The position taken up by the British Government on the question jof nationality involved in the Shameer: land dispute was explained fon Thursday by Sir James Jamie-ison, H. M. Consul at Canton, when proceedings were continued in the Supreme Court.
Continuing his argument, Mr. Wilkinson said it had never been contemplated that a Crown Tease should be granted to applicants sich as the plaintiff company, which was ''an artificial person of double nationality." If transfer of the lease was sanctioned, there would be thrown upon the Consul-General the responsibility of protecting the bank as against the Chinese authorities across the creek, protecting the staff of the bank and its securities. If the bank did obtain and assume possession of part of the Crown lands and Concession of Shameen there would be conferred upon it n status which might lead to awkward consequent ces; complications would surely ence in the ease of a company which was British in Hongkong, was not recognized as British Shameen, and had the further advantage of double nationality. The action of the defendants Consular officers was quite consistent with the instruct had had ry out the lease. The tr instructions, and also because of the fuct that while the directors of the bank and the majority of its shareholders were undoubtedly British in Hongkong, they were ton the mainland recognized British subjects by their own authorities, and the British consular authorities were, therefore, unable to protect them, Evidence was then culled, Mr. W. S. Cruickshank, assistant surveyor in il. of, Office' of Works, formally proving the Shameen Crown leases of 1861 and 1898, and adding that eases not renewed reverted to the Government. Such reversions would be very valuable.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.