tendente, po botoeuth
-u to uniços alanad
petence paneļdum eña no
MATAN BOLJ TOM PIZ
XL Bu encieu
9.7 ni beslaħ
Ciakong mela moqu
.midsoliqya
on the ground that British ships are at present prevented
by the Chinese agitators from engaging in the same trade.
Such action would apparently be possible unless it could be
contended that is involved a breach of some relevant treaty
obligation, but as the question whether any such breach
would be involved may depend largely on the terms of the
Straits settlements immigration laws it would not be possible to issue instructions to His Majesty's representa-
tives in China until the viewe both of the soard of Trade
and the Colonial office have been received and considered.
The second question, which arises on the Colonial
office letter of November 13th, is whether anything can be
done to prevent non-sritish ships from running from Chinese
ports to singapore, omitting Hongkong, when this action is
taken merely with the object of destroying the trade of
Hongkong. As regarda Chinese ships, the position may not
be soo complicated, but a difficulty arises in connection
with other foreign ships, and one of the vessels now in
question is Norwegian, It seems extremely probable that any
attempt to prevent a Norwegian ships from trading with
singapore on the grounds suggested would inspive a violation
of our treaty obligations: see for instance articles 6 and
7 of the Treaty with Sweden and Horway of March 18th, 1826.
A copy of this letter is being sent to the Colonial
wha kuti a 02
.aber; 10 binar
Your obedient Servant,
(54) S. P. WATEKLOTMM
BRITISH LEGATION, PEKING.
«sband amar edi »!
ed biwoo #3 ; elm ». A
YÉRO72 20Avsíst sæng 10
ONE TO BAGAJ ANS
Ride Windma anda baurong mưa ce
Junonaqqa biwow moitos dibua
n bevioral, až sarti babaednoo
Ja volevamp 250 sa tưd (moktaykido
kumho chaqah tra beyvlovni so kinow
14 de * Lurer åt zemi note-ngimal somasoženoŭ aglande -adrenencen u'yiestait «2: od muistuttaai eveni od sidissog
aría Llomu maleið að sovie
.betoblenua bna bevleden prak
jalnelec wriz ao mesita poté pali÷tes bavena sdi
od van Salátyre meritato uk,daca mer wrok te našiel sol110
luish-gon Snovaną od snob
DANS LES Eidyagala de $200
to chand selð xelqand, so 10 soulco mic 13że pieram aetas
moldoenna ni mważna yaısaltı
IN ROCINA EXCLOUS?? (RODENTS Cpre
LISARIO F
al won vloseɔy od: 10 ano paa Legie mylosat weďte dikw
nalguenot di nolékoup
matlar elpo vol a engyang or dista
Bo.732 17404/25) 6/194/10)
50 (7434 $87,
Ontober 9th.,1926.
I have the honour to rafer to my despatch Ho.
609 of the 23rd ultimo relative to the granting of amigra-
His Majesty'a
tion lisensus to non-Eritish ahişe aniling to British
ports from Evetov.
2. The recent trouble in this connection is now,
'iv in honed, at an end; but I should be glad to be informed
8.10.1925
whether, in your opinion, arv stepa could be taken, in
coneultation with the Colonish Authorities concerned, which
would justify a Consular officer, in the event of similar
circumstances arising in the future, in refusing to iscus
a certificate of emigration to non-āritish ships, as a
KARBUNE.
uumoris arta ze oneqegada
I have the homeur te be,
aniolamm vonnium. 102
umoisagiaco pisers wo to
Nabe "dnent adi to V
dia Tajesty's Comes
25 of 17th
With the highest respect,
lainojou sit at due: saind ai no sei elda zo 1909 à
Your meat obedient humble servant,
25, 34 ** 8th ...
(signed) f.k. PALAIRET.
The Light Sensurable
Austen Chamberlain, F.C..
PORLIGN OFFICM, 8.W.1.
.ZULAJAR .4.9
** EDITI
8376/194/10)
738 (7434/26)
His Majesty's Minister, Peking, presents his complimente to His Majesty's Principal Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, and transmits herewith 3 copies of the undermentioned papers.
8.10.1925.
Name and Date.
Reference to previous despatch;
Peking despatch No. 669 of 23/9/25.
Description of Inclosure.
Subject.
Jon Hie Kajesty's Consul, Kiungohow,
No. 22 of 17th September, '25.
His Majesty's Consul, Klungehow,
No. 14 of 8th October, +25.
Emigration: approves
attitude taken.
Copy to Board of Trade.
(BE\ACAT) BE.
His Britario Majesty's Consulate,
Kiungohow.
17th September, 1925.
nykaz... 10) »dasů 2o prejtatɔed faqkaniza ulyduojam mit of beat 15 trato nda 10 asiqon Ɛ dilwozod nikomeast bon jusĚNIZA
.UROL.OL.8
idoanquab auoirazę (07 aɔnazisä
„dalejās 10 €.0 10, zintæquod zalist
.ozuroínal to notżąłznesu.
.ataŭ bae DE
wodsymulX (lumnob a lyžuotai mi.
‚zedmejqal dari 16 25 ..
I have the honour to refer to despatches Nos. 40 and 51 dated August 13th and 3eptember 9th respectively, addressed to you by His Majesty's Consul at Swatow on the subjeat of the granting of facilities to non-British ships to darry emigrants to Singapore.
This morning the local representative of Kessrs. Yuen Fat Lee, a British firm agents for Messrs. Butterfield and Swire at this port, called on me and said that his firm had been invited by the Chong Han 3,8. Co. (see Swatow despatch No. 51) to accept the Hoinow agency of the Company. Kessrs. Yuen Fat Lee had refused on the grounde that they were
already agents for Messrs. Butterfield and Swire, I was
informed that the Chong Nan 3.5. Co., had chartered two ships, the Norwegian 5.3. Prominent and a Danish Ship (Chinese name Hei Tung) to engage in the emigrant business from Swatow to
Singapore and Bangkok and that, as Er. Kirke had refused to
inspect the ship bound for Singapore, it was anticipated that
the Company would carry the Swatow emigrants to Hoihow and
apply for inspection nere, pretending that the Swatow emigrante
originated from Hoihow. A further batch of gemine iloihow
emigrante would of course be picked up here. Hesora. Yuen Fat
Lee were perturbed at the prospect of this unfair competition
with Messrs. Butterfield and Swire and enquired what my
attitude.runt
Jajesty's Chargé d'Affaires,
.ebazt to LINDA DJ YEOD
A 30 OZ ZNA
og Istaï of Ivonod adt avad I
Tako se ut?I dengua BØJEL
no mojiet de kusnoɔ ntydamizi #28 xd voy os
i. S.. Prusifinel to saltoszy not
priorsyn le od adnezgime
pakuna indul sud printos alat
Jun sea) .00
201 Start maki talibig.
LINE LUS 30 no AJUTS (93. tds
dek yeah man ge bøt lynt nesc
te sutra
.*xico Las pielizessL
20. kinaga veenia
sachi HR PU
www.bul. antune
JA MAAY 82000 |
to cubanymon ztuhat
netyawzo" BUJ
molinoqeak 702 vient
Houten med bestnigizo
ann be afgm atnezgima
attitude would be in such a case.
Emigration to Singapore in non-British ships is governed not by the Asiatic migration Ordinance (Hongkong) 1915 but by the Chinese Immigrants ordinance (Singapore) 1902. The prosedure however is identical with that of the Hongkong Ordinance. Any such subterfuge as that anticipated by ženara. Yuen Yat Lee would undoubtedly be a breach of the ordinance and would venture to submit, with all respect to Mr. Kirke's opinion, that the action anticipated by him, namely the narrying of Swatow emigrants to Singapore via Amoy without British Consular inspection at 3watow would also infringe the ordinance.
A presisely analogous case occurred in the spring of this year. A British ship took Hoihow emigrants to Singapore via Hongkong without applying for my inspection and certificate. The fants came to my knowledge too late to warn Hongkong and the lapse of time having made legal proof unobtainable the Hongkong Government decided that it would be useless to prosecute. The Crown Solicitor's opinion was, however, quite definite and was as follows:-
"I am of opinion that if the s.8. "Haitan* cleared from "Hoihow having on board more than twenty passengers, "natives of Asia, with the intention or for the purpose "of commencing a 'short voyage to Singapore from *Hongkong, and to carry such passengers to Singapore, "then the vessel must be deemed to have cleared out or "proceeded to sea upon such 'snort voyage' from Hoihow, "at which port emigration papers should have been taken "out and fees paid (see ürdinance No.30 of 1915 "Section 2(2))".
Confirmation that this is a norrect statement of the law
is contained in Fee 115 of the Consular Fes Table, providing
for a certificate at a second port.
It would undoubtedly be my duty, in the case of a
British ship (which would come under the Hongkong Ordinance)
to refuse to inspect her since I am required to sertify that
vall, ... ... ....
BRAD À MOưa mà nó bluow abutitis
• at æqlan delatsg-non si exoqeanië of noisazşimớ (200pton) anzanitizu notjazɣlag visninä add yd son benzevoz SURI (#70qeynti:) KONNELLY. BIR¬TYLEMİ sannidð sæt yd jud airi anoxyuol mud 16 Jude dele insiznabi si zavować ozubeDOIG BAT insyrau yd beinglolène ti, s
.eonentbr..
sheillegu ved 30 Angsta a ad tibet quobno bisow ssl to dowY
■'•sie van US JOBLBOT Ila ntlw (tirdim of axužnev bluow I bns mid yć bożaqistine molina ode 2ad3,noiniqo gabyzzan ons glover
POLITA PROTJim Yona mày mzogrgadƐ od ninazykme wodawƐ do .BOZENİDEN at matat seim kings Pudemà je noktoeqent zalvenoɔ
sådd 10 antrør við al bəTTUOJU ABUN progoiana yioskaszą A
gang sali od kanszylon mało, zout gidin deletTE A Tatankattean int 201‡neqɛni ve sol gntyfoęs tuodt kw gaodynol sty akefront yR DJ WARDBina? adt „TO GROB NIEW OF BIWI 003 *
fauti was guivad salt to sequi seit
ri jens centseb zusmieved prodynod
.SEUDOCOIQ qara motalqu @trosiniio), nword ent
KUNING... od
-profit a new bra aðlnileb
Ze) adj 21 4°03 noinigo 20 mb 1* WISSAOGENE gerond eera STUK LABOJ no patveď wanlok" Brögzug mit tud tu kattmaral mit note miwa to nevidier "
PUTA 14IES IN
mo 12 taong gulḥ ki tarar dzokat e pakontummon 10% (@zoq"ynit of #2539882C This YTIRn os bus ¡norynok* tu juu beZe:İO ØVES 07 keciaal od Jaum Leskov elt Bedð” #ou log word foyerovi a zonat dhue noqu sên sở bábuenėtą" ISAAT NIEU even bluoda sztqaq molsstyins Jzoq natów du"
ZIMA TU 06.dk annaMELT. BU
UNILITOKĻ
•*{{$)S molto#2"
209750D 8 at nina Jans nutdumilino)
JGT 89, ISiuvaoü and to OII say ni bantasnon et
"all the requirements of the Asiatic Emigration Ordinance, 1915 have been complied with'.
No such clause however appeare in the certificate required to be given under the Singapore Ordinance, Section 33(2), although the Legation in despatch No.4 of September 15th, 1906 instructed the then Consul at Hoihow to satisfy himself that the requirements of the (Singapore) Ordinance are fulfilled before granting a certificate. I propose socordingly, if the case arises, to inspect the Chong Nan 3.3. Company's Norwegian or Danish ship in the usual way but to endorse on my dertificate a statement in the following texrAS:-
"I further certify
"(1) that this ship arrived at Hoihow from Swatow with
more than twenty immigrants bound from Swatow to Singapore on board.
(2) that no sertificate signed by the British Consul at Swatow or any person appointed by him as required by the Chinese Immigrants Ordinance" (Singapore) 1902, Section 33(2) has been produced to me and that to the best of my knowledge and belief no such certificate nas been issued.
(3) that accordingly this ship appears to have infringed the provisions of the said Ordinance and to be liable to the penalties provided in Section 34 thereof,"
If the prospect of this sation does not deter the ship
from continuing on her voyage, it will at all events enable
the Singapore Authorities to deal effectively with her on
her arrival.
I have the honour, etc.,
(signed) H.S. Pratt.
Acting Consul.
+3706 Bauben 1 76 #Jepitiszen a 201
Kudak Ve Bu tibetduobtu L[now I
(@manaċing, geokukan “Í tepku emon blbow anław) qinə dəisi TA
12155 04 „natupes me I wanke ze: 258quat os suutan of
2. Liangles tзLIBA
edź do ežnamastupes wi‡ ££m!
'ddiw batIqmon deed svad 8101 mounlikelen vad ni adesqqe zevewód osusin dous cË
ncipast (AMA IEI,
oz. guante ads taknu nevis ad od bezluper nudi maryani, ni moldayaI sáð Águonti®,(R)ET
Forluk je kurmo) nea) was befouztani 809L AJOI chatdan od expartido fezzettinib) Had 10 atamaziupez sáð tudt Zisumka BPO I .at£oblitzen a yakźnang szoted ballthish STA
jar des 20) ni qira nə insu ro nelzowzoll atyam quod .8.8 madan 23 bazen ya no sazubne of Jud
[14 (7402/25)
BRITISH LEGATION,
ign Office
Board of
October 8th, 1925.
***; BEIGT
Viltzen zeditzu? I*
Puri Purilok Je boytzze cine sind zust (1)"
:1) inuod vanezytowt yɔnowi asri #TOW .bunod so szoqayala niebig had yd banɣie szkołžitvee on Jadi ($) In vi beinloggs, Burzen yas zo wojewġ Ja tang en wi benurong magd sen (2)&& nolton?2 on Isiled bus sgusivoni ya to sand nist 190 dou
„banoni maad aan swed cd enteret qira etát vigu thxonas Jmit (8) 02 DOL ANZENEZO SEC mid Tu enotatroną ada bayntziak At multani ni babivuzų naktiɛney and of sidali ed *tosted J
qina sud JONAL Jue asol zolana eina to saequotq #A# 21
sidene Ezrvo II 36 ILL. JE 1024yov 250 no yakuaitaos MOTT
no za ptiz 14.29970s Ieah 27 palalzonava azoqeyatë ad
I have received your despatch No. 22 of
the 17th ultimo relative to the granting of
facilities to non-British ships to carry emigrants
to Singapore.
2. I approve the action you propose,
should the need arise, to take in regard to the
Chong Nan Steamship Company's ships.
I am, etc.,
(signed) C.M. Palɛiret.
TEINION Gnd even i
„ÄRVITIS INď
R.S. Pratt, Esquire,
Acting British Consul,
Kiungonow.
INJOJ DE
{3s\soat) as
E. J. Harding.
Strachey.
J. Shuckburgh.
G. Grindle.
03 Batik C. Davis.
sol110 mgł
S. Wilson.
Ormsby-Gore.
of Clarendon.
70. 54332
The it gr
14907.1920
w to act the
LENJE, POI TUOL
tli ma oot of avizelen inkiN AIVI SAJ
De eçide data far-tour of meist£tami
AIS, I Bi gand ki
пропус --
10 qi temető net zaɑdd
,nilipe?
(Ivanoð MeİJİTE SNIJDA
Worn youka
Cotyst B/T & 4 JAN 1828 1/2.60.
Luster of the my
formerding
I copy of a Sutes to be of two dispatches from
om. Changé d'apparens ove Peting
By is the
Comandor Apprais
wanion of Ani
in dealing
asti applesias jou equation
lise fices
lines for shops, the thon
main bort s
Fo. F5802/835/10
FOR CIRCULATION :—
Asst. U.S. of S.
HONG KONG
HONGKONG
11 Du 1925
Extra. Territoriality Commission.
Chombats in that before going judhe
to die metter
poofer in
aument the
Moms of the B
of the BMT.
(Signed) G. GRINDLE.
Perm U.S. of S.
Parl U.S. of S.
Secretary of State.
