NO. 227
Hongkong.
CG 0.253 39074 RECO IR 24 001 06 sent in 68 869 o the general result was that most Colonies, including Ceylon, Mauritius, and Malta, were willing to pay for the relief of their natives who became destitute in foreign countries; they wanted the assistance if possible.
In 1889 (10262/89 refers) there was a correspondence on this subject, but it was declined to reopen this question as there was no prospect of a successful appeal. The Colonies were not willing to relieve people abroad, and they are not likely to be willing to do so for other Colonies.
Some exceptions were noted, such as possibly some Australian and Straits Settlements, but it was expected that it was really Australians and Canadians that were being referred to. On this point, it was thought better to have a general rule that no principle was laid down, and each case was considered separately (10326/92 refers).
My Lord,
Government House, Hongkong, 25th September, 1906,
The question of the repatriation to the United Kingdom and the Colonies of paupers stranded in Hongkong whose domicile is either the United Kingdom or one of the Colonies has lately engaged my attention.
2. The cost of returning distressed British seamen is already defrayed by the Board of Trade.
3. The Foreign Office, in its letter Hongkong 342 of the 5th October, 1901, which formed an enclosure in Mr. Chamberlain's Despatch No. 342 of the 11th October, 1901, stated that it was prepared to bear the cost of passages to England from Hongkong of distressed British subjects not being seamen who are sent from Manila to Hongkong.
4. Further, in answer to Sir Henry Blake's Despatch No. 462 of the 23rd October, 1902, referring to Mr. Chamberlain's Despatch No. 342 of the 11th October, 1901...
The Right Honourable The Earl of Elgin, K.G.,