This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.
SOUTH-WEST CHINA.
CONFIDENTIAL.
No. 1.
C.O
562
36075
10-0001-06
Consul-General Wilkinson to the Marquess of Lansdowne.---(Received July 11.)
(No. 3.)
Yunnan-fu, March 17, 1904.
My Lord,
I HAVE the honour to forward copy of a Memorandum which I have compiled for the Government of Burmah on the Yünman Railway Agreement, signed at Peking by the French Minister on the 29th October, 1903.
I am sending a copy also to Sir Ernest Satow.
I have, &c. (Signed)
W. H. WILKINSON.
Inclosure 1 in No. 1.
Consul-General Wilkinson to Government of Burmah.
Yunnan-fu, March 13, 1904,
I HAVE the honour to send you a Memorandum on the Franco-Chinese Agreement for the construction of the railway from the Tonquin frontier to Yünnan-fu, signed at Peking on the 29th October, 1903.
The Memorandum consists of:-
1. An abstract, prepared by myself, of the Articles approved.
2. A translation, also made by me, of a Memorial to the Throne by the Wai-wu Pu (the Chinese Foreign Office).
3. A copy of the French text of the Agreement.
The Memorial in question, with its brief Imperial rescript, formed the authority for the signature of the Agreement by the Chinese Plenipotentiary. It is accordingly prefixed to the Articles in the Chinese text, but has, naturally, no place in the French. I have included it in my Memorandum as it is of interest in the history of the negotiations.
I may mention that the Chinese text has been printed at Yünnan-fu, for private circulation only. A specimen was courteously given to me by the Yang-wu Tsung-chu, or Provincial Foreign Department, which Department was also good enough to permit me to peruse and copy one of the four originals of the French text. This last, I should add, is somewhat carelessly written, and to this cause must be set down any errors I may have made in transcribing it.
Reference, it will be observed, is made in the Memorial to a "Special Trade Convention" between France and China, signed in 1887. This instrument does not find a place in "Hertslet's Treaties," for it is not the "Convention Additionnelle" given on p. 202 of his first volume. The clause inserted at the instance of M. Dubail, authorizing the construction of branch lines, appears in the Agreement as Article 11. In the sequel it may prove to be of the greatest consequence.
* The date is wrongly given in the Chinese text: it should be the 21st year of the Kuang-hsü, not the 13th. The reference is to Article 5 of the Franco-Chinese Agreement of June 21, 1895.-W. E. W.
[2062 1-1]