Cypher/Cat A
Kr
547
CONFIDENTIAL
NEY
REF
568
PRICITY PEKING TO FOREIGN OFFICE
Telno 453
20 May, 1968
557
CFIDENTIAL
Addressed to Foreign Office telegram No. 453 of 20 May. Repeated for information to:
547) My telegram No. 419: Grey.
Hong Kong.
At our request Cradock was granted an interview with Press Department of Ministry of Foreign Affairs on 18 May. He was seen. by Miss Chang Deputy Section Head.
2. Cradock began by expressing our strong dissatisfaction at Grey's present treatment. He pointed out it was clear from Grey's conditions of confinement in approximately the first month after his detention on 21 July, 1967, that the Chinese statement on that date announcing measures against him was intended only to mean that Grey was not free to leave his house. Since 18 August, however, his treatment had been much more severe. He was confined to one room, deprived of using the rest of his house and personal belongings, his telephone and radio and normal postal facilities. He was denied contact with his friends and with this office. This was inconsistent with only official statement the
This treatment of an Ministry of Foreign Affairs had made about Grey. innocent man was both inhumane and uncivilised. Cradock requested that Grey's situation be restored at least to what it was before 18 August, and specifically that Grey be allowed full use of his premises and personal possessions, normal inward and outward mail facilities, radio and telephone; also that he be permitted informal visitors from among his friends in Peking on a regular basis of at least once a month. 3. Chang described our requests as ridiculous and groundless and went on contrasting Grey's treatment favourably with that of Hong Kong journalists taken prisoner who, she [? gp. omitted] were treated like wild beasts. She denied flatly that there was any inconsistency between Grey's present treatment and the Chinese statement of July, 1967. She claimed that the issue raised by our requests was very simple. We should consider the question of the patriotic journalists and news-workers in prison in Hong Kong and we would find the answer ourselves. The Grey question was not an isolated one but part of the Hong Kong problem. In any case, Grey was on Chinese territory. His treatment was therefore the business of the Chinese Government and no one else had the right to interfere.
He
4.0 Cradock rebutted Chang's changes on Hong Kong prisoners in detail,
He contrasted drawing on the material supplied by the Governor. Grey's treatment in the matter of visits, isolation, mail facilities and recreation with that received by the Hong Kong prisoners. pointed out that Grey, as a British subject, was the legitimate object of our concern. The question affects Sino-British relations. Moreover, the treatment of Grey, a foreigner in China, was noted not only in Britain but by other foreign countries.
5. In reply Chang, amidst some general abuse about Hong Kong, said that as regards visit of Legal Adviser the British had so far arranged only one visit in Hong Kong. Anything else was only what was provided for usual prisoners. Grey's alleged isolation was because he was the only correspondent under restraint. By contrast the British had arrested many in Hong Kong [? gp. omitted] Grey's conditions had not
CONFIDENTIAL
/deteriorated
#30/5 p.a.