- 2 -
British subjects not falling within the classes indicated
should be refused on the grounds that any considerable
migration of labour would aggravate the situation as regards
unemployment in the territory of destination.
3.
If however, as stated in the Home Office letter
of 23rd February, 1938, enclosed with Mr. Ormsby-Gore's
despatch under reference, there is no power to refuse entry to the United Kingdom to British subjects who are in
possession of conclusive evidence of their British nationality,
it would appear that British Chinese of the labouring classes would have a claim to the issue of some document of travel,
short of a full passport, enabling them to travel to the United Kingdom. In order to discourage such a tendency, should it come into existence, it would be possible to require an applicant who had proved his national status to shew, in addition, that he had been engaged for definite and assured employment in the United Kingdom by substantial employers, who could be called on to repatriate him to Hong Kong if necessary, and that he was in possession of adequate means to support himself on arrival in England and until he took up his employment there. The verification of such particulars would of course involve prior reference to you in each case.
4. The issue of passports or travel documents is at the discretion of the Crown and therefore not properly the subject of regulation by a Colonial Government but a matter which should be governed by instructions from the Imperial Authorities. It would appear, therefore, that the attachment in Hong Kong of any special conditions to the issue of travel documents for the United Kingdom to Chinese of the labouring classes e.g. laundrymen, who possess British nationality, or even the total prohibition of the issue of such documents to such Chinese, should be the subject of definite instructions
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.