}
- 2 -
Lamps D
ཅི་ཊ་
.P
Japanese landing in British territory of armed Japanese
was contrary to the provisions of the local municipal
law (vide attached copy of Notification No.75 in the
Hong Kong Government Gazette of the 5th of February
1937, the contents of which were communicated to the
Japanese Consul-General last February). The alleged
stealing of the chickens of villagers in British
territory would constitute a criminal act of banditry
unjustifiable by any law: I see no reason to disbelieve
the story and I consider that the owners should receive full compensation.
3.
It has been suggested that the use of these
waters by vessels belonging to the Chinese Maritime Customs Service is a course of action of a provocative nature in view of the present hostilities in neighbouring waters. Undoubtedly, as the episode under discussion shows, it is liable to lead to the occurrence of an international "incident". On the other hand in my view it would be an unfriendly act to deprive Chinese Customs vessels at this juncture of the privilege which they have always enjoyed of free passage through the waters of the Colony. Moreover, I do not hold that the right to prohibit their passage lies with me. As you are aware the Convention between Great Britain and China which was signed at Peking on June 9th, 1898, specifically declared that "The area leased to Great Britain,
includes the waters of Mirs Bay and Deep Bay, but it is agreed that Chinese vessels of war, whether neutral or otherwise, shall retain the right to use those waters". Apart from other present considerations affecting neutrality locally these
Chinese Customs cruisers, despite their name, are not