CO537-3706 — Page 65

A

indicated, the occasions for exercising juris- diction would, we hope, be rare. We feel that we can scarcely be expected to go to the length of conceding the Chinese claim to jurisdiction, contrary to what we consider to be the proper legal position. Moreover, apart from the legal aspect, it seems to us that the exercise of jurisdiction by the Chinese Government in this. area of some 6 acres which is situated within 20 miles of the borders of Hong Kong would give rise to considerable practical difficulties, and might indeed itself prove to be the cause of incidents which we, and we feel sure,

and we feel sure, the Chinese Government are so anxious to avoid. However, since the Chinese Government apparently consider that the jurisdiction issue must be settled now, whatever its present or future practical importance, there seems to be no alternative but to refer that question to the International Court. We are accordingly prepared to agree to the adoption of that course, much as we regret that two great nations like ours should have to seek a ruling in this manner on a question which has so little practical importance. We should be glad to know whether the Chinese Government agree to such a reference. Pending the decision of the Court, we would propose either (a) to maintain the status quo in the area or (b) to proceed with the proposal for a Garden of Remembrance and we should be prepared to consider any views the Chinese Govern- ment may have on these two alternatives. Under the first alternative the huts which have been re- erected in the area since the 12th January would be allowed to remain and the persons living in them would not be disturbed, but no new huts would

be

ཀ

Page 65Page 66