Previous Paper
Fo/ 55785
Copy ends you comf17 Dec
Copy above to Bla
Subsequent Paper
Instruction to British member.
Se 57831 where we
were sent
then inchictions in Eft. They have now been apps apparatly Wilkout alliation - and despatched.
I have sent
Dones Office.
sch of encl. Is
? how send I set enche to
For HK couf she 5ft for info.a
V. L.o. Cons.
14 51931
will Mr Walktow
crfy Sap F.O. L.F.
Palletia suck
14:12:25
[ 5′′. / 2. 2. Summ
*732) WL 11010/26 Gp. 140 12000 8-25 W & 8 Ltd.
In any further communication on this subject, please quote
No. F.5801/835/19
and address-not to any person by name, but to--
**The Under-Secretary of State," Foreign Office, London, S.W. I.
Congwenvotal.
THE Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs presents bis
compliments to the tunden ཆ་ས་ད ། རྩ་ཚམ་ for the Colonies
and, by direction of the Secretary of State,
transmits herewith cope of the under-mentioned paper.
Foreign Office,
661o 1)crcurbex, 1925.
Reference to previous correspondence:
9. Grundte G M watutuw of 4 hnant es
Description of Enclosure.
Name and Date.
for den: 1925.
Subject.
Instinctions
British member
of Extra-territoriality
Commis sivn
Noter for quid name, ང་པ་ད་་་བ་
Similar letter sent to
board of bunde
14 (13341) 7/25 (3)
(1355) 9/25
a office.
[This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government. ?
CONFIDENTIAL.
[F 5802/835/10]
[December 1. 1925.]
SECTION 1.
Sir Austen Chamberlain to Judge Sir Skinner Turner.
Foreign Office, December 1, 1925.
I HAVE to inform you that you have been appointed British member of the International Commission which is to assemble at Shanghai on the 1th December next to enquire into the question of extra-territoriality in China in accordance with the terms of the resolution adopted at the Washington Conference on the 10th December, 1921, which will be found in the annex to this despatch,
2. There is a marked consensus of opinion among all who have studied the subject that, although China has made progress in the task of codifying her laws, training a judiciary and setting up a system of courts to administer the new laws, conditions are still not such as to justify abandonment of the vital principle that a British subject in China must be tried in the courts and by the law of his own country. It is very unlikely that the commission, after studying the question on the spot, will come to any different conclusion. His Majesty's Government, while holding to this vital principle, nevertheless anticipate that a time will come when the existing objections to the abolition of extra-territoriality will be greatly lessened, if not altogether removed. It is their earnest hope that the commission will find it practicable to recommend proposals which, if adopted by China, would materially assist her to attain this goal by gradual stages.
3. For this purpose the commission will no doubt investigate the constitution and the working of the Chinese courts of justice and the Chinese judicial system, enumerate and analyse their defects, and make suggestions as to their improvement and recommendations as to the conditions of which the fulfilment will be necessary on the part of China before foreigners can be subjected to the jurisdiction of Chinese courts.
4. But while this will be the commission's main duty, His Majesty's Govern ment do not desire that their labours should be limited to this field; nor would the terms of the resolution (see annex) justify such a limitation. It seems probable that the commission will think that the system of extra-territoriality, as practised in China to-day, presents certain features of which the modification need not necessarily be made entirely dependent upon the satisfactory evolution of the Chinese judicial system. In that event, it would be a disappointment to His Majesty's Government if the commission should fail to make recommendations either for the modification of the existing system in those respects or, if the features in question can be correctly described as abuses, for their early elimination. It would be a disappointment, because His Majesty's Government, so far from being attached to the existing system of extra-territoriality for its own sake, are anxious that the encroachments upon China's sovereign rights inevitably involved in any extra-territorial system should as soon as possible be reduced, as and when circumstances perniit, to the minimum consistent with security for the life, property and legitimate enterprises of foreign subjects in China.
5. You should therefore endeavour to secure that recommendations are submitted by the commission under the three following heads :-
(1.) Recommendations as to the steps to be taken for the improvement of the Chinese judicial system, and as to the conditions which, when they have been fulfilled on the part of China, would justify the complete transference to Chinese courts of the jurisdiction over foreigners at present exercised by foreign courts.
It is unfortunately to be anticipated that, among these conditions, are some which can only be gradually fulfilled for instance, the assumption by a central Chinese Government of responsibility for the administration of justice all over the country. The commission will therefore, it is hoped, also be able to make-
(2.) Recommendations as to the particular portions of the jurisdiction at present exercised by foreign courts which, without weakening the protection 3178-1 [13875]
enjoyed by foreigners for their lives, property and legitimate business and other interests, might be progressively transferred to Chinese courts. pari passu with the particular improvements in the administration of Chinese justice.
(3.) Finally, the commission will, it is hoped, since His Majesty's Government are anxious that no time should be lost in removing as many as possible of the causes of friction which in recent years have marred the relations between China and the Powers, be able to recommend measures to be put in force immediately with a view to remedying any abuses of the present system and any unnecessary encroachments upon China's sovereign rights.
I am, &c.
AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN.
Resolution adopted by the Conference on the Limitation of Armament regarding Extra-territoriality in China.—Washington, December 10, 1921.
The representatives of the Powers hereinafter named, participating in the discussion of Pacific and Far Eastern questions in the Couference on the Limitation of Armament, to wit, the United States of America, Belgium, the British Empire, France, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands and Portugal;
Having taken note of the fact that in the treaty between Great Britain and China, dated the 5th September, 1902, in the treaty between the United States of America and China, dated the 8th October, 1903, and in the treaty between Japan and China, dated the 8th October, 1903, these several Powers have agreed to give every assistance towards the attainment by the Chinese Government of its expressed desire to reform its judicial system and to bring it into accord with that of Western nations, and have declared that they are also " prepared to relinquish extra-territorial rights when satisfied that the state of the Chinese laws, the arrangements for their administration, and other considerations warrant" them in so doing;
Being sympathetically disposed towards furthering in this regard the aspiration to which the Chinese delegation gave expression on the 16th November, 1921, to the effect that "immediately, or as soon as circumstances will permit, existing limitations upon China's political, jurisdictional and administrative freedom of action are to be removed";
Considering that any determination in regard to such action as might be appropriate to this end must depend upon the ascertainment and appreciation of complicated statements of fact in regard to the laws and the judicial system and the methods of judicial administration of China, which this conference is not in a position to determine;
Have resolved, That the Governments of the Powers above named shall establish a commission (to which each of such Governments shall appoint one member) to enquire into the present practice of extra-territorial jurisdiction in China, and into the laws and the judicial systein and the methods of judicial administration of China, with a view to reporting to the Governments of the several Powers above named their findings of fact in regard to these matters, and their recommendations as to such means as they may find suitable to improve the existing conditions of the administration of justice in China, and to assist and further the efforts of the Chinese Government to effect such legislative and judicial reforms as would warrant the several Powers in relinquishing, either progressively or otherwise, their respective rights of extra-territoriality;
That the commission herein contemplated shall be constituted within three months after the adjournment of the conference in accordance with detailed arrangements to be hereafter agreed upon by the Governments of the Powers above named, and shall be instructed to submit its report and recommendations within one year after the first meeting of the commission;
That each of the Powers above named shall be deemed free to accept or to reject all or any portion of the recommendations of the commission herein contemplated, but that in no case shall any of the said Powers make its acceptance of all or any portion of such recommendations, either directly or indirectly, dependent on the granting by China of any special concession, favour, benefit or immunity, whether political or economic.
Additional Resolution.
That the non-signatory Powers, having by treaty extra-territorial rights in China, may accede to the resolution affecting extra-territoriality and the administration of justice in China by depositing within three months after the adjournment of the conference a written notice of accession with the Government of the United States for communication by it to each of the signatory Powers.
Additional Resolution.
That China, having taken note of the resolutions affecting the establishment of a commission to investigate and report upon extra-territoriality and the administration of justice in China, expresses its satisfaction with the sympathetic disposition of the Powers herein before named in regard to the aspiration of the Chinese Government to secure the abolition of extra-territoriality in China, and declares its intention to appoint a representative who shall have the right to sit as a member of the said commission, it being understood that China shall be deemed free to accept or to reject any or all of the recommendations of the commission. Furthermore, China is prepared to co-operate in the work of this commission and to afford to it every possible facility for the successful accomplishment of its tasks.
Adopted by the Conference on the Limitation of Armament at the fourth plenary session, the 10th December, 1921.
[This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government,
CONFIDENTIAL.
[December 1, 1925.]
SECTION 2.
[F 5836/835/10]
Notes for the Guidance of the British Representative on the Extra-Territoriality
Commission.
IT will have been seen from the Secretary of State's despatch of the 1st December, 1925, that, in the opinion of His Majesty's Government, the field which the investigations of the commission should cover falls naturally into two distinct but connected parts as follows:-
(A.) Questions connected with the administration of justice in the courts now
actually functioning in China; and
(B.) Questions connected with encroachments on China's sovereign rights due directly or indirectly to the limitations placed by extra-territoriality on the jurisdiction exercised by the Chinese courts.
If this opiniou is justified, the recommendations of the commission will probably be grouped under two corresponding heads, and will take the two following forms :— (A.) A draft programme for the gradual and progressive transfer of jurisdiction
over foreigners from foreign courts to Chinese courts.
It is important to make clear at the outset that, so far as action by the Powers is concerned, the recommendations of the commission under this head should (with minor exceptions of the kind indicated in paragraphs 9 and 10 below) be conditional in substance that is to say, no particular measure of transfer should be recommended except as a consequence of particular improvements in the Chinese judicial system which may already have been made or which the commission may recommend. Whether the form also of such recommendations should be conditional will depend on circumstances; there may be cases in which there will be no objection to saving Chinese face by letting the Chinese offer to take measures which, when they have been taken, will be accompanied by measures to be taken on the part of the Powers.
(B.) A draft programme for the modification or abolition of those features of the present system of extra-territoriality which the commission think might be safely modified or abolished independently of possible improvements in the Chinese judicial system.
Under this head the recommendations of the commission will not necessarily be conditional. Action by some or all of the Powers may be recommended without action on the part of the Chinese (whether by an improvement of their judicial system or otherwise) being recommended. It will, however, probably found that, in most of
the cases where action by the Powers is recommended under this bead, such action will involve the settlement of difficulties with the Chinese Government by negotiation through the diplomatic channel.
2. Before setting out the following directions for the guidance of the British representative under these two heads a general caution is required. He should bear in mind throughout that it is highly undesirable that he should allow himself to be placed in a position where it may appear that he stands alone in resisting concessions to Chinese opinion which the representatives of other Powers, whose interests in the matter are far less important than those of Great Britain, are prepared to recommend. To this end he should use every endeavour to discourage any of his colleagues from putting forward or supporting proposals which could only result in damage to foreign interests with no real benefit to China.
(A.) Transfer of Jurisdiction.
Under this head attention must first be drawn to a distinction of principle which it is apprehended that the commission will find it necessary to keep in mind, accordingly as their investigations bear upon the administration of justice in Chinese courts on the one hand, and upon the working of foreign courts on the other. As
3173-2 [13876]
regards the working of foreign courts, the investigations of the commission will, for obvious reasons, be subject to a certain limitation; their object will be to suggest remedies for defects, if any, inherent in the working of all foreign courts alike, whatever their nationality; it will hardly be possible for them to fix their attention exclusively upon, much less to recommend remedies for, any abuses that may be presented by the courts of particular nationalities. But as regards Chinese courts, there is no analogous limitation that need confine either the attention or the recommendations of the commission to the working of any particular court or set of courts. Nor is there anything to prevent them from enquiring iuto and making recommendations as to the conditious and administration of Chinese prisons.
4. This observation suggests that as regards foreign courts, there is one general feature of the present system to which the commission will give their serious, if not their exclusive, attention. This is the inconveniences arising from the diversity of laws administered by courts of different nationalities in China. In principle it would seem that the remedy for these inconveniences lies in the gradual and progressive substitution, as regards particular subjects, of Chinese laws for foreign laws. But, in considering the practicability of any such substitution at any stage, the commission will be confronted with a practical difficulty that will no doubt seem especially acute to its British and American members-namely, the difficulty which British and American courts will find in applying, in any department, but especially in the domain of criminal law, a system which is understood to be mainly based upon continental models of jurisprudence.
5. Assuming, however, that this difficulty is not insuperable, the method of substitution just indicated seems to present considerable practical possibilities. Thus the Trade Mark Law recently enacted by the Chinese Government is an example of a law which might be so applied; other examples are the police and municipal regulations and the local licences and taxes of Chinese municipalities in the interior, game laws, laws prohibiting import of or dealing in arms or noxious drugs, &c. Other Chinese laws might be added to the category, until in time practically the whole body of Chinese law might be made binding on all foreigners in China to the exclusion of their own law. This would remove one of the greatest evils arising out of the present practice of extra-territoriality and at the same time pave the way towards the time when these laws would be administered not by foreign courts, but by Chinese courts, namely, the complete abolition of extra-territoriality.
6. The two immediately preceding paragraphis adumbrate a general method by which the commission may think it possible that the way might be paved for the eventual complete abolition of exterritorial jurisdiction when they approach the problem from the angle of simplifying the administration of justice by the existing foreign courts. When the problem is approached from the other side-that of the defects of the Chinese courts--a second, but not incompatible, method at once suggests itself. This is the method of what might be called gradually diminishing probation, beginning with the institution, at particular places or for particular purposes, of special mixed tribunals which would apply Chinese law to foreigners. Such a system of tribunals would entail a Central Mixed Court of Appeal.
7. The principles of probation involved in this second method seems susceptible of a variety of applications in practice. Thus the regulations and bye-laws of foreign municipalities might he applied to foreigners and Chinese alike not in a variety of different tribunals, but in one mixed tribunal presided over by Chinese and foreign judges sitting together. The Chinese would gain face by acquiring the right to appoint judges to such a tribunal, and the experience and training might prove of great value.
8. Here, again, however, it is apprehended that the commission will be confronted with a practical difficulty. The Chinese will presumably be reluctant to accept any period of probation, and there is some force in the view that an attempt to institute mixed tribunals would only produce increased friction. As against this it may be pointed out that the mere presence in a Chinese court of foreign judges, who might be the salaried servants of the Chinese Government, would not divest the court of its Chinese national character, and that any such system, if accepted by the Chinese, would, by its educational effect and by improving the standards of Chinese justice, accelerate the process of gradually abandoning extra-territorial jurisdiction more effectively than any other method. The analogy of Siam is instructive in these respects and suggests that this path deserves careful exploration
9. In this connection it is for consideration whether a fruitful source of friction could not in any case be removed by abandoning the treaty right to send a foreign
official observer to watch the trial of suits brought by foreigners against Chinese. An arrangement similar to that in the Sino-German Treaty (which admits German lawyers and interpreters, but not (erman officials) might place this matter on a
159 permanently satisfactory basis.
10. A further suggestion, on which again immediate action might be practicable, is that in certain minor classes of case, such as breach of Chinese municipal or police regulations, purely Chinese courts might be allowed immediately to assume jurisdiction over foreigners, and that the area of such jurisdiction might be gradually widenedl until it embraced the whole field. In considering any such suggestion, it would, of course, be necessary to bear in mind the objections to allowing foreigners to become liable to detention in Chinese prisons.
11. To sum up
Under this head, the transfer of jurisdiction to Chinese courts, there are two methods by which the Powers, without endangering the interests of their nationals, might conceivably co-operate with the Chinese towards the gradual abolition of jurisdictional privileges. One is the application of specially selected Chinese laws to foreigners by their own authorities. The other is the application of Chinese law to foreigners by Chinese and foreign judges in special mixed tribunals. It will be for the commission to consider to what extent these methods are applicable and in what combinations at what successive stages.
