91
See however ara. 7 below.
26221/99)
Colony or possession" they "could claim no rights as British subjects beyond the limits of such Colony or possession, and the moment they entered China their al-
legiance to the Sovereign of China revived"
(5) Children born in a British possession of im- migrant parents subjects of China. These persons were held in 1865 and 1867 to be incapable of protection but
since those dates the rule had been reversed"
X
5. There is now a 6th class, persons residing in the New Territories at the time oflease (1894) and
their children. The Law Officers advised that they are British subjects, the lease conferring full sovereignty during the period of tenure.
6. From 1882 to 1892 the question of the rescind-
ing of the Costume Regulations was raised with China
see para. 7 below.but nothing definite came of it. A system of certificates
for four of the classes above mentioned was however introduced (naturalised subjects were omitted) and though the Chinese Government has never formally acknowledged that anything except strict adherence to the Costume
Regulations was sufficient to giveAnglo- Chinese a right to British protection, the certificate system in practice
was allowed to work.
0. print Part page 8. and /19239/03.
7. In December 1891 Sir W. Robinson, then Governor
of Hong Kong proposed to issue certificates of birth
for the 4 classes of Anglo-Chinese (omitting naturalised subjects) stating to what they were entitled in China.
The certificate for the natural born subject of im-
migrant parentage declared that the holder had no claim
or right within the Empire of China to British pro- tection. The forms were agreed to by the Foreign Offic
an