CO882-(4-5) — Page 618

256

From Hon. Stewart Lockhart, Tai Po Hu, to His Excellency the Governor.

I have seen no such flags as to which you refer, but there are two flags down with the Hong Kong Regiment at Kowloon, which should be examined. They were taken at the action of Lam Chun pass. Mr. May saw them. A resident of Sham Chun con- firms information already conveyed to you that over 1,000 men from Chinese territory took part in the fighting, and alleged that " Major Fong," who was stationed at Sam Cham, must have known what was going on, and took no step to stop the movement.

This confirms the Chinese letter already forwarded by me from Ping Shan, stating that you are allowed to carry out your settled plan.

257

With regard to the land and other records which are kept at Nam Tau, and to which it will be necessary for us to have access, has any answer been received from the Consul at Canton, who was requested to arrange with the Viceroy? This matter should be settled without delay.

J. H. STEWART Lockhart,

Colonial Secretary.

HON. COLONIAL SECRETARY,

WHAT was the letter at A, and what was done about it!

April 30, 1899.

H. A. BLAKE.

[14.]

Taipo, April 30, 1899.

[15.]

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

Reference :-

mwimmin ། ། ། ། །

C.O. 882

YOUR EXCELLENCY,

We yesterday proceeded by launch with a small party of the Hong Kong Regi- ment to Chik Kang in Long Harbour, and marched to Sai Kung, from which place we returned to Sai Kong.

The country through which we passed, though extremely picturesque, does not appear to be nearly so prosperous as the western portion of the territory. The inhabi- tants are almost entirely Hakkas, and live in small villages, among which little or no combination exists.

I regret to have to report that we were not received with that respect which one has a right to expect, and which, if not shown, ought to be demanded. At one place where we requisitioned for boats, we had very great difficulty in obtaining them, though we told the people they would be paid for the use of them. In fact, had not pressure been applied, we should not have succeeded in obtaining any boats. Again, on reaching Sai Kung we found the people far from respectful, and one person shouted out, "Two Portuguese devils (referring to the interpreters) have brought two red-haired devils here." An attempt was made to seize the person, but he disappeared.

One of the Italian fathers now resident at Sai Kung informed us that two police- men had visited the place the day before, on account of a report made to Bishop Piazzoli. I think it is unfortunate we were not made aware of this report, and the action taken, as we could then have shaped our course accordingly. At any rate, I think the inhabitants of Sai Kung should be called upon to produce the culprit who made such insulting remarks, and, failing such production, that they could have extra police stationed in their town until their behaviour improves.

I have been making inquiries here with regard to the Land Company, but the chief shareholders live in Hong Kong, and can give full information regarding its dealings. I would suggest that the Acting Registrar-General send for Mr. Li Shing, who is, I am informed, the Chairman of the Company and the largest shareholder, and question him. So far as I can ascertain, [no] purchases of land have been made by the Company since the date of the Convention. The Company was started some years ago, when there was a talk of making a railway between Kowloon and Canton. The land bought was, I believe, purchased at prices considerably in advance of the market rate, as it was anticipated that the railway scheme would ultimately enhance the value of land. The scheme, however, fell through. I do not believe for a moment that the people were frightened into selling their land. No complaint has ever reached me or been made to the Chinese Government regarding such sales, which must have been effected in many cases long before it was known that the territory was to be leased to Great Britain. It appears to me that the real fact of the case is that those who resisted the British are bitting[beating] about for an excuse to lessen the gravity of their offence. They com- mence by saying that the leasing of the territory was false, and that the Empress Dowager had ordered resistance. They then carried their story by declaring the leasing of the territory was not really known to the Hong Kong authorities, but was the work of a few adventurers. Now they are trying to attach the blame for their conduct to the Land Company. What the transactions of that Company have been can be easily ascertained by reference to the land records, but I do not think they have caused the recent outbreak of anti-British feeling.

YOUR EXCELLENCY,

Taipo, May 1, 1899.

AMONG the petitioners who came to see me to-day was a man named Ma On Ki, belonging to the Un Iu village. I had information in my possession to the effect that he had sold land to the Company, and there was a rumour that he had been compelled to sell it. I accordingly availed myself of his presence to question him. I enclose a copy of the statement he made before me. If the transaction took place on the 8th moon of last year it cannot be recognised by the Government, in view of the proclama- tion issued informing the people that no sales of land would be recognised if made after the date of the Convention. But you will notice that the seller states he sold the land of his own free will, and no threats were made to induce him to sell it. He also states that the price he received was a fair price, and that he does not wish to buy back the land again. When the land question is being investigated, it will be necessary to have some rule laid down as to how cases like the present are to be dealt with. The Acting Registrar-General might make further enquiries regarding the transaction în question in Hong Kong from the Chairman of the Land Company.

J. H. STEWART LOCKHART,

Ma On Ki states:--

Colonial Secretary.

I am a native of Um In. I have some land there. Last year I sold a piece of land to the Company, the Ion Kong. I sold it in the 8th moon of last year. I gave a deed. was paid 205 dollars. The price was a fair one. I sold the land willingly. No one brought any pressure to bear on me. The transaction has not been registered in the San On Magistrate's office. The piece of land is in Taipo T'an. I do not wish to buy the land back. I sold the land because I wanted the money. No one told me that if I did not sell the land it would be confiscated by the British authorities. The transaction was a perfectly voluntary one.

Statement made before me this 1st day of May, 1899.

HON. COLONIAL SECRETARY,

MA ON KI.

J. H. STEWART LOCKHART,

Colonial Secretary.

May 3, 1899.

I po not see why there should be any interference in such a case as this. Two men of their own free will make a bargain. The only grounds for interference would be a fraudulent statement by the purchaser to induce the seller to part with his property under its value. Our proclamation was intended primarily to apply to land sold by the Chinese Government after date of Convention.

H. A. BLAKE.

K

5 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC-

COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO

258