12. The complexity of the problem is increased by the fact that no progressive application of these two methods, whether singly or in combination, would be likely to be acceptable to the Powers, which would entail the transfer to Chinese jurisdiction of foreign personal status cases before criminal cases in which foreigners are involved had been so transferred, or which would involve the transfer of such criminal cases before civil cases in which foreigners are concerned had been transferred-in each case with satisfactory results. In other words, the recommendations of the commission should be framed in such a way that, whatever the administrative stages by which the surrender of exterritorial jurisdiction is to be completed, the surrender should be completed progressively as regards the three classes of case indicated. speaking, so long as foreign jurisdiction is even partially retained in civil cases, it Broadly should be wholly retained in criminal cases, and so long as it is even partially retained in criminal cases, it should be wholly retained in personal status cases. This need not exclude the possibility of the transfer of minor criminal cases, especially as regards the enforcement of municipal regulations or comparatively unimportant personal status questions, before the surrender of criminal or civil jurisdiction, as the case may be, has been completely effected.
(B.)-Features of the Present System of Extra-territoriality of which the modification need not necessarily be made dependent on Action on the part of the Chinese.
It may be expected that the Chinese representative on the commission will urge that the commission should investigate certain matters which constitute grievances in the eyes of Chinese opinion, and which, although they do not directly come under the head of jurisdictional privileges, arise out of those privileges or are otherwise intimately connected with them. The British Commissioner's general attitude in such matters will be determined by the instructions contained in the Secretary of State's despatch of the 1st December, 1925; that is to say, he will bear in mind that His Majesty's Government would welcome any suitable opportunity to disarm Chinese dislike of the privileged position of foreigners by abandoning superfluous and irritating rights. A review of the sort of matters the Chinese are likely to raise on the commission suggests that this principle-the principle of shortening so far as possible the front which the foreign Powers expose to the attacks of Chinese national feeling--will receive at the hands of the British representative an application that will vary according to circumstances.
14. It may, in the first place, be urged that the commission should investigate the whole system of foreign concessions and settlements in China, the terms under which they are held and the conditions under which they are administerel, with a view to recommending fundamental modifications of the system, if out its total abolition.
15. If so, the British representative will bear in mind that Shanghai is the most prominent example of the system in question; that, if the retrocession of the Mixed Court and Chinese representation on the Shanghai Municipal Council can be arranged, an essential factor in Chinese discontent under this head will have been inet; that, if these reforms can be arranged, a precedent will be created which is
bound to have effects in other concessions, and that the ultimate channel for negotiating these reforms with the Chinese Government must be the Diplomatic Body. If, there- fore, negotiations for these purposes are in progress while the commission is sitting, or if they have been broken off by the Chinese pending the result of the commission's labours, the British representative should consider whether it would help or retard their resumption or their successful issue if the commission were to investigate matters affecting the constitution and administration of foreign settlements and concessious generally. In making up his mind on this point he should be guided by the advice of Itis Majesty's Minister. Speaking broadly, it will probably be best to resist any Chinese pressure for the investigation of such matters by the commission unless to do so would postpone those changes at Shanghai on which there is already a measure of agreement in principle. If, on the other hand, it seems likely that an enquiry by the commission would help to get that agreement translated into practice, then any objection of principle to the commission's investigating such matters would be pro tanto removed.
16. The commission will doubtless direct their attention to what is not the least of the evils arising from the exclusion of Chinese sovereignty from the international settlements and concessions-namely, that they become alsatias for political and other refugees. This might possibly be remedied by making Chinese writs run in the settlements and concessions with either no, or only the simplest, form of extraditive proceedings
17. If the deliberations of the commission take the channel indicated above, a question which affects His Majesty's (overnment almost exclusively may be expectedl to arise, namely, whether the time has not come for the less important foreign concessions to be returned to China. Subject to the bearing of such an act on the general political situation at the moment (as to which the advice of His Majesty's Minister should be sought), His Majesty's Government, so far as they are concerned, would not be averse from returning such a concession as that at Chinkiang, which does little or nothing to promote or assist. British trade, and is always liable to operate as a stimulus to auti-British agitation. An alternative to the surrender of such concessions to China might be that the Chinese Government should be invited to undertake their policing in future. If this course were adopted at Chinking, Kiukiang and Amoy, it would assimilate them to the general foreign settlement at Wuhu, which has adequately fulfilled the purpose underlying the grant of settlement and concessions without making any real encroachment on Chinese sovereign rights. With regard to the concessions at the larger ports, Tien-tsin, Hankow and Cantou, the best line of advance would appear to be to aim at merging these areas into larger municipalities controlled by Sino-foreign councils. At Tien-tsin and Hankow progress on these lines may be expected in the not distant future, but it is feared that nothing can be done at Canton so long as that city remains in the hands of the Bolsheviks.
18. A caution is necessary in the event of this question being considered. It must be borne in mind that His Majesty's Government have incurred certain liabilities under the leases which they have granted at these concessions, so that any arrangement for retrocession would have to include provision to meet those liabilities.
19. Finally, there are various points of detail which, on the principle of "shortening the front," it might be well that the commission should consider, with a view to suggesting either remedies for abuses or solutions of difficulties. These are :-
(1) The irregular registration of Chinese as foreign subjects; (2.) The registration of Chinese-owned land in foreign consulates
(3) Company law and Chinese;
(4.) Chinese ships flying foreign flags; and
(5.) Missionaries in the interior,
(1.) The Irregular Registration of Chinese as Foreign Subjects.
20. The difficulty here will be to frame any recommendations which, while not affecting the legitimate exercise of foreign jurisdiction over Chinese possessing double nationality, will point to a remedy for the evil, which His Majesty's Government are most anxious to see abolished, of the fraudulent extension of foreign protection to Chinese not possessing any foreign nationality. If the commission can get over this difficulty, well and good. But the British commissioner will appreciate the importance of concurring in no recommendations of which the effect might be to weaken the claims of His Majesty's Government to the protection of any of the various categories of British subjects of Chinese race.
(2.) Registration of Chinese-owned Land in Foreign Consulates.
21. This is an abuse which exists at most ports in China, and has grown to large proportions in Shanghai. As it may therefore be brought to the notice of the 160 commission, the following considerations are set out for the guidance of the British commissioner :-
Land owned by a foreigner and registered in a foreign consulate is to a large extent withdrawn from Chinese jurisdiction. It is immune from expropriation for public purposes by Chinese authorities, and on transfer to another foreigner is immune from Chinese land transfer fees, which vary from 6 to 9 per cent. ad valorem. No question is here involved of land in British concessions which is held under Crown lease granted by the British Government. It concerns only land within the area of a treaty port, either within or without any settlement which may exist at such port, which has been leased in perpetuity from the original Chinese owner under a title deed validated by the Chinese authorities.
The time will certainly come, or may possibly have already come, when even the bond fide foreign land-owner should surrender the privileged position in respect of immunity from taxation, &c., which he has hitherto enjoyed. A fortiori, it would seem that the protection of extra-territoriality should no longer be extended to Chinese beneficial owners of foreign registered land. Possibly the best way of remedying what is undoubtedly a real grievance would be to prohibit any foreigner from acting as trustee for a Chinese in respect of the beneficial ownership of land. Chinese possessing dual nationality would have to be considered in this connection, The position of but should not present great difficulties, as such Chinese could obtain foreign registration of their land without having recourse to a trustee. tion which the commission may make under this head, care should be taken to In any recommenda- safeguard the large vested interests at Shanghai and elsewhere.
(3.) Company Law and Chinese.
22. It is possible that there may be brought to the notice of the commission a number of abuses which owe their existence to the operation of foreign (especially British) company law. Chinese, by forming themselves into a British company, aro able to withdraw their business, and to some extent the persons of their managers and employees, from the jurisdiction of their own authorities, and the friction to which this gives rise tends to jeopardise the position of bond fide foreign companies. Nevertheless, it is of vital importance to British commercial interests that the advantages and conveniences which legitimate business enterprises enjoy through the operation of company law should not be curtailed in any way. In view, however, of the many complicated questions which are involved in the application of foreign company law in China it will be better, before the commission makes any recommenda- tions in regard to it, that the British representative should refer (through His Majesty's Minister) to His Majesty's Government for further instructions, so that the whole question may be fully considered by the various departments interested.
(4.) Chinese Ships flying Foreign Flags.
A large amount of British capital is invested in vessels engaged in the coastal and river trade in China, and anything which brings foreign flags into disrepute might eventually lead to a demand by the Chinese Government for the withdrawal of foreign vessels from this trade. His Majesty's Government are therefore especially anxious to find some remedy for the abuse of Chinese vessels flying foreign flags, in respect of which both the Chinese authorities and the bond fide British shipowners bave grave cause for complaint. It is possible that the commission may be able to recommend a remedy satisfactory both to the Chinese Government and to the large British interests involved. But should it prove impossible to consider this question without raising the issue of the application of foreign company law, the instruction at the end of section 22 should be followed.
(5.) Missionaries in the Interior.
24. There has recently grown up a feeling among missionaries that their labours in the interior of China for the benefit of the Chinese people should no longer be carried on under the protection of treaties, which the Chinese regard as having been
forced upon them. The privileges which missionaries enjoy may be classified under the heads of:-
(1.) Religious toleration.
(2.) Right to own mission property in the interior. (3.) Right of residence and travel in the interior.
With regard to (3), there should be little difficulty in assimilating the position of the missionary to that of the trader; while, with regard to (2), the solution would appear to lie in the gradual transfer of mission property in the interior, such as schools, hospitals, &c., to Chinese boards of trustees. Should it be necessary, further instruc- tions under this head will be sent when the desires of the missionary societies are more definitely known.
Mr. Edmondo 15/13/20.
38r. Beckett
Mr. B. J. Harding,
Mr. Strachey,
r J. Shuckburgh.
Sir G. Grindle.
Sir C. Davis.
Sir S. Wilson.
Mr. Ormsby-Gore.
Earl of Clarendon.
Mr. Amery.
Copy 7017 Dec
comp. If.
+0755788/20 NK
H. Kong.
For Clementi.
have to. to transmit to you, for
your infor., a copy of
for Foreign Affairs to be suit. member
the International (ommission
extra-territoriality in China, together
copy of or hates for
of the Brit. Repre
the guidance
GemLidamkánka
on the tr
I have to.
(4) 45amery
Dowing Street,
December, 1925.
I have the honour to tranmik to you, for your information, a copy of a letter from the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs to the British members of the International Comidasden on extra-territoriality in China, together with a copy of Notes for the guidance of the British Representativa.
I have the honour to be,
Your most obedient
humble Servant,
Signed) L. S, AMERY
0. CLIENTI, H8Q., Gemelle,
REGISTERED NO. 57513
NOTICE TO BINDER
PLEASE LEAVE SPACE HERE FOR INSERTION OF 6 SHEETS
From £.0.
Subject...
of Norway
to Treaty
kayko- | 2000 Na 31 · IP *RP.
(Paper not available at time of binding)
HONG KONG HONGKONG
RED 31 DEC 25
F.O. 6036/635/10 Conf
F 582/05/10
L'IRCULATION ¦---
Dr. Beckett
Asel. U.S. of S.,
Perm' U.S. of 8.
Part" U.S. of 18.
of State.
Secrctury offi
Previous Paper
30 Dec 1925
Exhäterritoriality Commission
MINUTES (copy sent to cons Office)
The Tientsin batch having come to
no Soust the Commision
with how be meeting
? fout by
The Chularbuck
Subsequent Paper
13) WL, 17813/38 Gp, 140 50000 12-24 W & 8 Ltd.
In any further communication on this subject, please quote
No. 6o86 835/10
and address-not to any person by name, but to-
"The Under-Secretary of State," Foreign Office, London, S. W. 1.
Oonfidential
THE Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs presents his
compliments to The unde "、་
for the Colonies
kidlay f
and, by direction of the Secretary of State, transmits herewith copie of the under-mentioned paper.
Foreign Office,
Reference to previous correspondence:
Foreign oque letter
1.580/35/10
ude c 1925.
Name and Date.
Description of Enclosure.
lí M. Minister
Teleqn au
Subject.
Extraterritoriality
540 Commissiver.
1 19 Dee: 1925.
14 (13343) 7/25 (2) (13551) 9/25
Similar letter sent to Ďu aud rade
Departinen
t of Overseas Trade
This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government, and should be returned to the Foreign Office if not required for official use.)
Decypher.
Sir R. Macleay. (Peking).
December 19th,1925.
3.15.p.m. December 19th,1925,
10.20.a.in. December 19th, 1925.
No. 540.
Not only British judge but some other foreign members of extraterritoriality commission are held up in Tientsin owing to interruption of railway by civil war,
At meeting of diplomatic body yesterday it was agreed that Eenior Minister should address note to Chinese government referring to communication re- ceived by various govermenta from United States government in regard to meeting of commission in Peking on December 18th and stating that as appointed date has passed without members having been able to assemble in full numbers, commission will be consti- tuted without delay as soon as they all arrive, and in that event Chinese government will be duly noti- fied in order that they may be in a position to give effect to their intantion laid down in additional
resolution of December 10th,1921, to appoint a repre- sentative to sit as a member of said commission.
We decided to take this step to forestall in-
vitation from Chinese goverment to hold meeting of
commission at a place designated by them when it
would have been difficult to avoid electing Chinose
member as president.
There have been indications that Chinese gov- ernment, under pressure from Nationalists, would attempt to convert commission of enquiry into a conference and it is significant that recent man- date of chief executive appoints Wang Chung Hul as plenipotentiary delegate to commission.
We felt that such an attempt to modify scope and character of commission must be firmly resisted and that best means of doing so would be for first meeting of commission to be held at senior Minister's house when American or some other foreign member could be chosen to act as president or chairman.
TAU FOST
15 JAN 25
ky Jane any 14
FOR CIRCULATION :——
made by Mitsui Bussar Kaisha
Hom. I remazee': agent for licences to procure Person Opium
Assi. U.S. of S.
Perm U.8. of S.
Italco views wch
Pari U.S. of S.
Secretary of State.
Previous Paper
52/91681
Awind – L
Cody to 7.0.
6 Mcl 25$
Copy for Secret - APL 12925
Subsequent Paper
34313) Wt. 17813/38 Gp. 140 50000 12-24 W & 8 Ltd.
DISABLED MEN
Any communication on the subject of this letter should be addressed lo--
THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE,
HOME OFFICE,
LONDON, S.W. 1,
and the following number quoted :—
447.651/72.
HOME DEFICs,-
15 JAN 25
WHITEHALL.
14th January, 1925.
I am directed by Secretary Sir William Joynson-Hicks to refer to your letter (55807/24) of the 5th December last enclosing a cory of a despatch from the Governor of Hong Kong dated the 20th Uctober with copies of applications made by the Mitsui Bussan Kaisha and H.. H. Nemazee's agent in Hong Kong for licences to procure Persian opium.
The Secretary of State thinks a licence may be issued to the Mitsui Bussan Kaisha under the ordinance to "procure" but he observes that the firm proposed to purchase the 100 cases from the firm of H. X. H. Nemazee & Co., and he presumes that this latter firm will not be permitted to engage in any form of transaction whatever in opium or dangerous drugs.
The Secretary of State observes that the copy of the licence issued to Messrs. Mackinnon, Mackenzie & Co. enclosed with the copy of the Governor's letter of the 20th October last, does not appear to be a licence to "procure", but a licence to export and import opium arriving at Hong Kong en route for Formosa or Jalny. The object of such a licence is not clearly understood as under the
or permet ordinance a separate licence, is required in respect of each con- signment.
be Under Secretary of State
Colonial Office.
Your obedient Servant
malcoben Delevigne
FOR CIRCULATION ;----
Asst. U.S. of 8.
HONG KONG
23 January
REL 24 JAN 25
Facilities for four chinese dudents
Perm U.S. of 8.
Parb U.S. of 8.
Secretary of State.
Previous Paper
sofemely st pe
Capt. 9..E..
Copy.com. Gov. 36
31 Jam 35% (copy) 31 JAN 192512 Fus. ausd. – 16 FEB 1925 680
19 JAN 1925
Subaequant Paper
lavas no
provided they are
olyn. to their admission
the Red. Traps.
