-.
|||
HT
2
L--------ı ermine. n
--¶¶¶ ---------------VIHOPAPELERÍIAKIR-Tak
DAN PEJA. PONPON----------ELITESLA Pebek bankbun▬▬▬
He
---------------------------------
++
Saving to
➖➖➖➖➖➖➖ILLDIZALILALIJANI
Madhu VOITZEAN PORN POP-.
---------------------------LITTL➖➖➖NTERIJALIZZI Panerung ku÷NAAHI
Repeat to:-
Saving to:-
Distribution:-
F.E.D.
F.U.S.D.
Copies to:~~
Travel Restrictions.
We are considering reducing the area within
which the Chinese Mission here are now allowed to
travel freely.
2. There would be no administrative difficulty
about adopting a system of direct reciprocity.
Thus we could say that the free limit would extend
for a radius of 20 kilometers with a small extension
to cover Heathrow Airport. We could also arrange
two other "legs" equivalent to the Ming Tombe and
the Great Wall, for example Henley via M.4 and
Oxford via A.40.
3. We do not believe that tightening the restric-
mesa) secute any relaxation tions will de anything sixpa ** to vo ex-the
restrictions imposed on you but there might be some
value in as much direct reciprocity as possible.
Apart from the fact that we can never in practice
/be
(8430) 14.033266 600m 9/46 0.3.B LIA.. Op 163
sure of enforcing any restrictions of
as effectively as do the Chinese, one consideration
which has prevented us taking such action in the
past has been that it might lead to further
restrictions on your Kission (the point made in
your telegram No. 569). I should be grateful for
04
your comments on this and the idea in general.
मऊ
18
NOTHING TO BE WRITTEN IN THIS MARGIN
With the Compliments
of
Mr. S. H. E. BURLEY
Home Office
(Immigration and Nationality Department)
271 High Holborn
London W. C. 1
Our reference:
Your reference:
CONFIDENTIAL HOME
HOME OFFICE
Ma Wi 24 Em
Princeton House, 271 High Holborn, LONDON C.I
Telephone: Chancery 8811, ext.
IMG/66 648/750/2
Dear Denson,
17th August, 1967.
RECEIVED IN ARCHIVES No.31
1 7 AUG 1967
FC 3120
Thank you for sending me a copy of the note of the meeting at the
Foreign Office last week about the Chinese in Britain.
I have only two comments to make. After "complied with" in paragraph
8(b) insert "and any check could not be applied to travallers to
Ireland".
I fear that we may not have succeeded in conveying clearly that while we
know approximately how many Chinese there are registered with the police
we do not know how many Chinese are exempt from registration because of
long residence or other reasons, The enclosed revise of paragraph 15
does this.
You might like to know that at the time of the last count in December
1960 of all Chinese in the country there were 740 liable to continue to
register and 1,342 who immediately thereafter became exempt from
registration; we cannot estimate how many there are now because the
number changes on account of deaths departures, naturalisations and the
arrival of certain close relatives exempt from registration on arrival,
in addition to those who qualify for exemption on account of long
residence.
I am sending copies of this letter and the revise to those who attended
your meeting.
Yours sincerely,
Im Onde
I have annandment.
༼པེ.༤.
SHE Burby
The
J. B. Denson, Esq., 0.B.E. Far Eastern Department Foreign Office
Downing Street, S.W.1.
15/2
CONFIDENTIAL
Ordinary Chinese Citizens in Britain
15. The Home Office explained that there were about 2,500
Chinese in this country with C.P.R. passports and registered
as aliens with the police. This number fluctuated; the police
counted it each year at 31st December. It would be possible to
trace the aliens for a given date but the time involved would
The officer in charge of the Aliens Department
be considerable.
of the Metropolitan Police had estimated that it would take half
his total manpower two days to work through all alien registration
cards in the Metropolitan district in order to sort out the
Chinese. The Home Office would be able to enumerate forthwith
such Chinese in this country if it were really necessary, but
thought that the administrative effort involved was not
worthwhile unless some particular action was contemplated. If it
were desirable to find out how many Chinese were in Britain who
were exempt from registration an order would first be needed
requiring then to re-register with the police.
PC 3/20
FOREIGN CIFIC.
S.V.1.
23
CONFIDENTIAL
10 August, 1967.
I enclose e record of our meeting of 8 August at which we discussed
possible retaliatory mensures against the Chinese in
thà this country. We are reporting the results of the discussion to
Finisters.
I am sending copies of this letter to MacTavish at the Board of Trade
and to Miss Lachlan.
pe
(J. B. Denson)
S. H. E. Burley, Esq.,
Immigration Department,
Home Offios.
