CO129-507-4 China- anti-piracy precautions- question of compensation to families of British officers killed or wounded 5-10-1928 - 2-1-1929 — Page 46

Copy

(2 0881/43/10)

Dear Mr. Gwatkin,

46

*CET

JOHN #IRI & SOES IAD.

8. Billiter Square,

London, 1.0.2.

85th Getaber, 1988.

Pirasy.

Mr. Robertson has handed me your letter (F_5596/45/10)

af vetober 24th on this subject.

I am afraid we cannot accept the entire anus, which the

Government always seems to be trying to foist on to um, sí

vo pay an excessive taxation, in order that

our own

Their

we may have the use and protection of the various Imperial

services, which include aray and navy, and the Government are

merely trying to evade their duty in making any such suggOS-

tion as that contained in your letter. Furthermore i de sot

see any inconsistency in the shipowners' attitude in

previously getting the Hong Xeng anti-pirney ordinanses

repealed and in now asking for military prstestien .

action was dictated principally by the fact, that the

eré inances

a seans to an end KINË

mezeover tended to make a ship umorkable or fanṛoreas as

#smaercial machine and secondly because the usual attempt

was being made to make them bear the whole brunt of their

own protection. The shipowners have insisted, ever since

pirasy became serious, on the duty of the Government to

provide adequate naval or military protection and theme

farther representations since the "Anking" piracy have rely

been a ssntinuance of that attitude.

quite amelena

Although I as uerzy I canst agree with you, I think

it is just as well to make our attitude quite clear on this

very important question.

8.3.A.Askten-Gwatkin, ##q....

Foreign office,

iq.,

Yours sincerely, (8gd) G.%.3Wire

8.#.1.