described in para. 2 than those imposed on aliens generally in the same position, for the same services. The documents to which para. 2 refers are those described in Articles 25 and 27, but may also include other documents if their issuance is permissible or required under the provisions of the Convention, for instance, proof of indigence under Article 16. Article 30 Transfer of assets 1. A Contracting State shall, in conformity which its laws and regulations, permit stateless persons to transfer assets which they have brought into its territory, to another country where they have been admitted for the purposes of resettlement. 2. A Contracting State shall give sympathetic consideration to the application of stateless persons for permission to transfer assets wherever they may be and which are necessary for their resettlement in another country to which they have been admitted. 1. This article was not among those which the Ad Hoc Committee had recommended for inclusion. Opposition toward the inclusion was raised by the Belgian representative who thought its provisions concerned primarily refugees and were not applicable to stateless persons. The British representative, however, pointed out that the words “in conformity with its laws and regulations” protected Contracting States from abuse; on the other hand, there may be instances where stateless persons would benefit from such a provision. He was supported by the Swiss and Norwegian representatives. The article was included in the Convention by a vote of 15 to none, 212 with 5 abstentions. 2. This Article imposes an obligation upon the Contracting States to permit the transfer of assets of stateless persons, provided these assets have been brought in by him and the transfer is made to another country where he has been admitted for resettlement. Thus no such obligation exists in cases where the stateless person leaves the country of his residence for a temporary stay abroad. The obligation is qualified by the words “in conformity with its laws and regulations”. These words do not free a Contracting State from its obligation to permit the transfer of assets referred to in para. 1, even if it generally prohibits transfers in favour of other aliens or nationals, since the obligation is of a categorical nature. These words were inserted to regulate the manner of the transfer. The above-quoted statement by the British representative referred to “abuses” only, meaning that the laws and regulations provide sufficient guarantee that only such assets will be exported which were actually brought in by the stateless person. In other words, the words just quoted require a stateless person to obtain a licence if such a document is required; they may militate against total transfer at once if amounts of such magnitude cannot generally be exported in one lump sum; the transfer in certain currency may be subject to restrictions or the transfer can be made only through the intermediary of a certain agency or a payment union, if this is a general rule, etc. A state, however, cannot refuse to permit the transfer if all such formalities are complied with, on the grounds of lack of foreign exchange or that other aliens or their own 213 nationals do not enjoy the right of transfer. Paragraph 1 speaks of assets which a stateless person brought into the country of his residence. It is not necessary that the assets be brought in when the stateless person took up residence in the given country. The funds may have been sent into that country before he became a stateless person or before or after he took up residence there as such a person. In fact, the Refugee Conference dropped the words “with him” (in connection with 212 213 SR.8, pp. 7-8. The Belgian representative in the Refugee Conference correctly stated that the purpose of this article was in fact to lift in the case of refugees the restrictions imposed on the transfer of assets (SR.13, p. 5).