11/
On the 27th and 29th April 1946 (6) mx Collins Land Surveyor and Mr Wong Con Sexor, Chinese Land Surveyor made an inspection of the boundary stones and found 1 and 2 intact, 3 to 8 displaced und 13 to 20 intact.
12. a joint survey in 1948 re-established boundary stones 3 to 7 and atones BA and 8B either side of the original No 8. Plan 202 (7) at 1:990 gives geographicals for stones 1 to 8, 8A and 6B. This plan is a version of an original signed by both parties in 1948/49. None of the original records of the 1946 joint survey have been found in Hong Kong.
*
13. In 1955 CI&SO produced plans 213 A, B, and C (8) at scale 100' to 1". These plans intersect boundary stones 11, 12, 16 and 20 then visable from the Hong Kong border road. The plans are on an assumed datum and no records exist of the observations made.
14. Plans 202 and 213 A, B and C were used by Dalgliesh in 1968 (9) by CL&SO to produce two 1:10,000 plots (10) of the eastern land boundary. Dalgliesh also used the original DD plane table sheets 40, 64 and 72 surveyed in 1899-1904 and the modern (1960-64) 1:1200 survey sheets 44 NE A and D and 44 SE B. These two plots can be regarded as authoritative for defining the eastern land boundary until further survey records are found. Annex A summaries present knowledge of the demarcation of this section.
PROBLEMS IN DEPICTING THE ROUNDARY AS DEITMITED IN THE CONVENTION AND THE MEMORANDUM
15. No single portion of the international boundary can be depicted with certainty since the proper surveys oalled for in the convention were never made with the exception of the eastern land boundary for which the records are incomplete.
16. The sketch maps attached to the convention and the memorandum are at such a small. scale and are based on such rudimentary surveys that they cannot be used with authority for alignments in any section.
£
17. The eastern square boundary (AB. on attached map) is defined as 114° 30'E on the map attached to the convention and is currently shown in full on all maps. The position of this meridian relative to the land will vary according to the specifications of the survey concerned. Point B is not marked on the ground nor could it be without a joint agreement.
18. The north of Mirs Bay (BC) is defined as following the high water mark in the memorandum. Until recently, when this section has been depicted on restricted DMS products, this section has been omitted by CL&SO, DMS and DOS. This policy was adopted before the Second World War and has been unchallenged by CL&SO, Colonial Secretariat, AD Survey Hong Kong and Far East, FCO and MOD. The only debate, in the 50s and 60s, has been whether or not some sort of note in the margins or in the bay should be adopted to describe the boundary. The reasons for omitting this portion are largely to avoid any possible political overtones but aside from this there are considerable difficulties in knowing the alignment of the high water mark in March 1899 or indeed where the high water mark is today since no accurate surveys exist.
19.
•
The eastern land boundary (CD) is the only section actually demarcated. The depiction on 1882 and 1884 based on this demarcation can be regarded as authoritative and should be followed on all future products.
20. The west land boundary (DEF) is defined in the memorandum as the north bank of the river and is shown in full on all maps. Changes in the course of the river at the western end were accepted in 1967 as justification for changing the boundary alignment in the section EF (11). The alignment of this section given on L882 and L884 can be regarded as authoritative for future products.
;
ย
↓
}
4
F
P
The boundary to the north of Deep Bay (PG) is defined in the memorandu by e waters.....are included". There is no authority for describing this section as Lowing the high water mark as we have done on some maps. As for Mirs Bay this section has been omitted from maps without challenge since before the War. Neither poi f or G can be defined and no accurato surveys of the coast exist. It is there- fore recommended that this section is omitted and that no note on the alignment is incorporated.
22.
