:
1. A meeting was held on 26/10/48 at which the following were present:- Mr. Paskin, Sir Sidney Abrahams, Mr.Sidebotham, Mr. Wallace; Sir Ralph Stevenson, Mr. Scarlett, Mr. Vallat and Mr. Coates of the Foreign Office, Mr.Martyn of the Ministry of Defence and myself.
2. The implications of the Governor's telegram at (293) were discussed and it appeared that both the Foreign Office and the Ministry of Defence had assumed the first two sentences in paragraph 7 of that telegram to refer to the Hong Kong Government's case and the possibility that that case might not prevail with H. M. G. This had been the view first taken in this Department, but on further consideration we had decided that the Governor was talking about H. M. G. 's case and the possibility that this might not prevail with the International Court.
3.
During further discussion it emerged that the Foreign Office departmentally considered that we should not, at least without thinking very carefully, take a friendly power to the International Court. The distinction between this course of action and voluntary arbitration agreed to by both parties was also discussed. Obviously there would not be the same political objections to an agreed arbitration between friends as there might be to one friend taking the other befo e a Court. But it was pointed out that the difficulties of having to submit military experts to cross-examination, etc. would presumably arise just as much before arbitrators as before the International Court.
4. The Foreign Office disclosed in passing that the Chinese had been told that we were taking legal advice, a point not hitherto appreciated in the Colonial Office.
5.
Some consideration was given to the possible
alternative of doing nothing at all so far as Kristom City was concerned although it was realised that this would involve surrendering, at least for the time being, all hope of obtaining compensation for the Canton outrage. The consultate-general compound proposal was also discussed and Sir R. Stevenson indicated that in his view this was still the best solution; he also said that it would not result in our losing any face so far as the Chinese in China were concerned although he knew that the Governor held the opposite view with regard to the Hong Kong Chinese.
6. It was finally agreed that action should now
་
be taken as follows:
(a) Mr. Paskin would send a personaltelegram
to the Governor in order to resolve the ambiguity of paragraph 7 of (293).
(b) The Ministry of Defence would obtain the
Chiefs of Staff's views on whether, taking into account the Law Officers' opinion (including the point that proceedings before the Court would probably involve
cross-