2.
31
like the wording of paragraphs 3 (with particular reference
to the word "approval") and 4. He said the title "Chinese
Invoice Officer" was an awkward one, firstly because it was
⚫ very clumsy one in Chinese and secondly because there was
no provision for such an officer in the Chinese regulations,
and he suggested that it would be much better to adopt the
title which had been agreed upon in respect of the officer
who was to perfom similar duties in Bangkok, namely Commer-
ciel agent (Chang Wu #wei Yuan). I seld this would not do
because the lougkong Government attached great importance to
having the officer's duties described in the title by which
he would be known. kr. ang said that the title was surely
of no importance provided his duties were defined but I
replied that that wes not so because the Hongkong Government
were anxious that the title should be such as to describe the
officer's exact duties: a title such as Commercial agent was
very much wider and might lead the public to believe that the
officer's duties were much wider end more ɛmeral then they
were in fact. ve then turned to the discussion of paragraph
3. kr. sang said that he did not like the reference to the
condition that the Chinese Government must obt in the fongkong
Government's "approval before the officer was appointed.
Though that would in effect be the result it did not look well
on paper. Th same thing applied to the reference to his
withdrawal if he became persona non grate. I said that Mr.
To the socast working adopted my Ingram did not attach any special virtue these paragraphs
and he would consider any alternative wording that the Chinese
would like to suggest provided it contained the substance of
the present peragraphs. kr. Wang also esked why it was
necessary/
Page 30Page 31