37
ment, when attempting in April to occupy the New Territory (as the New Territories were then called), encountered much more ferocious resistance than anticipated. At this juncture, 600 men were sent into the Kowloon Walled City by the Governor-General of Kwangtung and Kwangsi, and the British authorities, convinced that they were there to support the resistance, demanded their withdrawal. The Colonial Office went so far as to threaten starving out the garrison at the City until troops were removed.41 The Chinese, however, claimed that the troops had been sent by special request of the Hong Kong government to preserve order, and though some of the men were withdrawn, by 4th May, 200 were still stationed in the City.42
This prompted the British to take action to attack Shumchun and Kowloon City as punishment for the Governor-General's duplicity in abetting the local resistance. On 16th May, at 3:00 p.m., a force of 300 men consisting of Royal Welsh Fusiliers and 100 Hong Kong Volunteers proceeded to Kowloon and occupied it, apparently meeting little resistance.43 All Chinese civil and military officials were ordered to depart as the British claimed that their continued presence and the retention of Kowloon Walled City in Chinese hands had proven inconsistent to British military requirement. To “legalize” the situation, an Order-in-Council was issued in December, announcing British jurisdiction over the Walled City which was to be administered in the same manner as the rest of the Colony.44 Yet this remained a unilateral revision of the Convention which the Chinese government never recognized.
44
45
46
The Chinese naturally responded bitterly to the development. T'an Chung-lin, the Governor-General, protested vehemently to the court of the undignified manner in which the military officers and soldiers were cast out.45 At Peking, the Tsungli Yamen complained to the British Minister.46 Chinese eagerness to recover jurisdiction at Kowloon is best revealed in the letters from Lo Feng-lu****, Chinese Minister at St. James, to the Foreign Office.Yet, paradoxically, this eagerness was not accompanied by action; no attempt was made by the Chinese to reinstate an administration in the Walled City.
37
ment, when attempting in April to occupy the New Territory (as the New Territories were then called), encountered much more ferocious resistence than anticipated. At this juncture, 600 men were sent into the Kowloon Walled City by the Governor-General of Kwangtung and Kwangsi, and the British authorities, con- vinced that they were there to support the resistance, demanded their withdrawal. The Colonial Office went so far as to threaten starving out the garrison at the City until troops were removed." The Chinese, however, claimed that the troops had been sent by special request of the Hong Kong [sic] government to preserve order, and though some of the men were withdrawn, by 4th May, 200 were still stationed in the City.42
41
to attack Shum-
This prompted the British to take action chun and Kowloon City as punishment for the Governor- General's duplicity in abetting the local resistance. On 16th May, at 3:00 p.m., a force of 300 men consisting of Royal Welsh Fusil- iers and 100 Hong Kong Volunteers proceeded to Kowloon and occupied it, apparently meeting little resistance."3 All Chinese civ- il and military officials were ordered to depart as the British claimed that their continued presence and the retention of Kow- loon Walled City in Chinese hands had proven inconsistent to British military requirement. To “legalize” the situation, an Order-in-Council was issued in December, announcing British jurisdiction over the Walled City which was to be administered in the same manner as the rest of the Colony." Yet this remained a unilateral revision of the Convention which the Chinese govern- ment never recognized.
45
46
44
The Chinese naturally responded bitterly to the development. T'an Chung-lin, the Governor-General, protested vehe- mently to the court of the undignified manner in which the mili- tary officers and soldiers were cast out." At Peking, the Tsungli Yamen complained to the British Minister." Chinese eagerness to recover jurisdiction at Kowloon is best revealed in the letters from Lo Feng-lu ****, Chinese Minister at St. James, to the Foreign
維 Office." Yet, paradoxically, this eagerness was not accompanied by action; no attempt was made by the Chinese to reinstate an administration in the Walled City.
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.