386
4. These Committees have been found of much assistance as intermediaries be-- tween the Government and the inhabitants of the New Territory, and have been of assistance in explaining to the villagers the objects of the various measures of Govern ment, which it has been found necessary to introduce from time to time.
5. No Chairmen of Committees have been appointed under Section 5, and I do not propose to make such appointments until experience has shown them to be desirable.
6. No necessity has so far arisen for making rules under Parts IV. and V. 7. No local tribunals have been established under Part VI.
I am of opinion, in which Mr. Stewart Lockhart concurs, that it is doubtful whether it will be advisable at any time to confer upon the District Committees the powers with which the Governor-in-Council can invest them under Part VI. At any rate there is no doubt that it would be unwise at the present time to enforce this part of the Ordinance.
Mr. Hallifax is at present discharging temporarily the duties of Magistrate in the New Territory, which so far have been very alight, and this arrangement is working satisfactorily.
I have, &c.,
HENRY A. BLAKE.
Governor, &c.,
381
Governor of Hong Kong in reply to the last paragraph of the telegram, the draft of which was enclosed in the letter from this Department above referred to.
.*
2. I am to explain that when the letter from this Department of the 21st June last was written, it was assumed that the telegrams, of which copies were enclosed, related to expenses incurred by the Colonial Government of Hong Kong in con- sequence of the occupation of Sham Chun, as well as of the disturbances connected with the taking over of the leased territory. It appears, however, that this assumption was made in error, as the telegram of the 13th June§ (draft of which was forwarded in the letter from this Department of the 9th June) to which those telegrams were in reply, did not specifically refer to the expenses caused by the occupation of Sham Chun, but only to the expenditure which had been or was likely to be incurred in consequence of the resistance of the Chinese to the occupation of the leased territory.
3. As it appears, therefore, from the enclosed statement that no expenditure was incurred by the Colonial Government in consequence of the occupation of Sham Chun, beyond the cost of the telegrams referred to therein, there will be no necessity to consider the question of asking the Imperial Treasury to refund any such expenditure. The military expenditure referred to in this statement will, however, remain a charge upón Army Funds, since the Colony of Hong Kong pays a fixed proportion of its annual revenue as its share of the cost of its defence.
4. A copy of this correspondence has Been forwarded to the War Office.
4971.
I am, &c.,
C. P. LUCAS.
SIR,
No. 298.
ADMIRALTY to COLONIAL OFFICE.
(Received February 15, 1900.)
Admiralty, February 13, 1900. My Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty have had under consideration your letter of 9th January, 150/1900,* forwarding correspondence which has taken place as to the ownership of the foreshore of Mirs Bay and Deep Bay, under the convention between this country and China respecting an extension of the territory of the Colony of Hong Kong (signed at Peking on 9th June, 1898), and enquiring whether, from an Imperial point of view, their Lordships would wish the British claim to the foreshore pressed.
2. My Lords observe that the Law Officers of the Crown consider that the Con- vention gives to Her Majesty the right to the whole foreshore in these bays, and they desire me to request you to state to Mr. Secretary Chamberlain that, in their opinion, the foreshores should be regarded as British, and that the Chinese Government should have no power to grant leases on any portion of them.
3. Whether the question should be raised at the present time is, in their Lord- ships' opinion, a matter of policy on which they are not prepared to offer an opinion, but they consider it essential that there should be no doubt as to the claim of Great Britain to the foreshores, should the question ever arise.
4031.
SIB
No. 300.
COLONIAL OFFICE to FOREIGN OFFICE. [Answered by No. 304.]
Downing Street, February 17, 1900.
WITH reference to your letter of the 13th October last, I relative to an enquiry by the Governor of Hong Kong as to the public buildings evacuated by the Chinese Government in the newly-acquired territory, I am directed by Mr. Secretary Chamber- lain to enclose, for the information of the Marquess of Salisbury, a copy of a despatch** which has been received from Sir Henry Blake, forwarding an estimate of the value of the buildings in question.
2. In view of the fact that public buildings similarly evacuated in the leased terri- tory at Wei-Hai-Wei were taken over by Her Majesty's Government without payment, Mr. Chamberain does not, subject to Lord Salisbury's concurrence, propose that any refund shall be made to the Chinese Government on account of the value of the buildings in the new territory.
I am, &c.,
C. P. LUCAS.
I am, &c.,
EVAN MACGREGOR.
4971.
No. 301.
4032
SIR,
No. 299.
COLONIAL OFFICE to FOREIGN OFFICE.
Downing Street, February 15, 1900. WITH reference to paragraphs 2 and 3 of the letter from this Office of the 21st October last, with regard to the cost of the temporary occupation of the Sham Chun district, I am directed by Mr. Secretary Chamberlain to enclose, for the information of the Marquess of Salisbury, a copy of a despatch which has been received from the
• No. 289.
↑ No. 261.
‡ No. 296.
SIB,
COLONIAL OFFICE to FOREIGN OFFICE. [Answered by No. 302.]
Downing Street, February 23, 1900.
WITH reference to the letter from this Department of the 28th ultimo,tt I am directed by Mr. Secretary Chamberlain to transmit to you, for the consideration of the Marquess of Salisbury, a copy of a letter from the Admiralty on the subject of the British claim to the foreshore of Mirs Bay and Deep Bay.
• No. 270.
No. 187.
** No. 295.
↑ No. 261. No. 184. †† No. 298.
↑ No. 194. No. 256. # No. 298.
638
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
Reference
6
REFERNIC.O. 882
5 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO