My dear Admiral,
Enclosure 2 in No. 1.
Sir M. Lampson to Rear-Admiral Tyrwhitt.
Shanghai, May 26, 1927. WITH reference to our conversation of the 24th May, I would suggest the adoption of procedure somewhat on the following lines in order to avoid a repetition of what happened in connection with the "Lungshan" incident.
Information of an incident having occurred will usually be reported to me by the consular officer concerned, and he will either repeat the telegram to you direct. or it will be repeated to you by the Legation. If the incident appears to me one where retaliatory action is desirable, I will telegraph to you saying so, and it will then be for you to decide whether any action is possible under the Admiralty instructions, and whether you wish it to be taken.
If you agree with the above I do not think we need go out of our way to discourage those on the spot from putting forward suggestions as to the possibility of retaliation-as Brenan did in the case of the Matshed Barracks at Whampoa. With their local knowledge they may be able to suggest something which would not occur to us, and any danger of your hand being forced should now, under the procedure suggested above, be out of the question.
If you concur, I would propose to send circular instructions round to the consuls.
Yours sincerely.
Enclosure 3 in No. 1.
MILES LAMPSON.
Rear-Admiral Tyrwhitt to Sir M. Lampson.
My dear Minister,
May 30, 1927. THANK you very much for your letter of the 26th May regarding the procedure to be adopted in cases of future retaliatory measures. I find your letter a tread on your very difficult one to answer, because it seems to me I am bound to toes," and that is the last thing in the world I want to do. I am therefore going to be absolutely frank with you and rely on you to deal gently with me if I say the wrong thing.
My point it this: Admiralty telegrams Nos. 812 to 815 are instructions from His Majesty's Government (not merely the Admiralty) to me. In other words, mine alone is the responsibility of deciding whether any retaliatory action is to be taken by our armed forces in any part of China, and the nature of such action. That being so, I think that the consuls should report to both you and me, and if a man-of- war is present, the senior naval officer should also report to me after conferring with the consul.
Should it be desirable to take retaliatory action, I would decide on its nature and execution, informing you at once. If I think that no such action should be taken, I would inform you, and it would then be for you to decide what diplomatic action should be taken.
It is obvious that the very closest touch must be maintained between you and me and the consuls, and you will remember that this point was mentioned in the Admiralty telegrams, quite unnecessarily, I thought.
These, frankly, are my views, and I hope you won't think I am trying to butt into your job, but there it is. I would certainly never suggest discouraging the consuls making suggestions as to suitable retaliatory measures. As you say, they have the local knowledge, which we have not. Commanding officers of ships are directed to suggest action in their reports (see my printed memorandum, No. 1040, of the 18th May).
Yours sincerely,
R. Y. TYRWHITT.