(No.2 on
62869/29)
still be regarded as true
"The solution of Hong Kong's difficulty and the ultimate future of the New Territories would appear both to be matters for negotiation with the Chinese, and until a favourable opportunity for initiating such negotiations has arisen it seems essential to avoid any action which could be construed as an intention on our part to violate our obligations towards China".
In the following year H.M. Ambassador in
China, in his telegram of 8th July, 1929, in giving his
opinion as to our chances of getting the Chinese to
agree to granting us permanent possession of the New
Territories, as part of a bargain for the retrocession
of Weinaiwei,
wrote:-
"I can only record the conviction that the Chinese would never listen to such a proposed bargain. Their whole policy is to regain whatever territory was once Chinese soil. For us to seek now to perpetuate or extend any existing alienation would be not only to invite a rebellion but to concentrate active attention on issues far better left dormant".
In 1931, soon after Sir William Peel had
assumed the Governorship of Hong Kong, he put down his (No.7 in 82770/ views fully in a memorandum dated the 23rd June, 1931.
31.
(Enc. in No.12 on 82770/31)
In the course of it he wrote:-
"It is my considered opinion that not only is Kowloon, but the greater part, if not the whole of the New Territory, absolutely necessary to Hong Kong, both on economic and strategical grounds. I have no hesitation in saying that, if Kowloon were not retained, we might as well surrender Hong Kong itself. I do not like to go quite so far as this as regards the whole of the New Territory, but I would at all events apply the same remark to the greater part of it. The question of water supply and military defence are so important that the question of retaining the whole of this territory on a permanent basis should be explored when a suitable opportunity occurs. This may not happen until China becomes more stabilised than it is today.
I would stress the point that during the past few years considerable money has been invested in land and property, both in Kowloon and the New Territory, by Chinese who undoubtedly have taken this course because, so long as these areas are under British control, greater safety and stability are secured than obtain in China proper. I consider that, if we let either or both of these territories revert to China, we should be deemed by these people to nave failed in our trust in regard to them".
H.M. Ambassador, in commenting on Sir William Peel's memorandum in a despatch to the F.0. of the 5th November, 1951, said that while he substantially agreed
with