CONFIDENT TAY.
pa
•
Mr. de la Mare
CONFIDENTIAL
RECEIVED INU ARCHIVES No.31
1 4 AUG 1967
22
L
FC 3/20
Retaliation against the Chinese in Britain
I attach a record of the meeting I held on 8 August to
discuss retaliation against the Chinese in Britain.
2. I recommend that, at this afternoon's meeting, we should
seek Mr. Rodgers' approval to proceed as follows:
(a) Draft a minute from the Secretary of State to the
Home Secretary saying
(1) we want agreement to grant no new visas to
N.C.N.A. for the moment;
(ii) we want the application for renewal to resi-
dence permission for the one N.C.N.A. man at
present under consideration to be delayed at
least until after the trial of the N.C.N.A.
reporters in Hong Kong;
(iii) we think that the decision not to expel N.C.N.A.
and to put no obstacles in the way of renewing
residence permits must be reconsidered;
(iv) we wish to institute a system of exit visas
for the Chinese and require Home Office co-
operation to work it.
(b) Send a telegram to Peking asking if a reduction of
the Chinese limit in London to 25 miles or less
would have repercussions in Peking.
CONFIDENTIAL
/(c)
CONFIDENTIAL
- 2 -
-
(c) Consider further banning all travel by members
of the Chinese Commercial Office (but not
trading corporations) although I am less snguine
than the Board of Trade that this would have no
effect on trade and cause no resentment amongst
British businessmen.
(d) Write to Customs and Excise asking them to use
administrative harassment against the Chinese
Office.
(e) Take no further action on shipping or locating
all Chinese nationals in this country unless and
until we have definite plans to act against the
latter, which I do not, in any case, think would
be productive.
Jom Jinson
(J. B. Denson) 9 August, 1967
Mr. de la Mate has agrew all the sibove action, Mi Rodget's absence. A
further submission
will be made.
Su supmission of 10 Angoud and
ICHE
lettu to
Mr. Bulley, Hom Borin
CONFIDENTIAL
+
Xr. de la Xare
CONFIDENTIAL
Entert
RECEIVED Ihị
2
ARCH VLS No 31 14 AUG 1967
F23/1/20
Retaliation against the Chinese in Britain
At Er. Rodgers' request I prepared the attached submission
and covering memorandum as background for his talk with the
Home Secretary, with whom he had lunch on Saturday, 5 August.
2. Mr. Rodgers told me that he emphasised to the Home
Secretary, while he realised the latter's strong reluctance
to take new powers to enable us to retaliate against the
Chinese or indeed to exercise his existing powers, that it
was important for us to be in a position to take some action
against the Chinese and to be able to say in public that we
had done ao. For this reason the delay in the grant of visas
to N.C.N.A., the delay in extending residence permits and the
institution of a system of exit visas would be of considerable
value. It would also be useful if we knew the whereabouts of
the 2,500 non-official Chinese nationals in this country,
although there was no immediate intention to suggest action
should be taken against them. Mr. Rodgers gained the impression
that Mr. Jenkins would be sympathetic to proposals for action
within his existing powers though he was still opposed to
throwing out the N.C.N.A. altogether.
3. Mr. Rodgers has agreed that, subject to your views, we
should proceed with discussion at official level on the basis
of the memorandum. I have therefore called a meeting with
representatives of the Home Office and other interested
/Departments
CONFIDENTIAL
CONFIDENTIAL
2
-
Departments at 12 noon tomorrow. I should be glad for your
agreement to proceed on this basis. Mr. Rodgers proposes
to hold a meeting at 5 p.m. on Wednesday, 9 August to discuss
the whole question before a submission is prepared which will
go to the Secretary of State on Friday afternoon.
John Denson
(J. B. Dengon) 7 August, 1967
Agred
Sir my supon Ani
A 9 Angart.
า
مجھے
मधु
1974
CONFIDENTIAL
L
Mr. Rodgers
CONFIDENTIAL.
M
Denson
RECEIVED 'N
ARCHIVES No 31
pe
1 4 AUG 1967
FC3/20
RETALIATION AGAINST THE CHINESE IN BRITAIN
There are four categories of Chinese in this country:
(a) Diplomatic staff of the Office of the Chinese Charge
d'Affaires.
(b) Non-diplomatic staff of that office, who hold
official passports.
(c) Members of Chinese Government organisations: N.C.N.A,
trading corporations and the Bank of China, most of whom
hold official passports.
(d) Non-official Chinese nationale holding ordinary
passports.
