CO129-331 - Public Offices - 1905 — Page 534

CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案 All AI Reviewed

#

527

waste paper on the ground was stated. I was informed that the Note represented the views of the Viceroy of Canton and local feeling in the matter, and that the Wai Wu Pu could not take on itself the responsibility of refusing to put forward those views. I was invited to state my objections on paper, to furnish the basis for a communication to the Viceroy. This I did in my Note of September 11th.

As Your Lordship will notice, I have asked the Wai Wu Pu to instruct the Viceroy of Canton to negotiate with the representative of the British and Chinese Corporation. In view of His Excellency's attitude, I should have preferred another negotiator, but the Wai Wu Pu have indicated him, and as any arrangement made must be approved by him before it can be concluded, I have, after mature consideration, decided that the best possible course under the circumstances is to endeavour to deal with him directly. I should add that this is also the advice of the Viceroy of Wuchang conveyed privately to me through His Majesty's Consul-General at Hankow.

I have sent copies of this Despatch and enclosures to the Governor of Hongkong.

It may be convenient if I explain that the English text of the Canton-Kowloon Railway Agreement does not accord exactly with the Chinese version of clause 1. The former speaks of "railways from Canton to British Kowloon" while the latter uses the expression "British leased territory of Kowloon". On my mentioning this fact to Mr. C. H. Rose, and observing that it was surely strange that the Corporation on the 28th March, 1899, should have signed an Agreement undertaking to build a line for the Chinese Government partly through territory leased to Great Britain by a Convention dated nine months earlier, he explained to me that at the time of signature, and still less when the agreement was drafted, his principals were ignorant of the Convention in question. The wording of the Chinese version, however, shows that the Chinese negotiator was acquainted with it, and substituted the words above quoted.

Your Lordship will perceive that the first portion of

Edit History

2026-06-24 07:39:35 · NVIDIA / meta/llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct
Live
View comparison
AI Proofread
# 527 waste paper on the ground was stated. I was informed that the Note represented the views of the Viceroy of Canton and local feeling in the matter, and that the Wai Wu Pu could not take on itself the responsibility of refusing to put forward those views. I was invited to state my objections on paper, to furnish the basis for a communication to the Viceroy. This I did in my Note of September 11th. As Your Lordship will notice, I have asked the Wai Wu Pu to instruct the Viceroy of Canton to negotiate with the representative of the British and Chinese Corporation. In view of His Excellency's attitude, I should have preferred another negotiator, but the Wai Wu Pu have indicated him, and as any arrangement made must be approved by him before it can be concluded, I have, after mature consideration, decided that the best possible course under the circumstances is to endeavour to deal with him directly. I should add that this is also the advice of the Viceroy of Wuchang conveyed privately to me through His Majesty's Consul-General at Hankow. I have sent copies of this Despatch and enclosures to the Governor of Hongkong. It may be convenient if I explain that the English text of the Canton-Kowloon Railway Agreement does not accord exactly with the Chinese version of clause 1. The former speaks of "railways from Canton to British Kowloon" while the latter uses the expression "British leased territory of Kowloon". On my mentioning this fact to Mr. C. H. Rose, and observing that it was surely strange that the Corporation on the 28th March, 1899, should have signed an Agreement undertaking to build a line for the Chinese Government partly through territory leased to Great Britain by a Convention dated nine months earlier, he explained to me that at the time of signature, and still less when the agreement was drafted, his principals were ignorant of the Convention in question. The wording of the Chinese version, however, shows that the Chinese negotiator was acquainted with it, and substituted the words above quoted. Your Lordship will perceive that the first portion of
Baseline (Original)
............ 527 waste paper on the grounde stated. I was informed that the Note represented the views of the Viceroy of Canton and local feeling in the matter, and that the Wai Wu Pu could not take on itself the respons- ibility of refusing to put forward those views. I was invited to state my objections on paper, to fur- nish the basis for a communication to the Viceroy. This I did in my Note of September 11th. As Your Lordship will notice I have asked the Wai Wu Pu to instruct the Viceroy of Canton to nego- tiate with the representative of the British and Chinese Corporation. In view of His Excellency's attitude I should have preferred another negotiator, but the Wai Wu Pu have indicated him, and as any ar- rangement made must be approved by him before it can be concluded, I have after mature consideration, decided that the best possible course under the cir- cumstances is to endeavour to deal with him directly. I should add that this is also the advice of the Viceroy of Wuchang conveyed privately to me through His Majesty's Consul-General at Hankow. I have sent copies of this Despatch and enclo- sures to the Governor of Hongkong. It may be convenient if I explain that the Eng- lish text of the Canton-Kowloon Railway Agreement does not accord exactly with the Chinese version of clause 1. The former speaks of "railways from Canton to British Kowloon" while the latter uses the expression "British leased territory of Kowloon". On my mentioning this fact to Mr. C. H. Rose, and ob- serving that it was surely strange that the Corpora- tion on the 28th March, 1899, should have signed an Agreement undertaking to build a line for the Chinese Government partly through territory leased to Great Britain by a Convention dated nine months earlier, he explained to me that at the time of signature, his and still less when the agreement was drafted, principals were ignorant of the Convention in ques- The wording of the Chinese version, however, tion. shows that the Chinese negotiator was acquainted with it, and substituted the words above quoted. Your Lordship will perceive that the first portion of **རམཊྛཱཎ། མགྒ4་
2026-06-24 07:39:35 · Baseline
View content

............

527

waste paper on the grounde stated. I was informed

that the Note represented the views of the Viceroy

of Canton and local feeling in the matter, and that

the Wai Wu Pu could not take on itself the respons-

ibility of refusing to put forward those views. I

was invited to state my objections on paper, to fur-

nish the basis for a communication to the Viceroy.

This I did in my Note of September 11th.

As Your Lordship will notice I have asked the

Wai Wu Pu to instruct the Viceroy of Canton to nego-

tiate with the representative of the British and

Chinese Corporation. In view of His Excellency's

attitude I should have preferred another negotiator,

but the Wai Wu Pu have indicated him, and as any ar-

rangement made must be approved by him before it

can be concluded, I have after mature consideration,

decided that the best possible course under the cir-

cumstances is to endeavour to deal with him directly.

I should add that this is also the advice of the

Viceroy of Wuchang conveyed privately to me through

His Majesty's Consul-General at Hankow.

I have sent copies of this Despatch and enclo-

sures to the Governor of Hongkong.

It may be convenient if I explain that the Eng-

lish text of the Canton-Kowloon Railway Agreement

does not accord exactly with the Chinese version of

clause 1. The former speaks of "railways from

Canton to British Kowloon" while the latter uses the

expression "British leased territory of Kowloon".

On my mentioning this fact to Mr. C. H. Rose, and ob-

serving that it was surely strange that the Corpora-

tion on the 28th March, 1899, should have signed an

Agreement undertaking to build a line for the Chinese

Government partly through territory leased to Great

Britain by a Convention dated nine months earlier,

he explained to me that at the time of signature,

his

and still less when the agreement was drafted,

principals were ignorant of the Convention in ques-

The wording of the Chinese version, however,

tion.

shows that the Chinese negotiator was acquainted

with it, and substituted the words above quoted.

Your Lordship will perceive that the first portion

of

**རམཊྛཱཎ། མགྒ4་

Comments

Approved members can add comments, bookmarks, and private notes.

No comments yet.

Private Research Note

Private notes are available after approval.