Question
of signature. This
will be cowenient in case
It. Kong again was to reverer
changes her mind about Saxation of salt.
bst conson
Glow
6.8.97.11
ल
12/7
J
51
387/11 and para.
It is natural that Sir B.Alston should resent the time of his legation having been wasted, but he goes too far both in ascribing all the blame to the Government of Hong Kong, and in the conclusion which he draws from the whole affair.
It may be true enough, as stated by Sir B.Alston, that the idea of a Customs Convention (or Agreement) originated in Hong Kong: but it originated not with the Government of Hong Kong, but with Mr.Herria, the Commissioner of the Chinese Imperial Maritime .Customs (16121/20). In submitting the draft convention Sir F.Lugard asked for permission to negotiste simultaneously this and the Working Agreement for the Canton Kowloon Railway. The connection between the two is emphasised in Gov/6520/11 and the attitude of the Colony on the subject at that time is shown in Sir F.Lugard's despatch of 13th September 1911 to Peking. This despatch appears to have been overlooked in Sir B. Aldon's précis,which scys "During the following 5 years (after ay 26,1911) no further correspondence on the subject between Hong Kong and the Legation appears in our records but it would seen that for the time being Hong Kong dedided not to proceed with the negotiationa". At that stage it was thought that the Railway Working
A recent was on the point of being signed, and Sir F.Lugard wrote to Peking on 13 h (GU
Clouse 37 with the Schedule D. It was originally intended that the Customs Agreement
regarding
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.