CO129-503-2 Tenure of new territories in view of Chinese situation 19-1-1927 - 8-8-1928 — Page 11

A

Jam afraid this is bound

to be a

BHE

ov

Of course His Majesty's present

Government cannot legally-bind its successors

in such a matter, but if leases for 75 years

the

continue to be issued Government of the day

will (whether any such assurances have been given or not) find itself obliged to insist

on the safeguarding of the lessees when and if

the New Territories are given back to China,

unless it prefers the alternative of paying

Evicted compensation to any lessee who is 2 victim

A

by the Chinese authorities before the expira-

tion of the term purporting to have been

granted by his lease.

I confess that I cannot think of any

expedient which will successfully camouflage

the question of the future fate of the New

Territories. It is impossible to grant leases

in such terms as will at the same time lead

(i) China to infer that we mean to give up

the Territories in accordance with the

Agreement of 1898, and (ii) the lessees to

infer that we shall retain them.

A lease for the unexpired period,

etc., would produce the first result but not

the second, and a lease for 75 years would

produce the second result but not the first.

The only sort of legal compromise between those

two leases that I can suggest would be a lease

for the unexpired period, plus so many years

as will make up a total of 75 years in the

event of H.M. retaining the New Territories

after 1997. But this would probably provoke

immediate