CO129-351 - Public Offices - 1908 — Page 768

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

he could not be banished for more than five years and the period of banishment must expire in March next, even if it has not already done so. If it has not, he will get risk a year's imprisonment by going back at once can go back freely in March.

In view, however, of the circumstances as regards Australia, it will be sufficient to warn him when he leaves here.

A copy of the circumstances of his banishment in 1904 the Hong Kong Govt would be fully justified in deporting him at once if he returned and I think they should be told to do so and that he should be warned of this.

The case is not so simple where the Straits is concerned. He never did any harm in the Straits. He could of course be banished under section 3 of the 1888 Ordinance and in view of the man's character I think such action would be perfectly justifiable but think our action in the Sun Yat Sen case (see £12685 and p.p.) makes it rather difficult to do so.

Sun is, I believe, very much the more dangerous person of the two, (I note from the Press that rebels in Southern China are at this moment proclaiming their devotion to his teaching) and we refused to turn him out unless he committed some overt act. See especially Mr Churchill's minutes on 8007 and 7157. If it were not for that case, I would propose giving instructions that he should be banished if he lands and telling him so.

In the circumstances I am not sure that it would not be well for the Minister at Stockholm to try peaceful persuasion, by telling him that, if he tries to stir up trouble, action will be taken.

The Dominions Dept should be asked as to what can be done to prevent his carrying on propaganda in Australia.

I would like to add "to the Colonial Office" but it is not necessary to make any suggestion to the Commonwealth Government.

It must be confidential.

Ju930 C.P.L. 30 at once.

17B 27/7 by H.R. Acting Secretary, Straits M.

1.377 17 Proceed as Proposed.

proposed, and then to Dominions Dept.

Col. Seely 3.7 Ford Crewe Wlt. July 11. 516-07

Edit History

2026-06-06 11:38:35 · NVIDIA / meta/llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct
Live
View comparison
AI Proofread
he could not be banished for more than five years and the period of banishment must expire in March next, even if it has not already done so. If it has not, he will get risk a year's imprisonment by going back at once can go back freely in March. In view, however, of the circumstances as regards Australia, it will be sufficient to warn him when he leaves here. A copy of the circumstances of his banishment in 1904 the Hong Kong Govt would be fully justified in deporting him at once if he returned and I think they should be told to do so and that he should be warned of this. The case is not so simple where the Straits is concerned. He never did any harm in the Straits. He could of course be banished under section 3 of the 1888 Ordinance and in view of the man's character I think such action would be perfectly justifiable but think our action in the Sun Yat Sen case (see £12685 and p.p.) makes it rather difficult to do so. Sun is, I believe, very much the more dangerous person of the two, (I note from the Press that rebels in Southern China are at this moment proclaiming their devotion to his teaching) and we refused to turn him out unless he committed some overt act. See especially Mr Churchill's minutes on 8007 and 7157. If it were not for that case, I would propose giving instructions that he should be banished if he lands and telling him so. In the circumstances I am not sure that it would not be well for the Minister at Stockholm to try peaceful persuasion, by telling him that, if he tries to stir up trouble, action will be taken. The Dominions Dept should be asked as to what can be done to prevent his carrying on propaganda in Australia. I would like to add "to the Colonial Office" but it is not necessary to make any suggestion to the Commonwealth Government. It must be confidential. Ju930 C.P.L. 30 at once. 17B 27/7 by H.R. Acting Secretary, Straits M. 1.377 17 Proceed as Proposed. proposed, and then to Dominions Dept. Col. Seely 3.7 Ford Crewe Wlt. July 11. 516-07
Baseline (Original)
he could not be banished for more than five years and the period of banishment must expire in March next, even if it has not already dene se. If it has net, he will pet risk a year's imprisonment by going back at once can go back freely in March. In view, however, ef tka métiocchecter 7 761 L As & Australia, it will & Eufiment to when he SIV > Lind a copy of circumstances of his banishment in 1904 the Hong Kong Govt would be fully justified in departing him at once if he returned and I think they should be teld te do se and that he should be warned of this. The case is not se simple #pukać where the Straits is cancerned. He never did any barn in the Straits. i He could of course be banished under section 3 of the 1888 Ordinance and in view of the man's character I think such action would be perfectly justifiable but think sur action in the Sun Yat Sen case ( see £12685 and p.p) akes it rather difficult to de so. Sun is, I believs, very much the mere dangerous persen of the twe, (I nete fram the Press that rebels in Southern China are at this moment preclaiming their devetien to his teaching ) and we refused to turn him out unless he committed seme overt act. See especially Mr Churchill's minutes on 8007 and 7157. If it were not for that case, I would propose giving instructions that should be banished Kany if he lands and telling kin se. In the circumstances I am not sure that it would not be well for the Minister at 1.6. Ander. papalis d not say ke propos Straits but it is t mnt natural place Stockholm to try peaceful persuasion, by telling him that, if he tries to stir caps the steach, and The Dominions Dept should be asked as to what can be done to prevent his carrying en prepaganda in Australia. thinose be with like to add "to the Ino with the 7.0 the preour fueral to he laid hom in heitir desah A ho Leus an Io as to make any suggeten to the Common tratton hi frown ment. They ar ham Slips her augh the not thing to ht meches of aut.] J Imaripation Resticiter but. It must be confidential Ju930 C.P.L. 30 at once haben 17B 27/7 bs HR. Ah Jape Straili M. 1.377 17 Procged as Propizod propezed, and then to Dominions Deft. Col. Seely 3.7 Ford Crewe Wlt. July 11. 516-07
2026-06-06 11:38:35 · Baseline
View content

