be guided by the criteria of what will or will not underline
firm intentions of the Hong Kong administration rather than by
the risky bat that we may earn Chiness gratitude by meeting
extravagant terms. It is not clear what Fr. Cradock means by
"if we are to maintain the presence here, etc.". If he means a
British presence in Hong Kong (which is perhaps unlikely), then we
believe nothing is to be served by indicating weakness in a public
fashion; if he means a British presence in Peking, we must
remember that the interests of our Mission there must
inevitably take second place compared with the maintenance of
social order in Hong Kong.
(iv) Mr. Cradock's (d): "Not an act of weaknese".
This is
merely an expression of opinion. In fact, both we and
Br. Cradock suet allow ourselves to be guided by the views of
the Governor of Hong Kong regarding the state of confidence in
the Colony. is seen from here it seems likely that while
sublic opinion in Hong Kong me wall or the United kingdom would
see a humanitarian content in the release of the news "orkers,
they would undoubtedly regard it also sa an act of wezknees;
and the Chinose most certainly would.
(v) Er. Cradook's (e): "Interfering with normal process of
justioc*. #hile we did indeed envisage the possibility of
banting the law in the eve of one prisoner (the NCNA correspond-
ent, Lo) we went no further than a very vague intimation to the
Chinese that we were capable of thic, nd then only if we could
CONFIDANT I AL