oviovni was "anoltlo hoog" taluanoo to uldsholyib bos noitoibeixt sut ni ddod no jalani himona se Jand 7equeq une da in meen bluor $1 ‚adostute usiding yioios exs on enout În 9830

hlow andi sako

mis ajoajava osa. 160 \fsloa 913 ore erom to Ra nokunupp and do amii'tmos J. ni Jlusen ylisusu enoideicoysil. ¿ðilmoidon Isob e vojne og anouit ANG od mo who ti sed duind og hentfont am I .andizmaonoo Isatun ni ada 0.02 egingocen od as on pijl vea el van vlibou ou boouhni anime find money to Jn1900sh -İlenciðun dolge unoqd,anoininu. Iz

mub excuse of ai „J- ,90013 Hon SA AJ JE Jnommeros daicITE red enode revo moicoi'eizį Isina i modnim od navíc LIs go evis d

I

* O* Mom sening to dlstī rod gaininder ellor grilaroiden

12 nd no faol ko boy" 1: SetoT9x9

hbiche' poisalo is”

910. 180.

2.5 (.*)

C O P Y.

See Mr. May's minute of 3rd.

August, 1891, in (IXA).

Govern- -or's Deep-

-atch of 16.4.03

in 1819 /03 C.S.0.

Memorandum.

1.

CO 37662

323

The question under consideration is the amount and

Rec 23 NOV JTJ nature of the protection to be afforded in Chine to Chinese,

children of subjects of the Emperor of China, but born in a

British Colony (Class 3 as they are called). The certificates issu

-ed to these and other Chinese born in a British Colony or

naturalised there, are issued with the object of defining the

exact status of the holder of the certificate, and thus assist-

-ing H. M.'s Consuls in China in the performance of their

duties. This object should be borne in mind, and the protection

to be afforded to these Anglo-Chinese in other parts of the world

should be ignored for the time being; it is a matter of sub- -sidiary importance and one which involves no grave questions of

public policy.

2.

There appear to be two reasons for the attention

drawn to this subject during the last four years. The Colony has

received much more than it asked for or wants, and has been left

no discretion in the use of the gift, whilst His Majesty's

Consuls in China are hostile to the policy of extending pro-

-tection to this class and anticipate that to give them the protection that they are now directed to afford, will give rise to acrimonious disputes with the Chinese Government.

3. What Sir Henry Blake actually asked for in 1903 was discretionary power to protect or assist a deserving Chinese natural born subject of His Majesty whose domicile is in a British Colony and who visits China merely to engage in lawful trade at a treaty port. In a subsequent despatch Sir Henry Blake subsequently included naturalized British subjects, but this suggestion was never pressed. In this latter despatch Sir Henry Blake asked that these persons should be protected while

hamis, deal, engaged in lawful business in a Treaty Port where other British of 26.8.03.

subjects are entitled to trade, and should be entitled to claim the good offices of the Consuls in case of injury to persons or property while in China (outside Treaty Port limits). These words were no doubt used in their exact meaning and to ask a

Consul

Share This Page