3
Tel. of 8-11-26, flagrad in 20815/26.
absence of any special intimation of the
confidentiality of the matter, Sir C. Clementi
should have known from the nature of the
subject that he should not have consulted
the Hong Kong merchants or the Chinese
Members of his Executive Council. On the
whole, since a Governor of Hong Kong is
expected to be more used to diplomatic methods
than most Governors, I think Sir C. Clementi
should have been aware of this. It must be
remembered as Foreign Office point out that
he was warned in 1926 against disclosing
canfidential information even to his Executive
Council it being specially explained to him
that the practice was objectionable because
it might involve a leakage of the intentions
of His Majesty's Government on a matter of
policy
precisely the same issue as the
present one. (See tel.of 18.11.26 in 20815/26).
It does not appear that any great harm
has been caused by his disclosure; possibly
the Shanghai merchants may have been a little
annoyed on learning that the Hong Kong
merchants had information in advance of theirs.
(It may be pointed out that business interests
in London, having connections with China, were
not consulted at all). The Foreign Office
also feared that there might be some risk of
disclosure by the Chinese Members of the
Executive Council to Chinese friends through
whom some hint of our intention might have
reached the Chinese Government. So far as we
are aware, nothing of the sort happened. On
the