The west square boundary (GHI) is defined as the meridian 113° 52' on the mp attached to the convention. The policy of showing this and other sections of the square boundary in full was adopted in the 1950's after much correspondence between Hong Kong, Singapore and UK at government and agency level (11). The map attached to the convention depicts this section as a straight line intersecting the coast of Lantau and the coast of China. As this meridian intersects the China coast much further to the west than shown on the convention map the expedient of depicting a horizontal line from south west point (G) to the intersection with the meridian (H) was adopted as soon as more accurate surveys became available.
23. The 'west Lantau section (IJ) is described in the memorandum only in the phrase that the whole of the island is included". The map attached to the convention does. not show either Peaked Hill or Tao 0.as.separate islands to the west of Lantau and these could therefore be disputed. Because this section has never been properly delimited or domaroated it haa boon omitted from moat mups.
•
The south west square boundary (JK) is not described anywhere and the only authority for depiction is the map attached to the convention. This shows the southern boundary (KA), intersecting the south west square boundary (JK) at the 3 tip of the Soko islands. The present practice of continuing the diagonal boundary from the SW tip of Lantau tangential to the SW tip of the Soko islands to the intersection with the southern boundary was adopted as soon as more accurate surveys became available.
+
25. The southern square boundary (KA) is defined as Latitude 22° 09'N on the map attached to the convention. This section is shown in full on all maps according to the policy adopted in the 1950's (11).
CONCLUSIONS
26. Annex B summarises the delimitation and depiction for each section of the boundary, It is recommended that the boundary on future products follows the depiction of 1882, L884 and L7019. The recent move by Survey 3 against the advice of AD Survey Hong Kong on HKLF Misc 8 (1:25,000 border map) and GSGS 5078 (1:100,000 New Territories Cordon
•Point map) of depicting the boundary with a stipple but no symbol and with a border note to the north of Mirs and Deep Bay should be abandoned until FCO/HK government approval is forthcoming. The note used in Deep Bay is incorrect in its present form and to be consistent we should use the full international boundary symbol and not just the stipple if we use any symbol at all.
.27.
The convention and the memorandum could be used as justification for showing, with a full symbol, the three sections usually omitted, with or without separate nótes of description, but the practice of omitting these sections is of such long standing that to do so now on unclassified products would certainly call attention to the question and this may not be to the liking of the Hong Kong, Chinese or British governments.
28. În view of the new boundary disclaimer then serious consideration must be given to the question of depiction of the three sections but the decision is a political one which must be taken by the FCO in consultation with the Hong Kong government. The government of China does not recognise the 'unequal' treaties establishing Hong Kong and regards Hong Kong as part of China. The few recent small scale maps published in Peking which we have seen do not use an international boundary symbol around Hong Kong but show a special symbol. This 'boundary' is shown as following the middle of Mirs and Deep Bay!
+
*
+
P
SOURCES
(11)
D5/02/A3. Convention 9th June 1898 Peking.
Ratified London 6th August 1898.
(2) D5:35(12). IDWO 1376. Version of map attached to the convention.
(3) D5/U2/A26. Hong Kong Government Gazette 26th August 1899.
19th March 1899.
Includes Memorandum
(4) D5:35(13). IDWO 1427. Version of map attached to memorandum.
(5) Series numbers taken from Geodetic Report. Hong Kong and New Territories to
1974. MR Neighbour April 1974. Geodetic Office MCE(RE). Restricted.
(6) D5/U2/A26. Excepts from CI&30 Boundary file 81/Svy/63. Folios 1 and 1A.
(7) D5:35(81). Plan 202 1948. 1:990. Version of plan nigned by Taai King Tong
and De Villo and Barrow.
(8) D5.35(81). Plans 213 A, B and C 100' 1".
(9) D5/02/A26. Excepta from Cl&50 Boundary file 81/Svy/63. Folio 22. Dalgliesh
Report 29.4.68.
*
(10) 05:35(81), Plot A and plot B. 1:10,000. Anglo Chinese boundary eastern section
Sha Tau Kok to Lin Ma Hung.
$
!
(11) MRLG File 20/2/16. International boundary China Hong Kong.
7
10
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.