OMPANY
103
Je67647/25+6.6.
of more recent piracies (But see flagged
enclosures to No. 66 in 300160/27 as to the
recent "banditry" of some of Chen's followers).
It seems, therefore, purely of historical interest,
and in view of the complete lack of direct evidence,
there appears to be no point in pursuing this matter, although Sir V .Wellesley's letter suggests
that this was the main object of the Foreign office.
sending the Memorandum to us. Of course, what
they really mean to say is that Hong Kong was very foolish ever to consider supporting such a rascal as Chen Chiung-ning •
(3) Commander Faure further suggests that "Hong Kong" was very much at fault in supporting Chen Ching-ming. The Memorandum is very confused on this point, but could certainly be read to mean that it was the policy of the Hong Kong Government which was at fault, and it was with this in mind
that we sent it out to Hong Kong. However, ho direct accusation is made against the Government, and it is quite possible that Sir. V. Wellesley is correct in assuming that Commander Faure is only referring to the unofficial community in Hong Kong. It is, of course, undeniable that the sympathies of Hong Kong both official and unofficial were with Chen Chiung-ming, and the unofficials probably gave practical assistance as well as sympathy.
The case of the S/s "Hav" is quoted.
This was the incident in which arms were run into
Canton for the merchant volunteers, an organisation of Canton merchants, more or less pro-Chen Chiung- ming and anti-Sun Yat-Sen, and which appears to
have