(1. is
position in the walled city and the intentions of the
Government are set out in the Governor's confidential
1934. The Foreign
33744/34) despatch of 9th January,
Office gave us their views as regards the strength and
and possible grounds of criticism of Hong Kong's claim
to 'expropriate' the owners and dispose of the site of the
walled area. Their conclusion was that the claim was
(Sgd) G.E.J. Gent.
22/7/35.
a strong one but in order to avoid dispute with the
Chinese Government every endeavour should be made,
they suggested, to secure the consent of the Chinese
owners concerned. Very favourable terms have been offered
by the Hong Kong Government and all except a very small
minority of the inhabitants have accepted them. To the
Chinese Government itself a reply was returned by
H.M. Minister that the Governor of Hong Kong was
clearly acting within his rights and no question of breach
of Treaty stipulations was involved.
enclosure to
"
D< $3552/35
Apparently all the residents in Kowloon City
agreed to leave on the favourable conditions offered to
them by the Hong Kong Government except those in four hovels who were obviously being urged to stay by the
Chinese authorities from political motives.
The Chinese Government raised the question of their
jurisdiction over Kowloon City (in a despatch from the
Chinese Special Delegate for Foreign Affairs to
H.H. Consul-General, Canton, dated 29th June, 1935)
stating that "as Kowloon City is Chinese Territory and
has not been leased to Great Britain, the Government
of Hong Kong has not, under any circumstances, the power
to order its residents to move elsewhere", and stating
that they now wished that Chinese officials should be
permitted to resume jurisdiction in Kowloon City. The
/British
Page 55Page 56