H
COPY.
M. 6899/38.
Mercantile Marine Department,
Board of Trade,
Great George Street,
S.W. 1.
31st March, 1938.
64
Dear Henderson,
Please refer to your official letter (F.3082/4/10) of the
24th March, with which were enclosed copies of telegrams
Nos. 351 and 352 from Tokio about the Japanese blockade of the
area at the mouth of the Canton River.
As regards telegram No. 352, we agree with Seal (see his
letter to you of the 28th March) that we cannot accede to the
Japanese request that we should advise British junks to provide
themselves with distinguishing marks.
Some
We should also much prefer not to act on the Japanese
request, reported in telegram No. 351, that we should advise
British shipping to follow a special route when approaching Hong
Kong from the west across the mouth of the Canton River.
of the arguments against marking apply equally against routing.
For example, a vessel found in the area of the Japanese naval
operations after the issue of advice that another route should
be followed might automatically fall under suspicion, and the
Japanese might claim some justification for interference.
Further, it would seem that any British vessels going to Canton
(as they have the right to do) would have to pass through the
area of naval operations; and if they continue to do so there
does not seem much reason for warning off those going to Hong
Kong.
The only reason which would, in our view, justify the issue
of the suggested advice would be if the British naval authorities
on the spot were of opinion that the number and disposition of
the Japanese naval vessels are such that British vessels should,
in their own interests, avoid passing through the area where
they are operating. The issue of advice to follow the course
suggested by the Japanese would then not involve any acceptance
J.T. Henderson, Esq.,
Foreign Office,
S.W. 1.
/of
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.