8
on
42770/30
116
regularising the position into which we have long been
drifting. As regards the children of denationalised
Chinese, their status in China would depend on the
interpretation of the relevant provisions of the Chinese Nationality Law and steps could be taken to obtain an
authority ruling from the Chinese Government on this point (see Mr.Henderson's telegram No.103 of March
29th, 1930, on which no action was taken at the time because the negotiations were not resumed).
15. If it is decided to send me instructions on the
above lines, consideration will no doubt be given to
various points which will arise in connexion therewith, such as, whether or not consular registration under the
Order-in-Council of non-denationalised Anglo-Chinese
is to continue, and, if so, the extent to which such
registration is compatible with denial of jurisdiction,
whether in these circumstances such registration should
be compulsory or voluntary, and the precise extent to
which we should in practice afford or withhold protection
in China, e.g. whether we should refrain entirely from taking jurisdiction over such individuals in China,
or whether, we should protect and claim jurisdiction
over them but only in circumstances where and insofar
as such claims are not challenged by the Chinese
Authorities. I should myself be in favour of making a
clean cut and, apart from the offer of good offices,
treating Anglo-Chinese who are not formally denationalised
in all respects as Chinese citizens in China. The
question of the registration of births (and deaths) of
British subjects of Chinese race in China, being a
statutory duty unconnected with questions of protection
and jurisdiction, would not, I understand, be affected
in