2. Any retaliation against categories (a) and (b) which
was not strictly on a par with Chinese practice in Peking
e.g. exit visas and travel restrictions, would probably
result in further harassment of our Mission there. The
ultimate sanction against a person in category (a) is
to declare him persona non grata, and in category (b)
to order him officially to leave the country. Such
/action
action would immediately provoke counter-action by the
Chinese which might end in our Mission being run down to
nothing.
3. Action against category (c) could provoke retaliation
respectively against journalists, businessmen an ech-
nicians and the staff of British banks in China. The two
last are still vulnerable as there are three groups of
technicians and the representatives of two banks in
China. But as Mr. Grey, the only British correspondent, i
already under house arrest some of the arguments against
action to restrict or expel members of N.C.N.A. no
longer apply.
4. Action against category (d) would be unlikely to
influence the Chinese.
5. The type of retaliatory action we might take against
the Chinese in this country can be classified under the
following headings:
(a) N.C.N.A. (b) exit visasă (c) travel restrictions
(a) Customs harassment (e) harassment of shipping (f)
harassment of non-official Chinese nationals.
6 The attached memorandum sets out possible courses of
/action
action under each heading and recommends which course
should be followed. Of the action possible, the most
eful from the point of view of protecting members of
our Mission in Peking would be the institution of a
system of exit visas. After this the most effective and
least damaging course would be action against the N.C.N.A.
7. It is proposed to hold an early meeting at official
level with the Home Office, the Board of Trade and the
Customs and Security Services, to discuss our
recommendations.
John Denson
(J.B.Denson)
5 August 1967.
CONFIDENTIAL
THIS IS A COPY
THE ORIGINAL HAS BEEN RETAINED IN THE DEPARTIJENT UNDER SECTION 3(4) OF
THE PUBLIC RECORDS ACT 1958
REVED W
· No.31
1 AUG 1967
F23/20
Retaliation against the Chinese in Britain
A meeting was held in the Foreign Office on 8 August
to discuss possible action against the Chinese Mission and
nationals in Britain in retaliation for their treatment of
the British Mission and subjects in China. Those present
were:
Mr. Burley and Miss Coates (Home Office)
Mr. MacTavish (Board of Trade)
(9)
2.
Kr. Denson and Mr. Wilson (Foreign Office)
Mr. Denson explained that the Chinese had harassed our
Mission in Peking in a number of ways and were likely to
continue doing so. They had also put the Reuters correspondent
in Peking under house arrest and taken action against a number
of British seamen for alleged "political provocation". There
was a possibility that more serious incidents right occur in
the future. Because of this the Foreign Office wished to take
certain retaliatory action against the Chinese Mission and
Chinese Government organisations in London now and to heve
agreement to take further action in the future if the situation
in China deteriorated. The Foreign Secretary had already exchanget
correspondence with the Home Secretary on this subject. The
Home Secretary expressed doubts about using his powers in
some cases and in other cases had said that he did not have
the necessary power. He had suggested that further discussions
should be held by officials.
CONFIDENTIAL
13.
C
CONFIDENTIAL
2
3. Discussion continued on the following points. The
Foreign Office point of view was the line agreed in the
Memorandum attached to Mr. Denson's submission of 7 August.
N.C.N.A.
4. Mr. Denson said that the Foreign Office wished to continue
refusing visa applications for all N.C.N.A. replacements and
would also like to delay the renewal of residence permite at
least until 21 August when it was thought that the trial of
N.C.N.A. correspondents in Hong Kong now under arrest would
be completed. Thereafter our attitude would depend on Chinese
treatment of the Reuters correspondent in Peking but we thought
that, as a minimum, the N.C.N.A. expatriate staff in London
should be reduced to one by refusing entry visas and renewal
of residence permits, while if the Chinese expelled the
Reuters correspondent we should have the power to expel the
N.C.N.A. in toto.
5.
The Home Office said that:
(a) the Home Secretary was reluctant to use his powers
to expel N.C.N.A. from this country (this had been
explained in the Home Secretary's minute),
(b) they would be similarly reluctant to refuse to
renew residence permits of those who were already
well established in this country (this covered all
the present expatriate members of the N.C.N.A. office)
or even to refuse to grant re-entry visas if these
were applied for before those concerned left this
country;
CONFIDENTIAL
/(c)
CONFIDENTIAL
- 3 -
6.
(c) they were however prepared to hold up approval
for the renewal of the one residence permit at
the moment under consideration until 21 August
when the fate of the N.C.N.A. correspondents in
Hong Kong should be known;
(d) they saw no problem about refusing entry visas
for new members of the N.C.N.A. if necessary.
