122
25
worthy recipients of the privilege of British nationality, the Colonial officials have set themselves an impossible task. It is not possible to pick out from among the large and law-abiding Chinese population of the Straits Settlements, those individuals who would be capable of resisting the temptation to abuse treaty privileges in China which only foreigners were intended to enjoy.
During the last two strenuous years a great change has come over opinion on this subject in Hong Kong and Singapore. It is now recognised that the extreme claims formerly put forward by His Majesty's Govern- ment can no longer be maintained, and both Colonies will probably be well content if some measure of protection-falling short of complete with- Colonial Office, drawal from Chinese jurisdiction-can be secured for Anglo-Chinese June 9, 1927, returning on short visits to China.
38. There are two ways in which the policy suggested in this memorandum may be prevented from attaining its object of removing a source of friction with the Chinese authorities:
(1.) It has hitherto been held that Chinese domiciled in Hong Kong at the time of its cession to the British Crown and their descendants are British subjects only, and do not possess dual nationality. If this is correct and if His Majesty's Govern- ment are bound by this technicality, then it is to be anticipated that, in future, any Chinese inhabitant of Hong Kong who may desire to enjoy immunity from Chinese jurisdiction in China, would have no difficulty in finding a foreign lawyer to draft the necessary affidavit and the requisite number of substantial and respectable sponsors to subscribe it, proving that he or his father had been domiciled in Hong Kong or Kowloon at the time of the cession. There is, however, high legal authority for the view that such individuals have, in fact, a dual nationality, and are not entitled to protection in China. That view has been acted on in at least one notorious case.
(Case of Liang Tou, 1910, Appendix I, case No. 20). It may possibly be open to His Majesty's Government to adopt that legal opinion which consorts best with their policy. The question is further discussed in Appendix IV.
(2.) If Chinese are refused registration and protection in the country of their second nationality it is to be anticipated that they will form themselves into limited liability companies in Hong Kong or elsewhere, and thus own land, carry on trade and run vessels under the British flag in the inland waters of China. Attention is drawn to this question here because it is closely linked with the evils arising out of protection of Anglo-Chinese. For the same
For the same reason two cases have been added to the appendix of cases attached to this memorandum (Appendix I, cases Nos. 32 and 33), the first illustrating the abuse of the flying of the British flag on Chinese- owned vessels, and the second the abuse of registering titles to land, which is not really British-owned, in the British Consulate Land Register. In both cases a wholly spurious British nationality is conferred by the operation of the company laws, and in the latter of the two cases it is White Russians at Harbin who have seized this method of evading Chinese jurisdiction.
J. T. PRATT.
[F 5382/348/10.]
Foreign Office, February 4, 1928.
[16827]
E