193
193.
3. It would not appear necessary to give formal
notice to the Belgian and Swiss Governments that, in the case of
exports from those countries, the production of a "through
contract" will be required. It is not entirely clear to
Sir Samuel Hoare whether the Hong Kong authorities have as yet
endeavoured to apply this test; for in paragraph 3 of his despatch
93. J/T/E:CA of the 14th June last the Officer Administering the
95
Government of Hong Kong stated: "In the meantime, the ruling
"of the Foreign Office" (to the effect that the test would
be justified) has been noted for guidance."
whereas, in his
telegram No. 171 of the 18th July he enquired whether the
criterion of a "through contract" was to be adopted in all cases.
Now that a favourable reply has been received from the United
Sn W. States Government, Sir Samuel Hoare would suggest that .
Southorn be instructed to the following effect. After a certain
date, arms exported from those countries which have instituted
the licence system will only be afforded "in transit" facilities
upon the production of a copy of the licence issued in the
country of origin for export to China; in the case of Belgium
and Switzerland "in transit" facilities will only be afforded
upon production of a copy of a "through contract" or a through
Bill of Lading. It will be appropriate in this connexion, and
Sutt. with particular reference to Southorn's enquiries, to define
more closely the nature of the contract to be accepted as
evidence of "in transit" status. Sir Samuel Hoare is advised
that any contract for the supply of arms may be so accepted,
provided that it is a direct contract made between some person
or firm in the exporting country, and some person, firm, or
organisation in China, whether or not these persons are acting
simply as agents for the original suppliers or for the ultimate
purchasers.
Southorn further raises the question of Hong
Kong's obligations under the Barcelona Convention and
atatute