before further action a comprehensive summary of events should be made ( unnumbered folio A.attached to HKD 286/1 of 1989: Ms Elliot (HKD/FCO) minute of 4 May
1989 and Legal Advisers (Mr Edwards) reply of 10 May 1989).
27 July 1989
Hong Kong Department
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.