CO129-560-17 Kowloon- expropriation of Chinese property 6-1-1937 - 4-9-1937 — Page 3

See (5)+ memut -de it a the '35 file.

P. R.

than is the case with any removal scheme even

in this country.

On the whole I think that as far as

this side of the question is concerned, the

Hong Kong Government will be quite justified in

continuing with the removal. It seems desirable.

on sanitary grounds, and there is always the

danger that if agitation succeeds in holding

up the scheme for long, those concerned will

be encouraged to make unjustifiable demands.

The second objection is on the groună

of Treaty rights. This has been raised by the

Waichiaopu on several occasions (see Nanking

telegram No. 206 (Tour), enclosure to(7) on the

1936 file), but we have carefully avoided any

reference to it in our replies. On the whole

this would seem the most desirable line to

take up.

The matter may quite reasonably be

settled on the basis of "dictates of hygiene".

To raise the question of jurisdiction would be

to invite long and complicated discussions

which, as the Governor remarks in paragraph 4

cf(1) would react most unfavourable on the

present relations between Hong Kong and Canton,

and on Sino-British relations generally. I

do not know exactly what the legal position

is, but from enclosure 4 I judge that it is

not inconsistent with our previous policy,

obotine per ans

slightly pingestio) though Mr. Blackburn's

remark is that "the fact remained that that was

!

the British Government's attitude and there

was no likelihood of their receding from it".

If the Foreign Office is satisfied on this

point,