M-Stables
Net Major Clauson and Sir M. Nathan See. Should we not alter then": lations as the Admiralty wish & sent them out". Otherwise a mu: set will be sent to
CPA
16. April
Six M. Hattian bitter sce
Please see. approval (o think I had 614/23 some one at the Admiralty & find out exactly what wording they would prefer.c as it is not orchar Clausin
Do you RU 2014. think the modifications I have suggested to the draft regulations in pencil would meet Admiraly approval? They would give some power to the Harbour master to raise objections on special circumstances of time made it undesirable that Foreign war ships should go to the waters they might wish to occupy. Juli (copy Register No.
Sir M. Nathan
1. In para 5 of their letter of 2/2/03 Minute Sheet No. 0 43634/03 15 the Adm. asked that paras 3 & 4 should be removed. I do not think polite wording would render these restrictions more palatable, as the position is, I take it, that they do not wish to have any restrictions over the movements of foreign warships in our waters (however worded) which might serve as a precedent to others.
2. It would be better to avoid addressing directly Regulations in their regulations di
2. I do not see any defence advantage in preventing foreign warships lying in Mirs Bay, Tytam Bay so long as they do not land men. It is better to have them lying there to know they are there, than to find them steaming in there from the blue at dawn. If however there is any objection to foreign warships lying in part of the inner harbour, or where see, there would be plenty of pretexts, navigational, quarantine fishery, for shifting them, without special regulations.
&Nick shor
3. Should not Hongkong adopt the regulation against landing foreign soldiers or sailors recommended in part 3 (with) of CD.C. 186.M? Apart from relieving the Governor of the onus of taking the initiative at a period of strained relations, it could be used to prevent foreign sailors roaming over the shore of Mirs Bay and inlets nearer the defended harbour
4. I would support a regulation: (1) as in preceding paragraph and (2) as in para 2 of proposed regulation in 7139/04. I would hope the searchlight regulation; although it is mentioned in 186 M para?. lukewarmly, Conson hase to bunor for 12-13 I have never done much use in it. We should not stop ships showing lights, and they could not see our defences better at one time than they can by day.
Tor. Lucas HWV 75,000 6--01
I accept the idea. CAL!! 10/5/044
[P.T. Over 180
M-Stables
Net Major Clauson and Sir M. Nathan See. Should we not alter
then": lations as the Admiralty hish & sent them out". Othawire a mu: set will be sent to
CPA
16. April
Six M. Hattian
bitter sce
Please see.
approval
(o think I had
614/23
some one at the Admiralty &
find out exactly what wording they
world prefer.c
as it is not orchar
Clausin
Do you
RU
2014.
think the
modifications I have sufaced
the draft regulations
in pencil wouldt met lidmiraly
would give
News. They would
some power to tu Harbour
mover to raise objections of special circumstances of time made it undesirable
that Foreign
wer shipso should
go to the waters they might with boccupy. Juli
(copy
Register No.
Sir M. Nathan
1. In para 5 of their letter of 2/2/03
Miuute Sheet No.
0 43634/03
15
the Adm. asked that paras 3 & 4 should be removed. I do not think polite wording would render these restriction, more palatable, as ter position is, I take it, that they do not wish to have any restrictions over the movements of foreign warships in our waters (however worded) which might serve as a precedent to other.
Rations in
x. It would be better to avoid
addreverd direelly Agulations.
in their regulations di 2. I do not are any defence advantage
in
warship to
It is better to have
preventing foreign ships lying in Mers Bay, Tytam Bay
so long as they do not land men. there to know they
them lying Steaming
are there, than to find them
in there from the blue at dawn. If however there o any objection to foreign warships bying part of the inner harbour, or
where see, there would be plenty of pretexts, ravijational, quarantine
fishery, for shifting them, without special regulations.
&Nick shor
3.
Should not Hongkong adopt the repolation against landing foreign soldiers or sailors recommended in part 3 (with) of CD.C. 186.M? Apart from relieving the Governor of
the onus of taking
of taking the initiative at a period of strained relations, it could be used to prevent foreign sailors roaming
over the shore of Mirs
Bay and inleto nearer the defended
4. I would
suppret a
harbour
K
regulation: (1)
in
preceding paragraph and (2) as in para 2 of proposed regulation in 7139/04. I would hop the searchlight regulation; although it is mentioned in 186 M para?. bukewarmly,
Conson
hase to bunor for
12-13
I have never dan much wee
in it. We should
the ships woning lights, and they could not are our defences better at one than they cand by day.
Tor. Lucas
HWV 75,000 6--01
I accept the ice? CAL!!
10/5/044
[P.T. Over
180
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.