CO129-521-2 Piracy in Chinese waters- anti-piracy measures 9-1-1930 - 10-4-1930 — Page 67

THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF HIS BRITANNIC MAJESTY'S government.

67

SCRET.

341-C.

Printed for the Committee of Imperial Defence. March 1930.

COMMITTEe of impERIAL DEFENCE.

PIRACY IN CHINA WATERS.

(Previous C.I.D. Paper No. 330-C.)

48

Copy No. 19

NOTE BY THE SECRETARY.

THE Prime Minister desires the Committee of Imperial Defence to take note that at their meeting* on the 12th March, 1930, the Cabinet had before them the following documents regarding piracy in China waters :---

(a) A Memorandumt by the Oversea Defence Committee (Annexure to

Enclosure).

(b) A Report by the Chiefs of Staff Sub-Committee of the Committee of Imperial Defence (Enclosure), in regard to the above Memorandum, the conclusions of which were summed up as follows:-

(I) If the continuance of the regular naval and military guards for a further definitely limited period is ordered by the Cabinet, it should be subject to the following conditions:-

(i) That the Shipping Companies agree before the 1st April to accept an elaboration of the present scheme under which Indian guards are made available by the Colonial Police authorities for the internal protection of shipping;

(ii) That any regular guards supplied after the 31st March should

be paid for in full by the Shipping Companies.

(II) That the whole cost of the elaborated scheme, including that of maintaining the Indian guards when not actually employed on board ship, should be borne by the Companies in proportion to their demands on it.

2. The Cabinet agreed :-

"Subject to the concurrence of the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs (who had not had time to consult his Department in regard to the Report, owing to its having been circulated only on the previous evening), to sanction a further extension of the provision of regular naval and military guards on the conditions suggested by the Chiefs of Staff Sub-Committee, and that in communicating the decision to the shipowners it should be made very clear that there is a definite time limit to the continuance of the extension.”

2, Whitehall Gardens, S.W. 1, March 13, 1930.

(Signed)

M. P. A. HANKEY.

* Cabinet 15 (30) Conclusion 2.

† O.D.C. Memo. 585-M.

Paper No. C.O.S. 224.

[20735] [20772]

B