CO129-495 - Governor Sir Clementi - 1926 [11-12] — Page 398

har

A/M

shower

tamari

сыба

a misafforhaision

Th

16the construction of the Itk Onna.

only apply of

labič

flying

Out-

Itk

using

machine guns Item by

I aircraft

but at Sripping soubo

Siminishes.

but it's importance is

For it is

Lighty

Supping Sombs aiverafé

probable Hat Surfore Suppring

SYL

the tol. Irgain' and also to take photos.

legain some ifia

ws. wish 1674 Jtheir whereabouts and also

Kome

and it seems

$15.

reales

il

Ital ForAM necessary

timate Ashort and. be legitimati

al

Росли

i'm

the event of their Sismgating

Gu

werning signal.

I suggest there form that

we showed lake

the Opportunity Ipamen both A rB.

Притис

Palkaliesbucke

8/1

NB

Jagran regarde for reverde, have

discussed with her. Clutterbuck. we

are

agreed

Mat (k

time

may very likely

come when H... G. will be forced to to the action against Jobate Canton without

Establishing

-

slati

was with Chinas.

du em E

But, as a matter of tacties, & ful sure we shall only harden the F.D. in their view by writing letters pressing abokack fedposition. Our best chanu is to wait until the emergency arises & we shall ta probably be able to carry them with was

авио

من

od

as regards the action to be faher ad hoc, We shall non set them to apres the aboliac (opinition that in com

in Chesanice to

bight Cauthe separa lef

Mr. Ellis.

Sir G.Grindle.

389

of 10/12

On looking at Mr. Clutterbuck's draft A

and re-reading Mr. Malkin's letter I think the latter

is right.

I see that he does not refer to section

4(1), and that sub-section is in fact not in point with regard to the supposed case, in which the pilot

of a Cantonese aeroplane would certainly have no

intention of landing in Hong Kong.

Mr. Malkin does refer to section 4(2)

which requires regulations to be made with regard to

signalling etc. The regulations must (1) designate the officer to make the signals (2) prescribe the

signals to be made, and not until those regulations

are made will it "be lawful" under the Ordinance to

fire on an aeroplane transgressing section 3(2) and

ignoring the signals prescribed under section 4(2);

and it will only be a specially designated officer

who can lawfully conduct firing operations.

The position accordingly is:-

A.

If a Cantonese aeroplane drops bombs on

Hong Kong force may be repelled by force and the

aeroplane may be fired at quite independently of

the Ordinance.

A.

If it merely flies over Hong Kong without

dropping bombs it can only be fired at in accordance

with the regulations made under section 4(2).

There being no aerodrome at present in

Hong Kong there is no occasion for an Order under

section 4(1) but as regulations made under section

4(2) are a totally distinct matter from an Order

made under section 4(1), why not tell the Governor to.

make