232
Confidesp.of 17 Jan./02 on
1414/02
see para.10
r this memo.
€9166/01
bara.3
Letter of 6.1.02
5.0./1414/02 10/1/02
replied that Sir H.Blake was correct in his assumption
Our reply rested on the fact quoted by Foreign Office "that the Chinese Government had accepted 113° 52' as
»
X
the boundary and if the Foreign Office ever informed
the Chinese of the difficulty etc. the matter is settled.
If they did not, we shall have to mention this case.
15. (2)
Ioes the lease of the islands included in
the limits of the leased territory include territorial
rights over the waters within the three mile limit of the islands?
We consulted Foreign Office pointing out that the
Law Officers in another connexion had stated that the
leased territory became British territory.
The Foreign Office concurred in our proposal
to reply that His Majesty had the usual territorial
rights, and added that the treaty of Tientsin allowed
His Majesty's ships to pursue pirates withir Chinese
dominions etc. The Governor was informed accordingly.
16. The Law Officers' opinion quoted above will
be found on page 307 of Eastern 66 and another Law Officers' opinion bearing on the same point appears on
page 344 of the same print. Therefore in the view of His Majesty's Government His Majesty has full territorial rights. As Sir F.Lugard says this view has never been
accepted by China, to whose notice in fact it has not
been brought. It does not however appear necessary to
amend the map as suggested by the Governor.
Sir R.
Finlay, in another connexion, advised that the map should
X
ee minutes and letter to P.0. of *6/1/00 on 1332/00
show the extreme limits of British territory or of the
territory which this country may legitimately claim.
I
Il may
it won the their attorney.
JR.
be Sir R.Webdes:
assume
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.