Depent's to be in fis of
at port of arrival. The pont at whirl, hey propor
It will be sure that the path of slidents werend
Can barkon
They shd. Wot therefor nael Marseiller
meid. Fib. (about 18th).
Har stel t
Capt. Warna (as nquated by For 1797)
wowed be justifical.
? write to Capt W. c/o Thes. Work ston Marciter, giving
Lemn subok. If Lim to tel.
and asking
king Lime
Manrikes the port
party purposes
amiral at
14. U.K. at which to
copy, como.
Mr For. sif LF r/ 1997
tela Klaft W. KHO.LF rf
4313) Wt. 17813/38 Gp. 140 50000 12-24 W & B Ltd.
Any communication on the
hand of this letter shonist
essed lo
UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE, HOME OFFICE,
LONDON, S.W.1,
HOME OFFICE,
WHITEHALL,
24 JAN 26
the following number quoled —— 71,085/4.
23rd January 1925.
With reference to your letter of the 15th instant (1797/1925) transmitting a copy of a telegram from the Governor of Hong Kong requesting that facilities to enter the United Kingdom may be granted to four young Chinese who are on the way to this country, I am directed by Secretary Sir William Joynson Hicks to suy for the information of Mr. Secretary Anery that he raises no objection to the admission of these four Chinese students, provided they are able to pass the Medical Inspector at the port of arrival. Sir William Joynson-Hicks would
be glad if notification of the port in the United Kingdom
at which they propose to land could be communicated before- hand to His Majesty's Chief Inspector, Aliens Branch, Home Office, in order that any necessary instructions may be Issued to the Immigration Officer.
The Under Secretary of State,
COLONIAL OFFICE.
Your obedient Servant,
John Pedder
Ausd 6850.
40 3443/25
pt. J. 6 Warner
3. "Hakosanmaru")
4. Mers Thomas Cook
Marseilles
Copy 4.0. ~ 31 JAN 1925
Copy Gov. 36. 31 Jan
Mr. Harman 28|1|26| Mr. Backel
Sir. J. Shuckburgh.
Sir C. Davis.
Sir G. Grindle.
Sir J. Musterion Smüh.
Lord Arnold.
Mr. Thaynas.
students
the for. If
the Chinese
fanging you
bryland,
their admission
country and
agection
provided that they
FOR CIRCULATION —
12 March
13 MAR 25
are able
Medical Inspector at the
that any
mitonctions
Collies 18
Asst. U.S. of 9.
Perne U.S. of S. Park, US. of S.
Secretary of State.
Previous Paper
Opium transactions of the firm of
Am A hemagle
Sungai Row, shd, je preosed to Conside fur. De possibility of taking proceedings against he firm in the case of 3.8. "Angistan"
• that he phs, repout the reason and, he emeise it impossible to cake such proeadings, dur suqqids har meðermido nouement, da. Ple Losely
copies of the
Opin Ordinances
necessary for the Chief
Aliens Branch,
be notified beforehand
the pore f
I am therefore
landing.
to requent
on asswing
Marseilles,
this Dept. by telegraph
the proposed
in England.
foor of disembarkation
(cd) 1. E. SUCHBURGH
Mi Emmlung
Hi (91391924
19 20 4 1923
Dangerous digs Rate.
The "embaramment caused to
with AK.
by Nemaru's connection
beginning to think, largely a figment of Sii 17. Delerigues imagination, fined there.
ir prejudice a
Constant re-iterati.
in live that
for Benny
(ver mild) refererer
vollest the have alwe;.
...y in the nature
there have bear
constant digs
Subsequent Paper
so write to the you in the Bu.
uggested by the 10. að hander give
über imprison *ཎྞ coubts the sincerity of
shhmento
4313) Wt. 17813/38 Gp. 140 50000 12-24 W & 8 Ltd.
the J. Fr
The Four's repent
that he i
ust wly reads
but auxions to provsente Nemasse a
The whole
(in spite of the
SA Delwright
vatal discuseries
be nichrie,
recordû în muninter
14.0.23915/14) merely
ombed by
points onised
Sound kuin to cover plus
Lamine it
wd. be better
the first plac
Mr Burokas
úgal points raised.
the Collins thunks.
Pertraps zon
with me.
this thorny que.
like to discuss
I really think that this letter from the
Home Office is very unreasonable.
Before dealing
with the main problems I would like to brush aside
two points.
In paragraph 5. the Home Office purport
to be unable to follow what the Attorney-General
says in paragraph 7, of his memorandum, which
To be this- really seems to me sille. He points out that under the Ordinance "person" includes a firm, and that on the conviction of a firm every
person concerned in the management shall also be
guilty, unless he proves that he knew nothing about it. The Attorney General merely says that Nemazee is the sole owner of the business,
and that as he is not in Hong Kong it is very doubtful how the conviction of some person connected with his firm would operate so as to bring him within the inference made by the provision in question.
In paragraph 4. the Home Office say that the Attorney General is wrong in his interpretation of Section 38(1)(d). I don't know what the Section intended, and it does not much matter. What it
in fact does, it seems to me, is to make it possible to prosecute anyone in Hong Kong who has been a party to the commission of an act committed out of Hong Kong, which if committed in Hong Kong would be an offence. In this particular case I do not think that the Section carries the matter any further, or would be more likely to secure a conviction than proceedings under Section 4(1), as the Attorney General suggests.
But what evidence is there of any offence? There is no evidence that Nemazee, or anyone connected with him, had anything to do with the sending of the telegram, and it is not possible to subpo na the telegraph people unless proceedings are actually commenced, and nobody likes to commence a criminal proceeding without a rag of evidence of any sort. Supposing you did subpoena the telegraph people, is it likely that the telegram, if it deals with opium, is signed in the name of Nemazee, or anyone connected with him? And even supposing it was, there is not
sufficient in the telegram to secure a conviction, since the boat was carrying other cargo, and you would
have to connect the telegram in some way with the
opium. I don't know how you are going to do that. It is true you might search the firm's premises, but . who believes that by that time any evidence would remain, even if it had ever existed.
I am satisfied that the Governor has got a difficult problem, and that in view of all the facts, and of the Attorney General's memo, he is right in not commencing proceedings in the present state of affairs, and I do not think that he ought to be forced into action, which he feels would be indiscreet, by the importunities of people here who, after all, do not have to share his responsibility; and I would tell the Home Office that in these circumstances we are not prepared to make any further representations in the matter.
As proposed by M. Burke ?
12 19/3/25
DISABLED
Any communication on the Sect of this letter should be
ressed fa-
S UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE,
HOME OFFICE,
LONDON, S.W, 1,
had the following number quoted —
447,651/85.
13 MAN 25
HOME OFFICE,
WHITEHALL.
12th March,
I am directed
refer to your letters (4142/24/25) of the 12th February and 19145/25) of the 9th liarch enclosing despatches from the Governor of Hong Kong with reference to the importation of
a large quantity of opium into Macao on the s.s. Gorgistan
by the firm of H. N. H. Nema zee and to the question of taking proceedings against the firm in respect of their opium
transactions.
Secretary Sir William oynson-Hicks to
2 The Governor in his despatch of 6th January states that he
fears that at present no action is possible and that he had
explained why in the case of the Gorgistan it was considered
that no action in the Courts could with advantage be taken.
Sir William Joynson-Hicks has not been able to find in the
The despatches forwarded the explanation referred to.
Governor's despatch of 20th December was accompanied by a
memorandum by the Attorney-General on the Gorgistan case,
which the Governor forwarded without any comment or indication
of the action taken by him upon it. That memorandum did not
definitely advise that a prosecution was impossible or in-
advisable, and raised several questions which called for con-
sideration. Sir William Joynson-Hicks is unable to understand, from the despatches before him, the failure of the Governor to take further action in the case of the Gorgistan. In view
The Under Secretary of State,
Colonial Office.
of the preceding correspondence with regard to the fim of Nemazee, he would have thought that the Governor would have made all possible efforts to bring the firm to justice.
3. It appears to be clearly established that the consignment of opium on the Gorgistan was brought by the firm from Persia to Macao, and the only difficulty would appear to have been that of connecting the transaction with the firm in Hong Kong, As to that, the telegram sent from Hong Kong to the Captain of the s.8. Gorgistan would, as indicated in paragraph 11 of the memorandum by the Attorney-General, appear to be sufficient evidence upon which to base a charge if it could be proved that it was sent on behalf of the firm. It is not stated what enquiries, if any, have been made as to the despatch of this telegram and in any event, if further evidence were needed, the telegram from Hong Kong to the Captain of one of Nema zeş 18 boats, which is known to have been carrying opium, would seem to have afforded sufficient justification for exeroising the powers given by section 31, paragraphs (c) and (f)II of the
Hong Kong Opium Ordinance of the 31st December, 1923.
I am to point out that the Attorney-General in paragraph 9
of his memorandum has quite misunderstood the intention of the
provision to which he refers. The intention of the provision
in the Dangerous Drugs Act, 1923, was to make the furtherance
by a person in Great Britain of any act abroad which would, if
committed in Great Britain, have been illegal, an offence
irrespective of whether the act itself was legitimate abroad or
The Secretary of State is also unable to follow the
Attorney-General's argument in paragraph 7 of his memorandum or
understand why the firm camat be prosecuted as such.
Aa Lir, Amery is aware, His Majesty's Government are being
caused very considerable embarrassment by the comection of H. . H. Nemazee with Hong Kong. Foreign Governments do not hesitate to point out that the illicit traffic is very largely
organised/
organised by a prominent Hong Kong firm and the existing state of affairs is liable to cause the sincerity of His Majesty's Government to be called in question. lir. Amery therefore will no doubt agree that it is desirable that the Governor of Hong Kong should be pressed to consider further the possibility of taking proceedings against the firm in the case of the 8.9. Gorgistan; and if he thinks it impossible to take such proceed- ings to report fully the reason for that conclusion.
In connection with the matter generally, he would suggest that the attention of the Governor be drawn to the possibility of the arrival in Hong Kong of lir. McDermid, a citizen of the United States, whom lenazee employed at Vladivostock to obtain import certificates to be used to cover his smuggling
240.41336/24
9145/25.
Copies of this letter have been sent to the Foreign Office
and India Office.
transactions (see Home Office letter 467572/7 of the 29th August
1924 and Foreign Office letters F.241/20/87 of the 24th January 1924 and F.660/20/87 of the 25th February 1925).
If Mr. McDermid has arrived in Hong Kong his proceedings should be closely watched.
Your obedient Servant,
Malcolm Delevingne
Emmano 24/3/25
Bushe 2*
7. Colline 24
Mr. Strachey.
Sir. J. Shuckburgh.
Bir O. Davis.
Q. Grindle.
Bir J. Masterton Smith,
Mr. Ormaby-Gore.
Mr. Amery
Want to fouché
this but Tots have
last faca was
send the
therwise
11621 Hongkong
37. Mah 1925
am rcto ack. the receipt of your letter of the 12 Moh, No. 147, 651/05, concerning the
647.681/85, importation of oferim into Marcas on the f.f. "Gorgistan" by the frein of Willst Namage, the question of taking frosedings against the firin in exfect of its oprim transactions.
The Sofs. noter that Sir
William Joynson. Hicks is unable to follow the argument of the Atty Tank. in fara. 7
Decret dorp. of
enced in Sir RE, Stetho
darp. of the 20 Dec, 1924.
Atty Paul Founts
What the
out is that under
Ordce No. No of 192's the term "person"
includes a firm, that on the convection
of a fin, every person concerned in the management shall also be held
to be guilty, unless he is able to prove that the actions committed without
his knowledge
Paul merely says
pole sover
of consent. The Atty
that Nemagee is the
of the business in questions,
that as he is not in
Hongkong, it is very doubtful how the conviction of
some person connected with his form
↑ Mr. Strachey.
Bir. J. Shuckburgh.
Bir O. Davis,
Bir G. Grindle,
Sir J. Masterton Smith,
Mr. Ormsby-Gore.
Mr. Amery.
would operate
to bring
others within the inference
the provision in question.
3. The Soft. notes that in
the opinion of Sir William Joguson-Sticks,
the Atty Paul's interpretation of Sec. of (1/(d) of Croke do of 19av is incorrect, whatever
the Opnim Orace hand, as enacted by
have been the intention
See, a of the Quim
Gundt Orace 1904,
may the Poft is advised that what in
it does is to make it possible to
fromscute anyone in Honghong who
has been a party to the commission
'an act done out of Houghing, which
.192....
if committed in Honghong would be
offence. In this particular case it does not affear that the fectioncariend
the matter
any further,
(DE CAME
or would be
conoration
than proceedings under Sec. 4 lipas
the Atty Gaul suggestio
With regard to the question
of evidence, it not that
or anyone
connected with
anything
to do with the
sending of the tel. from Houghing
to the master
of the P.S. "Corgistan's
It is not possible to subpoena
thicials of the telegraph companies
unless foceedings Commenced
actually
it is madonsable
to commence criminal proceedings
without a shred of evidence of any
And deffoxing that steps
were taken to waive
it is hardly likely that the tel; if
it deals with of win,
be signed in the
of anyone
if it were,
found to
of Nemages
connected with him
the wording of the tel. is
not infficient to secure a
owice the "Gorgistan"
other courquo
commorativn
carrying
it was be necessary
to connect the tel. in some way with the of mim. It is not clear how
the desired connection would be stabd.
It is true that the firm's premises
but it is obviono
be searched
that by this
this time
evidence if it
ever existed, would have disaffeared.
Jir. Strachey.
Sir. J. Shuckburgh.
Bir C. Davis,
Bir G. Grindle,
Sir J. Masterton Smith.
Mr. Ormsby-Gore.
Mr. Amery.
The P. of P. considers that the
Iw. of Stanghong has a diffimet
problem to deal with
all the facts
is right
& in vaio of
facts of the Alty Paul's
he is advised that the go.
in not commencing,
p in the present state of
affairs, frosseding which he fels would be undisweet. In these the Soff requets
is not frefared to make any
for. repus, to Si R.S., Stubber in
the matter.
Motwa Аз
FOR CIRCULATION —
AMU.S. of 8.
Perm U.S. of S.
Parl U.S. of S&.
Secretary of State.
Previous Paper
· bify Gov. 145 - Corra - 22 APL :25 L
opy alone 3 RO
24 al 1925 B12li.
was of copy above
HỒNG KONG
RE. 11 PR 25
of (dentaty
Chinese in
for purpose of proceeding to UK.
Submis oban's of Gors proposals!!
I don't kink that wz
moronally expect HD. I go furthe
Kfor ref 8243
arking him to proceed accordingly
to furnish for
Transmission
KHO specimens of the foren of catif. It issued
in each class of
His paper
and afte Capta
Sabequent Paper
1194813) WL 17813/38 Gp. 140 50000 12-24 W & 9 Ltd.
DISABLED
Any communication on the subject of this letter should addressed fo
The Under SECRETARY OF STATE,
HOME OFFICE,
LONDON, S.W. I,
and the following number quoted :—
471,085/6.
RE 11 PR 25
HOME OFFICE,
WHITEHALL.
9th April, 1925,
With reference to your letter of the 6th March (8243/1925) enclosing & despatch from the Governor of Hong Kong regarding the issue of certificates of identity to Chinese in Hong Kong for the purpose of proceeding to this country, I am directed by Secretary Sir William Joynson-Hicks to say, for the information of Mr. Secretary Amery, that he understands from the Governor's despatch that the persons in question fall into three classes, viz:-
(1) Chinese in possession of clear proof of birth in Hong Kong: (ii) Chinese who claim birth in Hong Kong but cannot prove it; and (iii) Chinese students resident in Hong Kong though not claiming
birth there,
As regards class (1) above mentioned, in view of the considerations put forward by the Governor Sir William Joynson-Hicks raises no objection, so far as the Home Office is concerned, to the issue of certificates of identity in place of British passports issued in Hong Kong. The individual. will be treated as British subjects on arriving in this country, mu
3. With regard to classe (ii) and (iii) Sir William Joynson-Hicks would observe, first of all, that the experience of this Department shows that there are large numbers of Chinese who are anxious to gain entry into the United Kingdom by any means, usually for the purpose of settling down and taking employment in the United Kingdom, and occasionally with more undesirable activities in view (and, it may be observed, claims to birth in Hong Kong appear to be put forward by such persons as a matter of habit for the purpose of avoiding trouble with the authorities in this country.). He fears, therefore, that if it should become known among them that facilities could be obtained at all freely from the authorities in Hong Kong to proceed to the United Kingdom as students, the system might afford a considerable loophole for the incursion into this country of Chinese who may profess e.g. that their object is study, but in fact intend to remain in the country and The Under Secretary of State,
COLONIAL OFFICE.
take work.
