CO129-518-1 Chinese Telegraph Office in Hong Kong 28-6-1929 - 3-1-1930 — Page 3

3

argument is that the appointment should be made simply on commercial grounds; what that means, I do not understand. He probably

intends it to mean that the most efficient

man should be appointed. It would be going

a little far to say that commercial appointments

are invariably made on grounds of efficiency

and not of favouritism or nepotism, but I do

not think the Governor would venture to interfere

with an appointment made, say, by the Eastern Telegraph Company, solely on such grounds.

The whole position of the Chinese Telegraph

Office in Hong Kong is obscure to me. The "Agreement" of 1884, a copy of which I have obtained from the Foreign Office (see No. 3) is

merely an agreement between the Eastern Extension Telegraph Company and the Chinese authorities which gives the Hong Kong Government no rights of veto over the appointment of the Chinese Superintendent and I do not understand on what

grounds the Governor contends that his approval

of the appointment is necessary. It would appear that the Chinese have notchallenged his claim that his approval is necessary, but I

should prefer to be quite sure what basis

that claim has, before exercising the right

in the high-handed manner proposed by Sir

C. Clementi. He states that the existence

of the Telegraph Office in Hong Kong is an

Chanes anomaly and is obviously aching for a challenge

to get rid of it completely. I see nothing

anomalous in a commercial department of a

foreign Government being permitted to maintain

the agency in British territory. There must

ageneres

be lots of such recensies maintained

London