CO537-3705 — Page 47

f

of China", and our legal positio

wsa then oxamined with the conclusion that from the point of view of jurbaiction we were not on very strong ground but the a prescriptive right had been established for the exercice of British jurisdiction in the city of Kowloon in as much as the Chinese Government having tacitly acquiesced for over thirty years could not now say that we were not rightly there, or, alternatively, that the exercise of Chinese jurisdiction was still inconsistent with the military requirements for the defence of Hong Kong at leid down in the Convention of 1898.

The matter continued to be the subject or disputa throughout 1935, 1936 and the first half of 1937, the Chinese maintaining their attitude on the jurislictional issue while we argued for the most part that the clearance of the area in question was necessary on the grounds of public health and civic amenities. on the outbrank of hostilities between China and Japans in July 1937, the matter went into abeyance where it ruined until the present time.

2.

RAINA DAV PLOEK NAA

In recent weoke agitation has been artifically stimulated by Chinese clements with the obvious purpose of reviving the question of juridiction over the walled city. Though the reason for rviving this question at this particular juncture is as yet obscure, the agitation gave rise to incident?' over the eviction of aquatters from the Bite of the walled city by the Hong Kong ministration as normal precaution against Fire and disease.

a

Initially on the 6th January, 1946 the Chinese Gevemi- ment made e formal protest t

1 His Majesty's baony against the evictions in the course of which the question of jurin- diction was not raised. By January th their attitude had hardened und His Majesty's Ambassador received a memorandumD which painted on exaggerated picture of proteats disregarded and of Chinese evicted from humble dwellings by large detach- mento of police, and requested lis Zajesty's Government to prevent the Hong Kong Government from continuing their oyletion meesures and immediately to order the relcase of tho arrested, the cessation of further arresta s of proper accommodation for thore dispo830:18) sought to justify this attitude on the ground

Chinese Government have never relinquished th ov r Kowloon walled city, and concluded with paragraph:

provision

"The Ministry of Foreign Affairs now Te declere to the British Embassy that in achi the provisions of the said Convention, thế Government enjoya jurisdiction over the CRY and that they have no intention the tace¥.. thie jurisdiction. The Chinese Government are cul unable to consider as legitimate any modeures in br of the Convention of 1898 respecting an extension of Hong Kong territory adopted by the British Dov reach oithr in the past or in the future. Should the Br Government hove a different interpretion of the se Convention, they should seek an equitable and legiti settlement through the usual diplomatic channels",

The Chinese ̈ress simultaneously took up the sam or argument and began assiduously to fan the spark of British fooling with every propaganda device.

From

conver