he could not be banished for more than five years and the period of banishment must expire in March next, even if it has not already dene se. If it has net, he will pet risk a year's imprisonment by going back at once can go back freely in March.

In view, however, ef tka métiocchecter

7

761

L

As & Australia, it will & Eufiment to

when he

SIV

>

Lind

a

copy of

circumstances

of his banishment in 1904 the Hong Kong Govt would be fully justified in departing him at once if he returned and I think they should be teld te do se and that he should be warned of this.

The case is not se simple #pukać where the Straits is cancerned. He never did any barn in the Straits. i He could of course be banished under section 3 of the 1888 Ordinance and in view of the man's character I think such action would be perfectly justifiable but think sur action in the Sun Yat Sen case ( see £12685 and p.p)

akes it rather difficult to de so.

Sun is, I believs, very much the mere dangerous persen of the twe, (I nete fram the Press that rebels in Southern China are at this moment preclaiming their devetien to his teaching ) and we refused to turn him out unless he committed seme overt act. See especially Mr Churchill's minutes on 8007 and 7157. If it were not for that case, I would propose giving instructions that should be banished

Kany

if he lands and telling kin se. In the circumstances I am not sure that it would not be well for the Minister at

1.6. Ander. papalis d not say

ke propos

Straits but it is t mnt natural place

Stockholm to try peaceful persuasion, by telling him that, if he tries to stir caps the steach, and

The Dominions Dept should be asked as to what can be done

to prevent his carrying en prepaganda in Australia.

thinose be with

like to add "to the

Ino

with the 7.0

the preour fueral to he laid hom

in heitir desah

A

ho

Leus an

Io as to make any suggeten to the Common tratton

hi

frown ment.

They

ar

ham Slips her augh the

not thing to ht

meches of

aut.] J

Imaripation Resticiter but.

It must be confidential

Ju930 C.P.L. 30

at once

haben

17B

27/7

bs HR. Ah

Jape Straili M.

1.377

17

Procged as Propizod

propezed, and

then to Dominions Deft.

Col. Seely 3.7

Ford Crewe

Wlt. July 11.

516-07

Comments

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

No comments yet.

Private Research Note

Private notes are available after approval.