4. It is to be recollected that the decision as to the desirability of any alien for admission to the country and the conditions under which he may be admitted are matters for the decision of the Authorities of this country after the aliens' arrival.
5. Sir William Joynson-Hicks agrees, however, that visits to this country by gemzine and desirable students are to be encouraged; and having regard to the representations put forward by the Governor, he is prepared to agree that, for the present at all events, documents of identity may be issued to persons coming under classes (11) and (iii) above-mentioned, who satisfy the Governor as to their character, bona fides and means of support.
6. It will be observed that persons coming under both these classes will be treated as aliens, on arrival in this country but that it is possible that, as regards persons coming under class (ii), who may claim birth in Hong Kong, it may be difficult to enforce if necessary their removal from the United Kingdom. Sir William Joynson-Hicks feels
bound therefore to ask that every case within that class should be referred to this Department through the Colonial Office with full details for enquiry before the document is granted. The references, he suggests, could be made telegraphically, if desired, at the applicant's expense.
7. With regard to cases in class (iii) Sir William Joyason-Hicks will not object to the issue of certificates of identity without reference, on the understanding that the document will not be granted unless the Governor is fully satisfied as to the character and antecedents of the student, that proper arrangements have been made for his studies and that he will have adequate means of support in this country.
8. Sir William Joynson-Hicks hopes that a clear distinction will be
made in the form or wording of certificates issued to persons in clase (i) and in classes (11) and (iii) respectively e.g.. in the case of (1) it will be definitely shown that the holder has satisfied the Governor 28 to the fact of his birth in Hong Kong: whereas a certificate granted in the case of (ii) will at most how that the holder claims birth in Hong Kong - a claim which ex hypothesi lạ not accepted. It will be convenient if the Certificates issued to recognised British Subjects are made easily distinguishable from others, He would also suggest that except in very special cases the document should be confined to particulara
of the identity of the applicant etc. and should not contain &
recommendation from a British authority as in the case of the certificate
issued to Wong Wing on the 7th June 1924 vide correspondence under Colonial Office reference 54664(1924)), which might prove embarrassing
in the event of trouble in this country with the holder of the document.
9. It will be convenient if specimens of the form of certificate to be granted in each class of case may be forwarded to this Department, so that suitable instructions in the matter may be issued to the Immigration Officers and Police authorities in this country.
A copy of this letter is being sent to the Foreign Office,
Your obedient Servant,
John Peder
Carmens 20/4/25 Paskin 201
Strachey.
J. Shuckburgh.
C. Davis.
10. Grindle.
R 20 APR
J. Masterton Smith,
Orchy-Gore.
Houghong 85 No! 145
Go CRESeals
saky to [40 | -24/4/25 6iak
potid lates
22 Ape 1925 Ape-1926
I have re to ack. The receipt of your
No. 18 regarding
of the 14 fan, 1965,
Jon 1985, milting
ampgestions for the grant of certo,
to enable Br. bom Chinese,
sess other Chinese whose entry
it is considered
wito England desirable to facilitate,
to batte
obtain admission to this country.
I have been in comen"
with the Mt. in the matter, &
[(IRCULATION :—
¿Asst. U.S. of 3.
|Perm1· U.S. of S.
Park U.S. of S.
HONG KONG
16 Septembe
Appr. of 6.5. Kasoorie
STO,186 42231
17 SEP 25
for grant of letters of denization
Prepared to
Unable to entertain the autorise souci
of identity for travel purposes.
of doccimento
I enclose a
copy of a argto.
the Soft for Home Affairs is
prefared
accept. to adft
I request,
therefore, that steps may
taken as
indicated in that
ľ old be
receive decisions of the form of
cert. of identity to be saved in each class of
o the 100.
for transmission
Secretary of State.
Previous Paper
I regret that
in Deph.
this has been overlooked
Accum vitation
Copy above for. 393.
28 OCT 195
? Substance to Th Kadoorie.
our Celler & baz
Winch Botley to see
22/10/25
her Settur
Jolassan 21/2
kus Kadoorie, deyous attended by the intelligot
Son ( of, 21137), came to was
*M 2 Abr. wo had the old show about thi hard can rewateralizon all owns again
Subsequent Paper
143) Wt. 17813/38 Gp. 140 50000 18-24 W & S Ltd.
I infandam renovavit dolorem), (uut
to know more
also concerned
a bout the Document of identity
which the Ho than promised to for him when he
off on his toworks. I said I would speak Is the HO. a bout it and accordingly rang up the Haldane Portes y exterday with the result shown in wey letter to the Kadooriė
- of answer сове of which I
specific times which the. Ko put to
on the subject
stan kay
about his naturalization.
July, 426
of the record which I
Extracted from the bacés pp.
It is hooith that as he has now been resident
(on off wo honden for
12 ramitos the
H.O migght count the old residence under
slc 2(5) of the Act, so as to water wh the
meccssue 5 cylate,
and not resist tão
ucidly on the intentia ti reside
axclus vily future!
in It M's dominans ui
But befon he makes
It's son so informed
me by phone
him also atte
the other day
of achub
application he
He is now
qove, to take coursets opinion
he is afraid that if by creto naturalized her it may affect be clomicile and the liability of the estate to den the duties of contor I drotsend to offer any opium on this, thour to think his frame any
groundles
nationally has nothing
to do with domicil
sund in one
Sirle Corindle
Sir E. Kadoori has now
Xottarned hers
certificate of imperial uaturalization from
the H.D.
so the look of It Wong, will und
bi troubled further
in the matter
of seems expedient to put this on record
hers in cas
hereafte
ave question
as to his nationality.
Sir). Shuckburgh will be interested to
ses in view of fire. Undorpies associations
with Palestine & Tracy.
Sir J. Shash hugh from
Far Eastern Best-
in Bennett.
14th December, 1926.
Dear Sir Elly,
I return the Mea.rial and other papera
which you have sent me.
I think that as you were born in Bagdad
you are entitled to describe your present nationality as "Iraquian" provided that your father was als born in Iraq, and crdinarily resident there at the time of y ur
It is improbable that the Home Office will raise any question on this point, but I think that they
*culu dake some difficulty about the descriptica of your parents nationality as being also Iraquian. I gather
from your answer to question (11) that they are both
dead and if they died before the creation of Iraq as a
new State it is clear that their nationality cannot be
described as Iraquian. In that case I suppose that
they were Ottoman subjects and it would not prejudice
your application to describe then as such.
As regards the declarations there need n't
necessarily be more than five Individuals concerned
(y urself
·RIE Á.D.A.
Kensington 6019.
6. Princes Gale, ·
Lienden. S. W. 1.
yourself and four others), since the gentleman who makes
the second (single) declaration in support of your
application may also be one of the four people who make
the third (joint) declaration. The declarations can be
sworn with little trouble and expenditure of time before
a Commissioner for Gaths of whom there is generally at
least one in every Solicitor's Office. It is not necessary
to go before a Rotary Public.
I may perhaps point out that the Home Office
often take some little time to deal with an application
for naturalization, especially if they have a considerable
number of such applications in hand at the same time, and
that it will therefore be expedient that you should send in
your application at a time when you are certain to be in
this country for some weeks, so that you may be available
to complete the formalities when you receive notice on the
subject from the Home Office.
Dear Sir John,
13/12/26.
I send you herewith a draft copy of the Naturalization Papere, duly filled in, which you so kindly consented to look through.
I hope you will excuse my troubling you with this matter, but if it is necessary to have the sworn declaration of six people, I should like to know that it is in correct form before I approach them.
I wonder if it is absolutely essential to have these declarations signed by six people, as it will take some time to bring them all before a Notary Public.
Yours Sincerely,
Eshadoone
(sd.) John Risley.
Kensington 6019.
6. Princes Gate, 189
Londen.S.W. 7.
18/11/26.
Dear Sir John,
Thank you for your letter of 17th inst., and for your kindness
in granting me an interview.
I quite realize how very busy you must be.
Next Friday at 5.P.M. would suit me admirably, but should you find it the least inconvenient, please let me know, and we can leave this matter until after the Imperial Conference.
Yours Sincerely,
Eskadoorie
Sir John Risley, K.C.M.G.,C.B.,K.C.
Colonial Office.
Kensington 6019,
6. Princes Gate,
London, S. W. 7.
16/11/26.
Dear Sir John,
I should be very much obliged if you would allow me to call and see you for a few minutes.
Any time that is convenient to you will suit me.
Yours Sincerely,
Eskadoorit
Sir John Risley, K.C.M.G.,C.B.,K.C.
Colonial office.
Mr. E.D. Kadoorie.
1898 May 1901
Resident in Hong Kong
Went to England, married and returned to
Hong Kong about 9 months later. Resident in Hong Kong
October 1902 on holiday in England.
May 1901
October 1902
November 1908
January 1911
December 1911
November 1908 Resident in Hong Kong
June 1919
Went on holiday in England
Returned to Hong Kong
Went to Shanghai
Resident in Shanghai with occasional short
visits to Hong Kong.
June 1919
November 1923
Resident alternately in England
and in France.
Returned to Hong Kong
December 1923
December 1924
In England
May 1925
then abroad for a few months.
Returned to England.
Here since, except for visits to the
Continent.
1882 1911.
30 years' residence in His Majesty's
dominions.
71⁄2 years' residence in Shanghai.
Some periods of residence in England,
including more than 12 months since
May, 1925.
NATIONAL
Any communication subject of this letter should be addressed to-
THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE,
HOME OFFICE,
LONDON, S.W. I.
and the following number quoted :—
201,178/7.
HOME OFFICE.O
WHITEHALL.
tl. September 1925.
With reference to your note of the 29th July (25326/25) I am directed by Secretary Sir William Joyns on-licks to express regret
for the delay in answering your letter of the 19th June (25326/1925) regarding the application of Er. E. S.Kadoorie for the grant of letters of denization, and to say for the information of Kr. Secretary Amer, that apart from the question whether Mr. Kadoorie is debarred by Section 3(2) of the Act of 1918 from naturalization, Sir William Joynaon-Hicks regrets that he is unable to regard his residence in
Shanghai as residence in His Majesty's Dominions for the purpose of
an application for a Certific .te of Naturalizution rund in the
circumstances he cannot entertain Fr. Kadoorie's application.
With regard to Mr. Kadocrie's request for travel facilities
Sir William Joynson-Hicks will be prepared to authorise the issue to
him of a document of identity valid for any number of journies during
a period of one year, and Mr. Hadoorie should apply to His Kjesty's
Chief Inspector, Aliens Branch, Home Office, accordingly when he is
next in the United Kingdom.
The Under Secretary of State,
COLONIAL OFFICE.
Your obedient Serv.nt,
CACRommi
Kensington 8019.
6. Princes Gale,
London, S.W. 7.
Dear Sir John,
Thank you for your letter of Yesterday's date.
I shall be pleased to call upon you tomorrow, 9th inst, at 3.30 o'clock.
Yours Sincerely,
Cestiacloone
Sir J. Risley. K.C.M.G...B..K.C.
channed to
Kensington 6019.
kutte! mung no1 woy de
fan ng team Xx
Dear Sir John,
6. Princes Gale,
Lienden, S.W. 7.
I have been looking through my Naturalization File and have found one or two letters which I should very much like you to see.
I shall therefore be much obliged if you would be kind enough to arrange an appointment at your convenience.
Yours very Sincerely,
Eskadoorie
Kensington 6019.
195 6. Princes Gate.
Lienden.S.W. 1
4/11/25.
Dear Sir John,
Thank you very much for your letter of yesterdays date.
I have noted its contents, and am very grateful to you for having taken the trouble to obtain such a prompt reply.
Yours sincerely,
Estuctoone
Sir John Risley.
ado 112 18
401 day, yeer boy de
eti beton 7
Altar of bond
Lvlonson'
.\9f018 05
3rd November,1925.
Dear Mr. Kadoorie,
with regard to your enquiry yesterday about the "document of identity" mentioned in our official letter to you of the 24th of October I have spoken to Mr. Haldane Porter, the Head of the Aliens Branch at the Home Office, and he tells me that should it expire whilst you are abroad on a journey you will be able to get it extended at a British Consulate and as it is a "return- permit" you will be able on return to this country to obtain another similar permit in its place. When you are in this country should you at any time be contemplating a foreign journey of con- siderable duration and your current permit has, say, only two or three months to run, you can apply to the Home Office to exchange it for another permit covering a fresh period of twelve
„KADOORIE„ESQ. .
Kensington 6019.
6. Princes Gate,
London.S.W.7.
#7/10/25.
You therefore have no difficulty in providing yourself from time to time with a permit which will cover any journeys you have in contemplation.
In any case Mr. Haldane Porter assures me that this kind of permit is the best document which the Home
office is able to issue to you.
Yours truly,
(sd.) John Risley.
Sir John Risley,
Legal Adviser,
Colonial Office.
Dear Sir,
I should be much obliged if you would grant me an interview
at your convenience.
I should like to have an opportunity of speaking to you
on the subject connected with my visit to the Colonial Office In May last.
Yours faithfully,
Espadoorie
Kensington 6019.
Sir John Risley,
Colonial Office.
6, Princes Gale,
London, S. W. 7.
29/10/25.
Dear Sir,
I thank you for your communication of yesterday's date, and shall be very pleased to call upon you next Monday, the 2nd of November, at 3.30. O'clock.
Yours faithfully,
E&Radooric
28th October,1925.
Dear Sir,
I am in receipt of your letter of today's data. My time is rather fully occupied during the rest of this week but I shall be happy to see you next Monday, the 2nd of November, either at 12.30 or 3.30 o'clock. Perhaps you would be good enough to let me know which hour will be convenient to you?
Yours faithfully,
KADOORIE, ESQ..
(sd.) John Risley.
Elbeam 28/w Beckett 23
Shuckburgh.
Grindle.
Masterton Smith.
maby-Gore.
Copy for 393- 28 OCT 1925 7
(26326) 20
F. S. Kadoorie, Esq
24 Oct. 9825
Lam With refer to
the bio from this Dept of
the 19th June regarding your
appler for the grant of letters of denization, I
to if you that he has been in communication with the Home Secretary
the subject.
Six W. Joynson Hicks
states that apart from the question
You are debarred by Section 3 (2)
Act of 1918 from
Naturalization
Le regres that
unable to regard your
residence in
Thanghai as
residence in this Dominions
for the purpose of
an appli
Certificats of Naturalizations
and in the aires, he cannot
entertain your appli.
Brachey.
Shuckburgh.
). Davis,
Grindle.
Masterton Smith,
Braby-Gore.
of journers during
period of one
year. You
affly should accordingly
Home Chief Inspector, Aleis
Home Office, when
(Bigned) G. GRINDLE.
request for havel facilitis, fis
W. Joynam Hicks states that he
will be prepared to authorize
a document of
issue to your of identity valid for any
b+0. 6496/25
28 ÜIRCULATION :—
341. Clin
Asst. U.S. of B.
Coffin 19
• Bottomley
Precedent Boft "Land"
25. Grünbleits Perm
S. of S.
Park U.S. of N.
Secretary of State.
Provious Paper
HONG KONG
2nd November
Peak District.
Is. copy ofa h. for Goor of
RC 3 NO: 25
Jenclosing a copy of a question and Answer
in the Inside Legislative Assembly relating
and asto what reply sha, be
Subsequent Paper
I understand that the 1903-6
hafers are not available owing to mision
Grinding
The present law is Order 5/1968.