Hr. Denson said that the Foreign Office understood the
Home Office's difficulties but we might well be under very
strong pressure from Parliament and public opinion if, for
instance, the Chinese expelled the Reuters correspondent or
took more drastic action against him such as e.g. imprisonment.
This was a problem on which we would probably have to ask the
Home Office to reconsider their views.
Exit Visas
7. Mr. Denson said that some system of exit visas for
Chinese officials in this country was essential if we were
to safeguard our own people in China.
8.
The Home Office said that:
(a) they themselves had no powers to impose a system
of exit visas on those travelling on either official
or ordinary passports;
(b) they would, however, be prepared to try to co-operate
if the Foreign Office instituted a system of their
own. The difficulty would be that there was no
sanction whatsoever if the Chinese disregarded this
system. Immigration Officers could not be expected
/to
CONFIDENTIAL
CONFIDENTIAL
- 4·
to prevent Chinese leaving the country by force
if they did not comply with Foreign Office regu-
lations and at times of great pressure it might
even be impossible for Immigration Officers to
check that the system had been complied with.
They would consider further this problem of
control.
Travel Restrictions
9. Kr. Denson explained that the travel notification scheme
was now rigidly enforced. The only journeys we were prepared
to authorise outside the 35-mile limit were for commercial
purposes. The Foreign Office had been told that members of the Bank of
China were disregarding the travel restriction
scheme and we intended to send a note to the Chinese Office
about this. Our Chargé d'Affaires in Peking was, however, not
very happy about the limited nature of our present restrictions
and had suggested that we should now refuse permission for all
journeys by members of the Chinese Commercial Office.
Foreign Office had been reluctant to agree to this because
it might have an adverse effect on trade.
The
10. The Board of Trade said that they thought restrictions
on the Commercial Office alone would not have much effect on
trade providing that members of the Trading Corporations
resident in London were still allowed to travel.
11. The Security Services suggested that the present 35-mile
limit should be further reduced since the limit allowed in
Peking was only 121⁄2 miles.
CONFIDENTIAL
/12.
CONFIDENTIAL
- 5-
12. Mr. Denson said that we were at present producing a
short memorandum on the likely effects on trade with China
of, inter alia, restricting travel by the Commercial Office
in London. We would consider in the light of the conclusions
of this paper whether or not it would be feasible to restrict
travel by members of the Commercial Office. On reducing the
present 35-mile limit we had previously considered that such
action would probably cause further difficulties for our
Mission in Peking and might for instance cause the Chinese
to prevent them travelling to the two places just outside
Peking where they were now allowed to go (the Ming tombs and
the Great Wall). When we had last consulted Peking, their
view was similar to ours but we would consider asking them
again.
13. On sending a note to the Chinese about travel restric-
tions applying to officials of the Bank of China, the Home
Office pointed out that, properly speaking, the Foreign Office
had no right to impose restrictions on those here on ordinary
passports (there were six such people working in the Bank
of China at present together with four others who had ordinary
Chinese passports who had been in this country since before
1949). Mr. Denson said that we would now need to consider
this matter further and decide whether our note could only
refer to those on diplomatic or service passports.
Shipping
14. Mr. Denson explained that the Foreign Office was not
asking for action to be taken against Chinese ships or seamen
at present but there was a possibility that British ships
CONFIDENTIAL
/might
CONFIDENTIAL
.6.
might be impounded in China or further action taken against
British seamen. If this did happen we might wish to take
action against Chinese ships or seamen here. The Foreign
Office understood that it would be possible to do so by
administrative action against Chinese ships (since China
was not a signatory of some of the Safety at Sea Conventions)
or by harassing Chinese seamen through immigration procedures. The Board
of Trade said that very few Chinese ships called at English ports (about
six per year) and, although it might be
necessary to take this action, it was unlikely to be very
effective since the Chinese held so many more cards in this
particular game.
Ordinary Chinese Citizens in Britain
15. The Home Office explained that there were about 2,500
Chinese in this country with C.P.R. passports and registered
as aliens with the police. This number constantly fluctuated
since those who had been in Britain more than a certain time
were exempt from registration. It would be possible to trace all such
people for a given date but the time involved would
be considerable. The officer in charge of the Aliens Depart- ment of the
Metropolitan Police had estimated that it would take half his total
manpower two days to work through all alien registration cards in the
Metropolitan district in order to sort out the Chinese. The Home Office
would be prepared
to enumerate such Chinese residents in this country if it were really
necessary, but thought that the administrative
effort involved was not worthwhile unless some particular
action was contemplated.
/Customs
CONFIDENTIAL
E
CONFIDENTIAL
- 7-
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.