144
2
discussion, Sir Cecil Clementi and Sir Miles Lampson agreed that we did not wish to claim as British subjects Chinese of the first generation, Sir Cecil Clementi making a reservation in regard to those who formally renounced Chinese nationality.
Sir M. Lampson said that our hands were to a certain extent already tied. There was, for instance, the offer of last January to recognise a reasonable Chinese nationality law. Any ex parte decisions on the question would not help us in dealing with it in China, which naturally was his main concern. Our object must now be to try and get some agreement with the Chinese on the subject The Sino-Dutch arrangement had been suggested to Dr. Wellington Koo and he had taken no apparent objection to it. This proposal had never been put to the South. It seemed to him that the first step to take now should be to put it to them at some convenient opportunity. If the South would give all that arrangement covered, well and good; if not, we must try and get as much as we could by agreement. The only doubt in his mind was whom to approach. We were not on speaking terms with Nanking and could not start a discussion with them.
It was ultimately decided that the best course would be to send Mr. Brenan a résumé of this conversation and say that we were in favour of discussion at Canton. The present looked a particularly inopportune moment for it, with Li Chai-sum on his way to Shanghai, and it would accordingly be left to him when to move on the question if at all. Our idea was that he should approach Li or his successor and say that this was a question which caused a good deal of friction which we should like to remove. Any formal arrangement would be very difficult in present circum- stances in China, but we would like, if possible, to make some provisional working arrangement on the question, which might form the basis from which at an opportune moment to advance towards a satisfactory settlement. Li might, and very probably would, decline to discuss the question himself, but he might instruct some subordinate to do so, and Mr. Brenan would then see how far he could carry the matter. The object would be as far as possible to avoid discussion of the Chinese nationality law and to get some provisional arrangement going, preferably on the Sino-Dutch model. It was, however, realised that it would be difficult to prevent the nationality law issue being raised, and, in any case, the question might easily be referred by the Canton authorities to the Nationalist Government, wherever situated. An alternative line of approach would be to endeavour to obtain some arrangement for the semi-automatic issue by the Chinese of renunciation certificates at a small cost, and if these certificates came under discussion, it was hoped that the possibility of this would be explored. Were it possible to secure some reasonable and more or less automatic procedure by which Chinese, who had formally renounced their Chinese nationality in Hong Kong, could obtain Chinese certificates of denationalisation, the problem of our recognising "a reasonable Chinese nationality law" would be in great measure solved.
J. W. O. D.
November 17, 1927.
November 18, 1927.
Enclosure 2 in No. 1.
E. T.
Sir M. Lampson to Acting Consul-General Brenan.
(No. 123.) Sir,
Peking, November 24, 1927. WITH reference to Sir Cecil Clementi's despatch to you, No. 353 of the he 1st October last, I transmit to you herewith copy of a despatch* which I have dressed to His Majesty's Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs recording the cussion that has taken place between his Excellency the Governor of Hong Kong I myself on the subject of the protection in China of British subjects of Chinese
cent.
2. Subject to any further observations you may have to offer, and to the con- rence of the Hong Kong Government, you should, if and when a suitable portunity occurs, endeavour to discuss the question with the Canton authorities on the lines suggested in the enclosure to my despatch to the Foreign Office.
I am, &c.
MILES LAMPSON.
* No. 1.