The Chinese Chamber of Commeren
(ar lime affamilly
some protest at the time
under Eurasian inflemmer. The plantil
sgruppathetic. Reservation
firm Chinese
Chaine has excited suice 40s.
flaw in the Ordre wh. had been
found out, and it did wit Asiaties, esp. Japanese.
It was thought
at the time posters when the Kidz was
ed hat then might be
auth the Jefs, but there has been wome.
Dark Wo, 11010/26 Gp. 140 12000 8-25 W & B Ltd.
I amver copy of
anternst in
Cd 1922 (Indians
this connection
auswer affran libe
the Reservation of the Peak District
was decided on
The wall
is at present governed by Vids 4/04 of 8/18 (ind copies).
If will be seen
that residence within the district in
matter of administrative decision by
albination
the Pen?
of If the few
healthy for
not aware
a to fees.
the for- in Council. The Sbject of the uneration is to [cmalli Curopeans to
continue to live in one
The colony & siis chithen I the sofe
cecent cepresentations by Chinese
agamist in reservation.
In new of the long experience that
E. A Dept have had in dealing with
Somewhat
similar questions
questions in Kenya,
I we had bella have their Arom
BB 52/25
You q.8.18.12.31.
(1) Segregation inthe Kenya towns was adopted, purely
for health reasons,on the advice of Professor
(now Sir William) Simpson
on the analogy of West African segregation, where only Europeans and Africans are concerned. We were never on firm ground (a) because Europeans keep their African servants
in huts in their gardens and
(b) because some Indians are far more out of place
in a typical Indian area than in a European area ("But look at their crowd of relatives who are not Europeanized").
We maintained our point till Sir W.Simpson deserted the health argument and relied on the amenities, which were not his business. (2) Amenities noise (processions, bands) cooking etc.
(3) Children It was suggested that European children associating with Indian children in the road, are contaminated. The idea was put forward, without enthusiasm, by Lord Delamere, who lives in the country. As Nairobi residential plots are 2 acres in area
on} th acre,
the idea, to a suburban dweller on
grotesque. The children can meet their friends
within gates.
(4) Economic Rents would go up as (at the time)
This was not
Indians were better off than Europeans.
formally put forward as an argument.
We were driven out of our position and the
conclusion is shown on p.15 of Cmd.1922. The phrase
core for the "sanitary police and building regulations" Mas history considered with £.0. referentatives: _
(a) "Police" was specially introduced as a
precaution against bands, etc.
(b) The India office first wanted to add "in
European areas". We pointed out that there
would be no European areas, so the words
dropped out and we have a free hand to
educate the Indian in the poorer quarters
to any standard of living we think fit.
The dropping of residential segregation has
left us a problem, not quite finished with, of
areas developed on the pledge of segregation.
as in towns here you can get a house on a new
"Estate" with confidence that a slaughter house will not be set up on the next plot, so in Nairobi men have bought parts of an "Estate" on the understanding that no Indians need apply. On such areas, we have
Segration
no option but to maintain the leant it is not a
matter of compensation but of probable injunction.
21.12.45
In Hong Kong the problem is more
that- karawation is acimed
Against Japanese as well as Chinese.
as perfond, but mis head of
the words in brackets in Ire. Beckett's minute put it that the object of reservation is " to regulate excessor competition for towns in the Peale sishich a to prevent the
52963/17
Fro 76260/12
Exclusion
fue areas
Есябрести рели
one flie
The Colony which are
healthing for them
their children
And, seeing that vi sk in 1917 cited the Portuguese czvermtin,
precedent, love might add
it was found recanary
for somewhat similar cumscres allangements to accuse
ہیں کر سعده
definiti the Portuguen acction of the
community.
I lake it that he net coplo gete
bresinen
that we shall have to offer to
may be lete a few approved Indians leside in thi Paake as a
fur Chinese do. mud- obskuct as emg
as possible.
GG 36.1211 E.
Jagree. Reply as proposed.
ther communication on this subject should
Under Secretory of State for India,
nomic & Department,
Overseas
India Office,
London, 8. W. 1,
Allowing reference quoted :—
$ 0.6496/25.
8020. 1.0. Ert. No.
handum, London,
NATIONAL
INDIA OFFICE,
WHITEHALL,
LONDON, S.W. 1.
November, 1925.
3 NOV 25
I am directed by the Secretary of State for
India to transmit copy of a letter from the Government
of India enclosing copy of a question and answer in
the Indian Legislative Assembly relating to the Peak District in the Island of Hong Kong.
The Earl of Birkenhead would be grateful if
he could be advised as to the reply that should be returned to the Government of India's enquiries.
I have the honour to be, Sir, Your obedient Servant,
Junsailon
for Secretary, Economic & Overseas Department.
Under Secretary of State,
Colonial Office.
No. 291- Om.
Government of India,
Department of Education,liealth and Lands.
Simla,the 8th October 1925.
G.S.Bajpai, Esq.,0.B.E..1.0.3.,
Offg: Deputy Secretary to the Government of India,
His Majesty's Under Secretary of State for India,
Economic and Overseas Department,
India Office, London.
Question and answer in the Legislative Assembly regarding the reservation of the Peak District in the Island of Hong Kong for Europeans.
I am directed to forward a copy of a question aske by Mr. S.0.Chose in the Legislative åssembly on the 1st September 1925 and of the reply given thereto. It would appear from the information containe? at pago 707 of Whittaker's Almanac.1925, that the area in question is reserved for Europeans but the Government of India would be grateful if it could be ascertained" from the Colonial Office whether this is correct. If so, they would also like to be informe of the circumstances in which the area came to be reserved and whether the local Chinese or any other non-European community has asked for a modiflea- tion of the arrangement.
I have the honour to be,
Your most obedient servant,
Sd/ G.S. Bajpai
Offg: Deputy Secretary.
Gestion asked in the Legislative Assembly on the lat
September 1926, by Mr. 8, C. Ghose.
(1) Will the Government efate if it is aware of the fnot that in the Island of Hong Kong the Peak District is reserved
for Europeans?
(2) If the answer is in the negative, will the Government look up this year's Whittaker's Almanac at page 7077
(a) If it is a fact that the Peak District is reserved for Europeans, are the Government prepared to demand an explanation from the Government of Hong Kong why Indians are excluded from residing in the Peak Distrioti
(4) Is the Government aware that the Chinese of Hong Kong have demanded the right of the Chinese to residenos upon the Peak?
Reply to above questions by Mr. J.V. Bhore, 0.I.E., C.B.B..
1.0.5.1-
Government have no official information but are making
inquiries.
Mr. Peckett
Mr. B. J. Harding.
Mr. Strachey.
Sir J. Shuckburgh.
Sir G. Grindle.
Ser U. Davis.
Sir S. Wilson.
Mr. Ormsby-Gore.
Earl of Clarendon.
Mr. Amery.
DRAFT. cous
174945-0/25
u fofs, Economic & boersees Dept.,
11 January, 1976.
am to. to back. the receipt of igr. br.,
E. 40. 6496/25, of the 2nd. of hour. relating to the
reservation of the Peak District in H Koup for
Peuropians and to request you to inform the
Earl oft
of Birkenhead that the reservation
district was decided on in
1904 and that
bedeciances
the matter is at present-poverned by
no. 4 of 19out
and he safe918 of which
an enclosed.
It will be when that residence within thi
district is a weather of
administrative decision
by the Lov. in Council. The object of the reservation
competition for houses in
replete excessive competition for
the leak District and to prevent the exclusion
of heropans from our of the few
which are
1912 it was
areas in the Colony
healthy for them and their children. In
weessary for somewhat similar
found wecessary for
reasons to make urangements to
a definite
the Parlaquese section of the community.
is not aware
of any recent
representations by the local Chinese or any other
European community against the European
reservation in the Peak District.
(Signed) G. GRINDLE
Enclosures of
INDIANS IN KENYA.
MEMORANDUM.
Presented to Parliament by Command of His Majesty.
July, 1923.
PUBLISHED BY HIS MAJESTY'S STATIONERY OFFICE,
To be purchased through any Bookseller or directly from H.M. STATIONERY ŎFFICE at the following addresses: IMPERIAL HOUSE, KINGSWAY, LONDON, W.C.2, and 28, ABINGDON STREET, LONDON, S.W.1, YORK STREET, MANCHESTER; 1, ST. ANDREW'S CRESCENT, CARDIFF;
or 120, GEORGE STREET, EDINBURGH,
Price 6d. net.
Cind. 1922.
THE following memorandum summarises the history of the Indian
question in the Kenya Colony and Protectorate and sets out the
general policy which has been laid down by His Majesty's Govern-
ment, together with the decisions which they have taken on the
practical points at issue.
COLONIAL OFFICE,
23rd July, 1923.
DEVONSHIRE.
(B 3-518/T
INDIANS IN KENYA.
1. THE question of the status of Indians in Kenya has come under the consideration of successive Secretaries of State for the Colonies in one form or another for many years; but with the recent change in the constitutional and political position of India, it has now become a matter of Imperial policy, to which His Majesty's Government have given prolonged and anxious consideration in order to reach a settlement of the existing difficulties.
2. The history of the position of Indians in Kenya up to the end of the late war may be summarised briefly. There have been Indian merchants established along the East African Coast for a long time, and, with the opening up of Uganda and Kenya, and particularly with the development of British administration in those countries during the last thirty-eight years, Indian traders have penetrated into the interior. Many Indian artisans and labourers employed on the construction of the Uganda Railway remained to engage in commerce, and, at the beginning of the present century, the number of Indians in Kenya was greatly increased by the arrival of artisans, clerks and small traders. There is a limited number also of professional men and traders on a large scale who have come from India to the Colony. The agricultural Indian is, however, almost unknown in Kenya.
3. It was the question of the ownership of land in the Highlands which first brought Indian and European interests into conflict. The Highlands, less the area in that region reserved for Africans, amount to about one-tenth of the total area of the Colony and Pro- tectorate, and they are in climate unique in the great belt of Tropical African possessions of the Crown. There were a few European settlers from about 1897, but the encouragement of their immigration into the country as a matter of policy may be dated from 1902. From that time the influx of European settlers increased steadily. policy of the reservation of the Highlands for Europeans was definitely The laid down by the Earl of Elgin, when Secretary of State for the Colonies in 1908.
4. At that time the unofficial element on the Legislative Council was entirely nominated, and in 1909 the experiment was tried of adding an Indian nominated member. This experiment did not prove entirely satisfactory, and the appointment was not renewed when the term of office of the Indian concerned came to an end.
5. In 1913, a distinguished sanitation expert, Professor (now Sir William) Simpson, furnished a report on sanitary matters in Kenya, in which he advocated strongly a system of racial segregation, both in the residential and in the commercial areas of the large towns. His views were accepted, and when the time came for applying them after
the war, this question of segregation formed one of the main points at issue between the European and the Indian communities.
6. At the end of the war it was decided to give effect to the long- standing desire of the European community for representation on the Legislative Council by means of elected members. The grant of elective institutions was approved by Viscount Milner in 1919 and took effect at the beginning of 1920. The number of European elected unofficial members of the Council was fixed at eleven, but provision was made for maintaining an official majority in the Council.
7. In 1918, the report of a local Economic Commission of Enquiry into post-war development was published. This contained dis- paraging references to the Indians then in Kenya, and advocated strict control of future immigration from India. Although the passages in question were repudiated by Lord Milner as not representing the view either of His Majesty's Government or himself, the report undoubtedly added to the feeling of bitterness among the Indians.
8. At the same time Indian sentiment, both in India and Kenya, was becoming more and more articulate, and a large number of claims was put forward by the Indian community in Kenya, including a demand for representation on the Legislative Council on an equality with Europeans. After full consideration and discussion, Lord Milner addressed a despatch on the 21st May, 1920, to the Governor of Kenya, conveying decisions on the various points at issue. That despatch has already been published locally in the "Official Gazette." The decisions may be summarised as follows:-
(a) Arrangements to be made for the election of two Indian
members of the Legislative Council on a special franchise.
(6) Arrangements to be made for elective representation of
Indians on Municipal Councils.
(c) No restriction on Indian immigration which would place the natives of India at a disadvantage as compared with other immigrants.
(d) Lord Elgin's decision in regard to the reservation of the Highlands for Europeans to be maintained, but reasonable opportunity to be afforded for Indian agricultural settle- ment in areas of adequate extent and good quality which could be set apart for that purpose without infringement of native rights.
(e) The principle of race segregation to be adhered to in residential areas and, whenever practicable, in commercial areas also.
Other matters were dealt with, but these were of minor importance and need not now be recapitulated.
9. The Government of India reviewed the whole position in a despatch of the 21st October, 1920, which has been published as Command Paper 1311.
This despatch reopened the whole question and led to protracted discussion between the Secretary of State for the Colonies and the Secretary of State for India, in which the points at issue were
(B 3-518)T
considered in relation not only to Kenya but also to the general political position in India. This discussion continued during the spring and summer of 1921, and in that period also the matter was raised by the Joint Parliamentary Committee on Indian Affairs under the chairmanship of Lord Islington. The report of the Committee has been published as House of Commons Paper 177.
10. The more general question of the position of Indians in the Empire came under discussion at the Imperial Conference of 1921. At the final meeting, the following Resolution was adopted:
"The Conference, while reaffirming the resolution of the Imperial War Conference of 1918, that each community of the British Commonwealth should enjoy complete control of the composition of its own population by means of restriction on immigration from any of the other communities, recognises that there is an incongruity between the position of India as an equal member of the British Empire and the existence of disabilities upon British Indians lawfully domiciled in some other parts of the Empire. The Conference accordingly is of the opinion that, in the interests of the solidarity of the British Commonwealth, it is desirable that the rights of such Indians to citizenship should be recognised."
The following observations were appended to the Resolution :-
"The representatives of South Africa regret their inability to accept this resolution in view of the exceptional circumstances of the greater part of the Union."
"The representatives of India, while expressing their appreciation of the acceptance of the resolution recorded above, feel bound to place on record their profound concern at the position of Indians in South Africa, and their hope that by negotiation between the Governments of India and of South Africa some way can be found, as soon as may be, to reach a more satisfactory position."
11. The question of the settlement of the position in Kenya was discussed between Mr. Churchill, then Secretary of State for the Colonies, and Sir Edward Northey, the Governor of Kenya, who was on leave, and when Sir Edward Northey returned to Kenya in September, 1921, he attempted to secure an agreed settlement, but without success.
12. A deputation of Europeans came to England in the following winter, and an Indian deputation, consisting of persons who were already in this country, was also received by the Secretary of State. No progress, however, was made towards a settlement on this occasion.
13. An Interdepartmental Committee, consisting of the Parlia- mentary Under-Secretaries of State for the Colonies and for India (The Honourable Edward Wood, M.P., and the Earl Winterton, M.P.), with representatives of the two Offices, met several times
during the summer with a view to arranging terms which would meet the insistent demands received from India for a full measure of Indian representation in Kenya and at the same time secure a settlement acceptable in Kenya itself. They drew up a report, which was adopted provisionally by the Secretaries of State for reference to the Government of Kenya and the Government of India, in order to obtain a confidential expression of the opinion of both Govern- ments on the proposals.
14. Meanwhile, Sir Robert Coryndon had succeeded Sir Edward Northey as Governor of Kenya, and a telegram was sent to him on the 5th September, 1922, conveying the substance of what is now known as the "Wood-Winterton report." The terms of the proposed settlement as detailed in the telegram were as follows:-
(I) Franchise.-A common electoral roll for all British sub- jects and British protected persons (male or female), aged 21 years and upwards, possessing qualifications which were to be prescribed.
(II) Qualifications.-Either a complete census or a test census to be held in order to determine a method of adjusting qualifica- tions which would approximately result in a ten per cent. Indian electorate. To obtain this percentage it might be necessary to adopt alternative property or educational qualifications instead of a combined qualification. Should the census show that in order to get the ten per cent. the qualification standard would obviously be unreasonably low, reasonable standards would be laid down irrespective of the resulting percentage. Qualifications to be settled in time to enable the new Indian electorate to vote at the general election in March, 1923. European voters already on register would be admitted to the new register whether or not in possession of the new qualifications, but all fresh applicants for registration, whether Europeans not registered under the Legislative Council Ordinance 1919, or Indians, would be required to possess these qualifications.
