CO129-544-14 Proposed public park in Kowloon- question of Chinese jurisdiction in city area 9-8-1933 - 9-8-1933 — Page 6

6

precedents to show that displacement of the

inhabitents with proper compensation for the

purpose of constructing public works has not

been hitherto regarded as an infringement of the

letter or the spirit of the Convention.

I would reply to the Foreign Office

that it is observed that the Acting Consul

General has asked the Governor for his observa-

tions on a protest by the Provincial authority

at Canton which appears to be based on the

special provision for Kowloon City contained

in the third paragraph of the Convention of

1898: refer to the Foreign Office Note to the

Chinese Minister of 30th May, 1899, and say that

as far as the Secretary of State is aware there

has been no question since that date of with- drawing from the policy then adopted, and that the Governor no doubt assumed in the reply which

1 he gave to Sir M. Lampson as reported in No.

that the protest of the Nanking Government was

based on the same provision in the Convention.

Add that it appears possible to the

Secretary of State that the Chinese may base a claim to protest on the ground of infringement of

the understanding contained in the sixth

paragraph of the Convention, which relates to the leased territory in general, but that since other

works of a public character involving a

disturbance of villagers with proper compensa-

tion e.g. the large scheme of water conservation in the Shing Mun Valley in the New Territories

are being and have in the past been undertaken without any similar protest from the Chinese

authorities the Secretary of State is not of

the