68
2
[Paper No. C.O.S. 224.]
ENCLOSURE.
PIRACY IN CHINA WATERS.
Report by the Chiefs of Staff Sub-Committee.
AS directed by the Prime Minister, we have examined the attached report by the Oversea Defence Committee relative to the provision by the naval and military authorities of anti-piracy guards for shipping in China waters.
2. On the question of principle, our views of a year ago, stated in paragraph 3 of the attached report, remain unchanged. We are still firmly convinced that no satisfactory action for the protection of vessels against piracy is possible without the whole-hearted co-operation of the shipowners, who must be made to assume full responsibility for the internal protection of their ships.
3. The whole subject of piracy in China waters was so fully dealt with in our report of a year ago (C.I.D. Paper No. 330-C) that in the present paper we propose to limit ourselves to an examination of the conclusions submitted by the Oversea Defence Committee in paragraph 16 of the attached report. We will now consider these seriatim.
4. (a) It is not for the Committee to suggest any modification of the Cabinet decision to withdraw regular naral and military guards on the 31st March. If, however, the continuance of these guards for a further definitely limited period is considered desirable, the Committee propose that it should be subject to the following conditions:-
(i) That the Shipping Companies erolne an efficient scheme and agree to bring it into operation at the earliest possible date, this date to be fixed by the 1st April.
(ii) That the full cost of any naval and military guards supplied after the
31st March be borne by those Shipping Companies which employ them.” We are in complete agreement that it is for the Cabinet alone to decide whether any modification of their decision to withdraw the regular naval and military guards on the 31st March is desirable.
5. We do not, however, agree with the stipulation contained in (a) (i) that the Shipping Companies should evolve the scheme. We consider that no better solution could be found than an elaboration of the existing scheme under which Indian guards, organized under the Inspector-General of Police, Hong Kong, are available. Experience has shown that these guards, if properly employed, accommodated, and supervised, are capable of performing the duties required of them efficiently.
In this connection, we would mention that the Commander-in-Chief, China, reported on the 17th January that the Indian guards on board during the piracy of the "Haiching ' fully justified the reliance which the Douglas Steamship Company put in them, and it does not appear that a British guard of equal numbers could have done more.
Further, we understand that the Colonial Government are quite willing to continue this system. It will, of course, be necessary to make provision for depots of guards at places other than Hong Kong, such as Singapore and Shanghai.
6. We fully agree with the stipulation contained in (a) (ii) above that the full cost of any naval and military guards supplied after the 31st March should be borne by those Shipping Companies which employ them.
7. (b) That any practicable scheme should emanate from the Shipping Companies, but the Committee suggest that, in order to expedite progress, His Majesty's Government might inform the ship owners, both in London and in Hong Kong, that they would be willing to advise them, and to consider favourably any application for the services of retired naval and military officers and other ranks."
If our previous recommendation is unnecessary.
accepted, consideration of conclusion (b)
8. (c) That any organization which is set up should ultimately be independent of the Imperial and Colonial authorities, and that the whole cost, including that of tiating the scheme, should be borne by the Companies in proportion to their demands on it."
As already stated, we consider that the Colonial authorities should continue to assist in the provision of Indian guards, but we fully agree that the whole cost of the elaborated scheme, including that of maintaining the guards when on shore, should be borne by the Companies in proportion to their demands on it.
9
!
CONCLUSIONS.
Our conclusions may be summed up as follows :——
(a) If the continuance of the regular naval and military guards for a further definitely limited period is ordered by the Cabinet, it should be subject to the following conditions:-
(i) That the Shipping Companies agree before the 1st April to accept an elaboration of the present scheme under which Indian guards are made available by the Colonial Police authorities for the internal protection of shipping.
(ii) That any regular guards supplied after the 31st March should be paid
for in full by the Shipping Companies.
(b) We consider that the whole cost of the elaborated scheme, including that of maintaining the Indian guards when not actually employed on board ship, should be borne by the Companies in proportion to their demands on it.
2, Whitehall Gardens, S. W. 1,
March 11, 1930.
(Signed)
G. F. MILNE.
CHARLES E. MADDEN. J. M. SALMOND.
[20772]
B 2
69