(III) Constituencies.-The official majority to be retained. Alternative proposals as follows :—
(a) Eleven elected members representing seven constituencies, three of which to return one member and four two members. In the former, European candidates only to be qualified for election in the latter, there would be one European seat and one Indian seat, giving a total of seven Europeans, four Indians.
(b) The India Office suggested that there should be twelve elected members representing four constituencies, each constituency returning three members, or, alterna- tively, eleven elected members, representing four constituencies, of which three would return three members and one would return two members. One seat in each constituency should be Indian, the rest European, giving eight or seven Europeans according
as the total were twelve or eleven elected members and four Indians. This alternative (b) would not prejudice the position of the Europeans, and might be more acceptable to the Indians. The Government of Kenya to examine and report upon the possibility of giving effect to alternative (b), but the reply to the telegram not to be delayed for that purpose.
(IV) Municipal Franchise.-Agreed that in municipalities Indians must be given adequate representation on an elective basis where such basis already existed for Europeans, but detailed arrangements could not be decided upon until the receipt of a despatch on the subject expected from the Governor.
(V) Executive Council.-Provision already existed in the Constitution for such persons to serve as unofficial members of the Executive Council as the Governor might appoint from time to time. There was now one unofficial Indian member of the Executive Council under this provision, and it should be understood that this arrangement would continue. No distinction to be made between Europeans and Indians in deciding on the fitness of individuals to be members of the Executive Council.
(VI) Segregation. No segregation, either commercial residential, on racial lines, but the Colonial Government or municipal authorities to have power to impose at their discretion sanitary, police and building regulations, subject to these regula- tions containing no racial discrimination as such.
(VII) Immigration. It would be announced that in present circumstances no change was contemplated in the existing regulations.
Note.-The Secretary of State added a note on this subject as follows:-
Throughout discussions with India Office, I have made it plain that my view is unchanged as to immigration control, and that if the danger ever arises of a large influx of Indians I hold myself entirely free to take action which may be necessary. In view of the figures which you have supplied as to the influx and efflux of Indians in 1921-22, I have not felt it necessary to insist on any alteration of the law at present."
(VIII) Highlands.-The following to be the terms of the
announcement:—
'The Colonial Office cannot contemplate any change in the existing law and practice, having regard to past policy and commitments. The India Office take note of this view, but are unable to accept it, and reserve the right to reopen the question, if need be, at some future date.” 15. The Government of India were willing to accept the scheme, although they did not consider that it fully met the claims put forward on behalf of the Indians. The Government of Kenya rejected the
scheme mainly on the ground that it gave no sufficient safeguard to the European community against Indian predominance in the future.
16. No immediate progress was possible for various reasons, but, with the change of Government in October, 1922, discussions were resumed between the Secretary of State for India and the new Secretary of State for the Colonies. The desirability of arriving at an agreed settlement was impressed upon the Governor, but his discussions with the leaders of the European community in Kenya led to nothing, The fears of the Europeans were rendered the more acute by demands put forward by Indian political leaders in Kenya and elsewhere, who were understood to state that they only accepted the Wood- Winterton proposals as a basis for further demands, and that nothing short of the full equality of Indians and Europeans would be satisfactory. The Europeans, seeing themselves outnumbered by Indians already by more than two to one, and fearing a further large influx of Indians, regarded such a claim as establishing Indian domination on the unofficial side of the Council and as depriving the Europeans sooner or later of all representation on the Council.
It became obvious that the policy proposed in the Wood-Winterton report would not satisfy parties in Kenya. It was therefore arranged that a European and an Indian delegation should come to this country from Kenya, together with the Governor, for further discussion. The European delegation was accompanied by the Reverend Dr. J. W. Arthur, selected to represent the views of the Missionaries in Kenya on the native interests involved in the controversy. A delegation, consisting of three Indian political leaders, headed by the Right Honourable Srinivasa Sastri, also came from India to represent the interest felt by Indian public opinion in this question. The delegations arrived in the course of April and May 1923. Every opportunity has been taken of gathering the opinions of the several parties interested, and the question has now been reviewed in all its bearings. As a result of this re-examination of the position, His Majesty's Government have arrived at certain conclusions, which are set forth in the following part of this memorandum.
1. General Statement of Policy.
PART II.
The general policy underlying any decision that may be taken on the questions at issue must first be determined. It is a matter for satisfaction that, however irreconcilable the views of the European and Indian communities in Kenya on many points may be, there is one point on which both are agreed, namely, the importance of safeguarding the interests of the African natives. The African popu- lation of Kenya is estimated at more than 23 millions; and according to the census of 1921, the total numbers of Europeans, Indians and
Arabs in Kenya (including officials) were 9,651, 22,822 and 10,102 respectively.
Primarily, Kenya is an African territory, and His Majesty's Government think it necessary definitely to record their considered opinion that the interests of the African natives must be paramount, and that if, and when, those interests and the interests of the immigrant races should conflict, the former should prevail. Obviously the interests of the other communities, European, Indian or Arab, must severally be safeguarded. Whatever the circumstances in which members of these communities have entered Kenya, there will be no drastic action or reversal of measures already introduced, such as may have been contem- plated in some quarters, the result of which might be to destroy or impair the existing interests of those who have already settled in Kenya. But in the administration of Kenya His Majesty's Government regard themselves as exercising a trust on behalf of the African popu- lation, and they are unable to delegate or share this trust, the object of which may be defined as the protection and advancement of the native races.
It is not necessary to attempt to elaborate this position; the lines of development are as yet in certain directions undetermined, and many difficult problems arise which require time for their solution. But there can be no room for doubt that it is the mission of Great Britain to work continuously for the training and education of the Africans towards a higher intellectual moral and economic level than that which they had reached when the Crown assumed the responsibility for the administration of this territory. At present special considera- tion is being given to economic development in the native reserves, and within the limits imposed by the finances of the Colony all that is possible for the advancement and development of the Africans, both inside and outside the native reserves, will be done.
His Majesty's Government desire also to record that in their opinion the annexation of the East Africa Protectorate, which, with the exception of the mainland dominions of the Sultan of Zanzibar, has thus become a Colony, known as Kenya Colony, in no way derogates from this fundamental conception of the duty of the Government to the native races. As in the Uganda Protectorate, so in the Kenya Colony, the principle of trusteeship for the natives, no less than in the mandated territory of Tanganyika, is unassailable.
This para- mount duty of trusteeship will continue, as in the past, to be carried out under the Secretary of State for the Colonies by the agents of the Imperial Government, and by them alone.
2. Future Constitutional Evolution.
Before dealing with the practical points at issue directly connected with the claims of Indians, it is necessary, in view of the declaration of policy enunciated above, to refer to the question of the future constitutional evolution of Kenya.
It has been suggested that it might be possible for Kenya to advance in the near future on the lines of responsible self-government, subject to the reservation of native affairs. There are, however, in the opinion of His Majesty's Government, objections to the adoption in
Kenya at this stage of such an arrangement, whether it take the form of removing all matters affecting Africans from consideration in the Council, or the appointment of the Governor as High Commissioner for Native Affairs, or provision for a special veto by the Crown on local legislation which touches native interests; and they are convinced that the existing system of government is in present circumstances best calculated to achieve the aims which they have in view, namely, the unfettered exercise of their trusteeship for the native races and the satisfaction of the legitimate aspirations of other communities resident in the Colony.
His Majesty's Government cannot but regard the grant of responsible self-government as out of the question within any period of time which need now be taken into consideration. Nor, indeed, would they contemplate yet the possibility of substituting an unofficial majority in the Council for the Government official majority. Hasty action is to be strongly deprecated, and it will be necessary to see how matters develop, especially in regard to African representation, before proposals for so fundamental a change in the Constitution of the Colony can be entertained. Meanwhile, the administration of the Colony will follow the British traditions and principles which have been successful in other Colonies, and progress towards self-government must be left to take the lines which the passage of time and the growth of experience may indicate as being best for the country.
3. Practical Points at Issue.
Turning now to the practical points at issue arising directly out of the claims of Indians domiciled in Kenya, these may be considered under the following heads :—
Representation on the Legislative Council, Representation on the Executive Council. Representation on Municipal Councils. Segregation.
Reservation of the Highlands for Europeans. Immigration.
4. Representation on the Legislative Council.
(a) Elective System.-In no responsible quarter is it suggested that the Indians in Kenya should not have elective representation upon the Legislative Council of the Colony. The point at issue is the method whereby such elective representation should be secured. There are two alternative methods :-
(i) A common electoral roll.
(ii) Communal franchise.
Under the former system, Kenya would be divided up into a given number of constituencies, in each of which European and Indian voters on the roll would vote together at an election for candidates of either race, and the qualifications for admission to the voters' roll would be the same for Europeans and for Indians. Under the latter system, European and Indian constituencies would be demarcated independently, not necessarily coinciding in number or boundaries;
the qualifications for admission to the voters' roll would not neces- sarily be the same for the two communities; and while Europeans would vote in the European constituencies for European candidates, Indians would vote in the Indian constituencies for Indian candidates. As a variant of the former system, there is the common electoral roll with reservation of seats. This arrangement would involve the setting apart of a certain number of seats in a given constituency for candidates of a certain race; for example, in a constituency returning three members, with two seats reserved for Europeans and one for Indians, the two European candidates and the one Indian candidate highest in the poll would be elected, irrespective of the position in the poll of other candidates of either race.
The common electoral roll for all British subjects and British protected persons, with reservation of seats, was proposed in the Wood-Winterton report, and it was further suggested that the qualifi- cations for voters should be such as to admit, if possible, ten per cent. of the domiciled Indians to the register.
For the common electoral roll it is claimed that it would bridge the gap between the Europeans and Indians by giving a candidate of one race an incentive to study the needs and aspirations of the other race. Further, Indian sentiment, both in India and Kenya, strongly favours the common electoral roll, even though a communal franchise exists in India itself.
A communal franchise secures that every elector shall have the opportunity of being represented by a member with sympathies similar to his own, a consideration which in other Colonies has led the domiciled Indians to press for its adoption; it is well adapted to the needs of a country such as Kenya; no justification is seen for the suggestion that it is derogatory to any of the communities so repre- sented, and it is believed that, so far from having a disruptive tendency, it would contract rather than widen the division between races in Kenya.
So far as Africans are concerned, a communal franchise provides a framework into which native representation can be fitted in due
From the point of view of the Indian residents themselves, this system permits of a far wider franchise being given than would be the case if a common electoral roll were introduced, and this alone should render it acceptable to all supporters of the Indian claims who have at heart the political development of the Indian people.
Finally, it allows of the immediate grant of electoral representa- tion with a wide franchise to the other community in Kenya which is ripe for such institutions, the Arabs of the Coast.
These considerations were weighed before the Wood-Winterton report was drawn up; the recommendation then made turned largely on the desire to meet Indian feeling so far as conditions in Kenya would admit. The result of the reference to opinion in Kenya of the recommendation that a common electoral roll should be adopted, even though combined with a reservation of seats, was to show that the advantages claimed for the common electoral roll would in practice
have been illusory. In the special conditions existing in Kenya it is clear that no candidate, European or Indian, could stand as an advocate of the interests of the other race without sacrificing the support of his own. If elections were to be fought on racial lines, as they undoubtedly would have been in Kenya, the main advantage claimed for the common electoral roll, namely, the bringing of the races nearer together, would be lost.
Having regard to all the circumstances, His Majesty's Government have decided that the interests of all concerned in Kenya will be best served by the adoption of a communal system of represen-
(b) Qualifications for Voters. It is not intended to effect any alteration in the qualifications for admission to the register of European voters as laid down in Ordinance No. 22 of 1919; that is to say, adult suffrage, subject to certain necessary and customary reservations. Under the communal system His Majesty's Govern- ment are prepared to grant to Indians a wide franchise. It will be a matter for the Governor of the Colony to ascertain the views of the Indian community and to submit the necessary legislation to give effect thereto. The same procedure will be followed in the case of the Arab community.
(c) Qualifications for Candidates.-His Majesty's Government are prepared to adopt a similar principle in regard to the qualifications for candidates, except that there must be a test which will ensure that candidates have such a knowledge of the English language as will enable them to take their part in the proceedings of the Legislative Council. No system which would involve the use of two or more official languages in the Council will be contemplated; but His Majesty's Government have no ground for supposing that the imposition of this necessary condition will create difficulties or limit unreasonably the choice of suitable candidates.
(d) Numbers on Legislative Council.—The question then remains of the number of seats on the Council to be allocated to each com- munity. As matters stand, there are eleven elected unofficials (Europeans) on the Council, and as a provisional measure authority was given in 1921 for the substitution of four nominated Indian members for the two elected Indian members contemplated in Lord Milner's despatch of the 21st May, 1920.
After full consideration, His Majesty's Government have decided that provision should be made for five elected Indian unofficial members on the Council; while for the Arabs, it has been decided that there shall be one elected member in addition to the nominated Arab official member for whom provision already exists. The Europeans will continue to return eleven elected representatives. The number of nominated official members will be fixed so as to maintain an official majority on the Council.
In the opinion of His Majesty's Government adequate representa- tion of the interests of each community will be secured by this alloca- tion. It is desired, however, that the views of the Indians in Kenya
should be ascertained before a decision is taken upon the actual arrangement of the constituencies to be represented by the five Indian members.
No articulate expression of opinion can be yet expected from the African tribes in Kenya, and the time has not come to consider what should be their representation on the Council. The educational development of individual natives will undoubtedly precede the political education of the general body of natives; there are, indeed, signs of this already.
In present circumstances, the Governor has the advice of the Chief Native Commissioner in all matters affecting the African population and with the official majority can ensure the enactment of any measures for the betterment of the natives which may be approved by His Majesty's Government. It has, however, been suggested that a nominated unofficial member chosen from among the Christian Missionaries in Kenya specially to advise on such matters should be added to the Council until the time comes when the natives are fitted for direct representation. His Majesty's Government see no objection in principle to this arrangement, and they agree that provision should be made accordingly. It will be for the Governor to select a suitable person for nomination from time to time. It will, of course, be understood that there is no question of the representation of the Missionary Bodies as such, and that consideration of religious denomination will not affect the selection. Nor will the nomination of this one member relieve the Governor and his advisers of their full responsibility for representing the native interests.
5. Representation on Executive Council.
As regards the Executive Council, the present position as set forth in the Wood-Winterton report will be maintained, except that the Governor will be given authority to nominate as an additional un- official member a suitable person, preferably a Missionary, whose advice on matters affecting Africans will, in the opinion of the Governor, be of value.
6. Representation on Municipal Councils.
The only municipality which has been set up in Kenya is that of Nairobi.
The Municipal Corporations Ordinance No. 33 of 1922 provides for Municipal Councils to consist of so many Councillors as the Governor shall determine, and the appointment of these Councillors rests with the Governor.
It was not desired to suspend the enactment of various amend- ments to the existing law which are included in this Ordinance until the policy as to elections for Municipal Councillors had been determined; consequently, the provision for the constitution of Municipal Councils was re-enacted generally in the form in which it appeared in the Municipal Corporations Ordinance of 1909.
Lord Milner contemplated in 1920 election in lieu of nomination of Municipal Councillors, but no concrete scheme was submitted by the Colonial Government for giving effect to that policy. The matter is one requiring careful examination, but, in principle, if an elective basis is now introduced, it follows from the decision in regard to the Legislative Council that municipal representation must also be on a communal basis, due provision being made for the protection of the interests of the Africans until such time as they are fit to exercise a franchise.
It will be an instruction to the Governor to put forward proposals for consideration of the Secretary of State for the Colonies after he has been able to consult his advisers in Kenya.
