75
British subject, would willingly declare himself to be
Chinese at the very moment when he found himself in the
hands of Chinese Officials who were engaged in extorting
money from him.
There is no doubt whatever that the Bureau's
report on the point is deliberately false. The Bureau
possess no proof of the admission which, they say, was
made by Low Peng Kiah, for he gave no signed statement,
either to the Bureau or to the No. 3 Police Station; and
even if he had done so, a statement signed under duress
would have no validity. On the other hand, I possess
proofs that not only Low Peng Kiah, but also his late
father, Low Cheang Yee, were both born in Singapore and
were both British subjects. Both were granted passports
by the Singapore Government for travelling to China and
both were registered for many years in this Consulate as
British subjects, the local authorities having always
recognized their British nationality and having applied the
Treaties in all matters concerning them.
In these circumstances, the statement of the
Opium Suppression Bureau is valueless.
I need not go to the trouble of rebutting the
other incorrect statements of the Bureau, as quoted in
your letter of the 17th instant, for Low Peng Kiah, being
British, the Bureau have no jurisdiction over him and have
no right to take any action against him except through
this Consulate.
You state that you have reported on the matter to
the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. If, on the unsupported
statement of the Opium Suppression Bureau, you have
reported that Low Peng Kiah is of Chinese nationality,
you have reported what is not a fact, and I request that
you will immediately correct your report
Low Peng Kiah is beyond all doubt a British
subject