7. Segregation in Townships.
The next matter for consideration is that of segregation of the European and non-European races. Following upon Professor Simpson's report, a policy of segregation was adopted in principle, and it was proposed by Lord Milner to retain this policy both on sanitary and social grounds. So far as commercial segregation is concerned, it has already been generally agreed that this should be discontinued. But in regard to residential segregation, matters have been in suspense for some time, and all sales of township plots have been held up pending a final decision on the question of principle involved. It is now the view of the competent medical authorities that, as a sanitation measure, segregation of Europeans and Asiatics is not absolutely essential for the preservation of the health of the community; the rigid enforce- ment of sanitary, police and building regulations, without any racial discrimination, by the Colonial and municipal authorities will suffice. may well prove that in practice the different races will, by a natural affinity, keep together in separate quarters, but to effect such separation by legislative enactment except on the strongest sanitary grounds would not, in the opinion of His Majesty's Government, be justifiable. They have therefore decided that the policy of segregation as between Europeans and Asiatics in the townships must be abandoned.
But for the present, at any rate, it is considered desirable, as in other native dependencies, to keep the residential quarters of natives, so far as may be practicable, separate from those of the immigrant races. In the case of individual natives, such as servants, strict segregation would be unworkable; but it is important that, when areas have been fixed in townships for native residence, those areas should be regarded as definitely set aside for the use of natives, and no encroachinent thereon by non-African races should be permitted.
8. Reservation of Highlands.
As early as 1906 the question of the grant of land in the Highlands to non-Europeans had arisen for consideration, and Lord Elgin, who was then Secretary of State for the Colonies, informed the Commis- sioner (now styled Governor) that it would not be in accordance with
the policy of His Majesty's Government to restrict any section of His Majesty's subjects from holding any land in British Protectorates; but he thought, in view of the comparatively limited area of the East Africa Protectorate suitable for European cultivation, that a reasonable discretion should be exercised in dealing with applications for land from natives of India or other non-Europeans. The principle which had been acted upon by the previous Commissioner, namely, that agricultural land in the Highlands should be granted only to Europeans, was approved.
Lord Elgin confirmed his decision in 1908, stating that, while it was not consonant with the views of His Majesty's Government to impose any legal restrictions upon any section of the community, grants in the upland area should not, as a matter of administrative convenience, be made to Asiatics.
It has been claimed on the side of the Indians, first, that Lord Elgin's decision only related to the initial grant of Government land in the Highlands, and that it has since been stretched so as to preclude the transfer of land from Europeans to Indians in that area, and further, that Lord Elgin's statement that no legal restrictions should be im- posed has been varied by the terms of the Crown Lands Ordinance of 1915.
At the time of Lord Elgin's decisions, Government land in the East Africa Protectorate was alienated by allotment by the Lands Office, and the Commissioner had the power of veto on all transfer of land between private holders. In view of this general veto, it was unnecessary for Lord Elgin to deal specifically with the question of transfer, and, although no public statement was made on the point, it is clear that the question of land in the East Africa Protectorate was considered by his successors and the local authorities on the basis that the reservation of the Highlands to Europeans must cover transfer as well as original grant from the Crown.
In the consideration of land policy which led to the enactment of the Crown Lands Ordinance of 1915, it was decided :-
(a) To substitute for the system of selling land by allotment the
system of selling leases at public auction.
(b) To abolish the Governor's general power of veto on transfer, which was found to interfere unduly with the lessee's ability to deal with his land by mortgage, &c.
In order to apply these decisions in a manner consistent with the principle of the reservation of the Highlands to Europeans, it was found necessary to provide that, in announcing the conditions of the sale of particular farms, the Land Officer should state (in cases where the point arose) whether the bidding at the auction was limited to Europeans or not. To deal with the case of transfer it was necessary to retain, in a modified form, the Governor's power of veto, and this matter was very fully considered by Mr. Harcourt (the late Viscount Harcourt), who was Secretary of State at the time. He refused to agree to a veto on transfers between Europeans and Asiatics involving
a definite racial discrimination; but, in order not only to deal with the particular case of the Highlands, but at the same time to secure protection for non-
n-European land-holders (particularly in the coast strip which now forms the Kenya Protectorate) against their being victimised by concession hunters, he approved of provision being made to retain the power of veto on transfers between persons of different
It will be observed that the passages in the Crown Lands Ordinance of 1915 which have been complained of raised no new principle, but merely maintained the principle of past practice. Nor can it be claimed that they amount to legal discrimination against Indians, for it would be possible for the Executive Government to grant land in the Highlands to an Asiatic, or to approve of the transfer of land from a European to an Asiatic, without any alteration in the existing law.
In adhering to the position adopted by his predecessors in this matter, Lord Milner, when Secretary of State, made it clear that the reservation of a certain area for Europeans implied that a similar reservation should be available for Indians who wished to take up agricultural land, and he contemplated a reservation of such land in the Lowlands of Kenya, on the understanding that the land offered to Indian settlers would be examined as to its suitability and adequacy by a representative whom the Indian Government might send.
After reviewing the history of this question and taking into con- sideration the facts that during the last fifteen years European British subjects have been encouraged to develop the Highlands and that during that period settlers have taken up land in the Highlands on this understanding, His Majesty's Government have decided that the existing practice must be maintained as regards both initial grants and transfers.
An area of land in the Lowlands which can be set aside without infringing on native reserves and without conflicting with native requirements will be temporarily reserved in order that it may be ascertained by experience what demand there is for agricultural land on the part of Indians who will give suitable guarantees of their intention to develop the land themselves. After the expiration of a limited period, the reservation of this area in the Lowlands will be reconsidered in the light of the experience so gained.
9. Immigration.
Finally the question of immigration into Kenya has been canvassed both by the Europeans and by the Indians. It is sufficient to say that the line taken has varied with the point of view, and it is not necessary to present the arguments which have been advanced.
It may be stated definitely that only in extreme circumstances could His Majesty's Government contemplate legislation designed to exclude from a British Colony immigrants from any other part of the British Empire. Such racial discrimination in immigration regula- tions, whether specific or implied, would not be in accord with the
general policy of His Majesty's Government, and they cannot counte- nance the introduction of any such legislation in Kenya.
The existing Immigration Regulations of the Colony are of quite general application. It is clearly as important in the general interests of Kenya to prohibit the entry of undesirable persons from Europe or America as from Asia. There is no reason to suppose that the Regulations in present circumstances are inadequate for this general purpose. But the consideration which must govern immigration policy in Kenya is purely economic, and strict regard must be paid to the interests of the African. When the question is re-examined from this standpoint, it is evident to His Majesty's Government that some further control over immigration in the economic interests of the natives of Kenya is required. The primary duty of the Colonial Government is the advancement of the African, and it is incumbent upon them to protect him from an influx of immigrants from any country that might tend to retard his economic development.
In course of time, as the natives progress intellectually, they will no doubt take the place which Africans hold in other parts of British Tropical Africa in mechanical and subordinate clerical work and in small trade, and it must be the aim of the British administration to further this development by all possible means. With this object the Colonial Government must weigh, so far as may be practicable, the effect on native interests of the admission to the Colony of would-be immigrants of any race. No information is yet available to show what number of immigrants following a particular occupation the Colony can absorb. The problem is complicated by the position of the separate dependency of Uganda, to which the normal access lies through Mombasa and the Kenya Colony, and this necessitates careful con- sideration before any scheme is definitely decided upon. Further, some arrangement must be devised for securing a strictly impartial examination of applications for entry into Kenya, possibly by a Board on which the various communities, including the natives, would be represented. It will, therefore, be an instruction to the Governor of Kenya to explore the matter further on his return to the Colony, and, in concert with the Governor of Uganda, to submit proposals to the Secretary of State for the Colonies for giving effect to that amount of control of immigration which the economic interests of the natives of both dependencies require.
10. Conclusion.
In conclusion, His Majesty's Government desire to record that the decisions embodied in this memorandum have only been taken after an exhaustive review of the several complicating factors which have led to the present unhappy controversy. Their constant en- deavour throughout their deliberations has been to relate the principles which must govern the administration of a British Colony in Tropical Africa to the wider considerations of general Imperial policy as enunciated in the Resolution of the Imperial Conference of 1921. It is regretted that on certain material points it has not been possible
to meet the wishes of the Government of India, whose views have received the fullest consideration from His Majesty's Government at the instance of the Secretary of State for India. It is not to be expected that issues so grave can be composed to the immediate satisfaction of the several interests concerned, but His Majesty's Government believe that the decisions now taken, resting as they do on the broad basis of the British trusteeship for the African, provide an equitable adjustment of those interests. It is the confident expectation of His Majesty's Government that, if the whole matter is viewed in its true perspective, decisions so based will be accorded general acceptance, and it is their earnest hope that a sincere effort will be made to restore in Kenya that spirit of co-operation and good-will so essential to its welfare and development.
July, 1923.
Printed under the authority of HIS MAJESTY'S STATIONERY Office, By HARRISON AND Sons, LTD., 44-47, St. Martin's Lane, London, W.C. 2, Printers in Ordinary to His Majesty.
#3-518)r G510 2000 7/23 IH & S Ltd. Gp.3.
FOR CIRCULATION --
Asst. U.D. of B,
Perm U.S. of S.
Park U.S. of S.
Secretary of State.
Previous Paper
HONG KONG
14 April
Special class Passenger Cent..
Before arranging for
m Ondal, in Chit
to bemade declaring hat he went, shall
same force as that granted under Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, oft wo. require to be fully sciope At this cent, will only, begrantes after a ourway do indientis, Fro, copus of regno, » Posim & leang ʼn what sclint it will be possible for Col. Goot, to adopt them
Copy (w/orig. enclos) {w. 160~ cons -- 1 MAY (125
itused (c/copy alone). I may as Bizle
26 AUG 1926 on
4/34172/25/
There appears to be
suggestion
in mind.
Lagu ka te ame
HK Gut. I had
? Copy letter, with echt
full report
to Ev. asking for points maised by B/F
+ Copy OB/T LF
Subsequent Paper
184913) Wt, 17813/38 Op. 140 50000 12-24 W & S Ltd.
yama-" SHIPMINDER, PARL, LONDON."
Shone VICTORIA 8740 Ext.
Any further communication on this
et should be addressed to
The Astant Secretary.
Mercantile Marine Department,
(addrea no opposite)
The following number quoted:-
.8292/25.
DISABLED
RMERCANTILE MARINE DEPARTMENT,
R 18 h 25ARD-
OF TRADE,
3, SANCTUARY BUILDINGS,
GREAT SMITH STREET,
LONDON, S.W.1.
16th April, 1925,
With reference to your letter (8517/25) of the 12th March, forwarding a copy of a despatch from the Governor of Hong Kong concerning the recognition by this Department of a Special Class Passenger Certificate which it is proposed to issue in Hong Kong, I am directed by the Board of Trade to state, for the information of Mr. Secretary Amery, that they see no objection to the proposals of the Government
of Hong Kong to introduce a Special Class Certificate for foreign-going passenger ships, but before the
Board could arrange for an Order in Council to be
made under Section 284 of the Merchant Shipping
Act, 1894, declaring that this Certificate shall be
of the same force as that granted under the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, the Board would require to be
fully satisfied that the Special Class Certificate
will only be granted after a survey similar to the Under Secretary of State,
survey/ Colonial Office,
Instructions as to the survey of Life
Saving Appliances. (Under revision).
Instructions as to the survey of lights
and sound signals.
Oiroular 1596. Repairs to boilers by
the electric or oxy-acetylene process.
Circular 1615. Bilge pumping arrange-
ments in passenger steamships.
survey in this country of foreign-going passenger
In this connection I am to forward to you, for transmission to the Governor of Hong Kong, copies
of the following Regulations etc. which are applicable
to foreign-going passenger ships under survey in this
country: -
Instructions as to the survey of
passenger steamships.
Instructions relating to the construction
of passenger steamships. (Under revision).
Instructions as to the survey of passenger
accommodation. (Under revision).
Standard conditions for the design and
construction of marine boilers,
(5) Standard conditions for the design and
construction of water tube marine boilers.
Standard conditions and rules for the shafts
of marine steam engines.
(7) Merchant Shipping (Life Saving Appliances)
Rules dated 6th August, 1924.
(8) Merchant Shipping (Life Saving Appliances)
Amending kule dated 18th January, 1925.
(13) Circular 1647. 011 fuel installations
in passenger steamships.
Circular 1649.
Instructions as to the
survey of passenger steamships, crew
spaces, etc.
(15) Circular 1650.
Precautions to be taken in the use of oil fuel on passenger steamships.
The Board will be glad to learn to what extent
it will be possible for the Government of Hong Kong
to adopt these regulations, and to see that they are
complied with in respect of passenger steamers under
survey in Hong Kong for the proposed Special Class
Certificate. They would also be glad to have
information as to the officers who will carry out
the survey work, and their qualifications.
The Board desire me to state that a considerable
amount of supervisory work will arise out of the
application of the instructions relating to the survey
of passenger ateamers, especially as regarde sub-division. In this country this supervisory work, and the examination of the plans of passenger steamers before construction, is undertaken by a special staff, forming a Consulative Department and the Hong Kong Government may find it necessary to have at least two officers, one of high marine engineering qualifications and another with special expert knowledge of naval architecture, who could undertake the work of examining the plans of vessels as regards bulkheading and other matters, and deciding what should be done in order to meet the
This is of special requirements and regulations. importance in the case of ships under construction,
and in respect of sub-division.
As regards the form of the proposed Special Class Certificate, I am to suggest that "buoyant apparatus capable of supporting" should be substi- tuted for "life rafts capable of supporting", in view
of the fact that under the Life Saving Appliances
kules which come into force on the 1st July next
pontoon life rafts will no longer be accepted as
part of the life saving equipment of any ship,
apparatus/
apparatus not properly described as a "raft" will
be permissible. Special reference need not be made in the certificate to the wireless telegraphy rules. The Board agree that the penalties for carrying excess passengers should be brought in line with those applicable to ships holding Passenger Certificates issued by this Department.
I have the honour to be,
Your obedient Servant,
Gr.Baker
1. Callaghan 20/04/25 Nr. Paskin 30fs.
Mr. Strachey.
·Sir. J. Shuckburgh.
Bir O. Davis.
Bir G. Grindle.
Sir J. Masterton Smith.
Mr. Ormsby-Gore.
Mr. Amery.
17533/25 H.K.
16 ligt 25 (17573)
(enes in orig
C. D. 1-MAY
1 MAY 1925
With reference
your despatob
No 26 of the 19th of January, I laque
ete to transmit to
aceg. copy
a letter from the Board
regarding the recognition by that Deft
Special Class Passenger Certificate,
which it is proposed to issue in
me with a
full report on
the points raised by the
raised by the B/T.
(for the Secretary of State)
(*_ned) W. ORMSBY GORE.
HONG (HO
By rende
JUR CIRCULATION :—
31r. Backal
Asst. U.S. of S.
REL 9 00125 227
Transit dues on goods passing
thes' French Indo-China.
regarding
Perm2 U.S. of S.
Parl. U.S. of 8.
ang obsons
tes copy of be to F.O.
If it is desired to outwit
arks hat hey may
4.0. App at an early date
be communicat
9261 190 8 Z PREDAVID
Secretary of State.
Previous Paper
Capy above of Ara 2 NC: 1926
Subsequent Paper
59) Wt. 110l0/26 Gp. 140 12000 8-25 W & 8 Ltd.
This seems
armarash memo.
Then nothing
? Refly that soft concern the kin
lian affancel
the means enclosed (I kink we
lo concur Boon
Jay books if
were hit
particularly interested - which is for from
being the (com) стру
above 15 FO 7
before informing
1.0.1 each & B/T
wait for F.O. action
TACkuliabuck
19-10-25
Eny further communication should be
ressed to
THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY,
e address given opposite.
The following letter and number should
C.R.T. 2990/25,
Telegraphic Address: COLASTA, PARL, LONDON.
Telephone No.: 3840 Victoria.
COMMERCIAL RELATIONS AND TREATIES
DEPARTMENT,
BOARD OF TRADE,
GREAT GEORGE STREET,