(This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.]
322
4
The last paragraph seems unnecessary, especially as torture never has been permitted in the Mixed Court.
8. In place of the words "any refusal to obey their lawful summons or order," I would suggest "any wilful disrespect to the Court, that is to the Magistrate or to the Assessor, or any unprofessional conduct." This appears preferable, and if these words could be inserted they would go to include the Assessor in the Court, a point that has sometimes been disputed by recalcitrant attorneys.
9. In place of " equity," I would suggest "equitable dealing," or better, in place of "commercial customs and equity," "by the law, merchant, and local customs of trade, and, failing these, by natural justice and equitable dealing." It would be well to avoid the word "equity" standing alone, or it may be argued some day that the expression meant the equity doctrine of English or United States' law.
11. After "regulations" the words "and practice of" would strengthen the rule in our interest. It would legalize practice past, and, by analogy, future.
Several of these proposed changes could be made in the English version with scarcely any variation in the Chinese text. Yet the English version will in fact tend to govern the practice of the Court, because it is accessible to the Bar and the public; and some of the changes are really radical, e.g., "law merchant" is an old term of convenient elasticity which conveys the idea of international mercantile custom-exactly what the Mixed Court has often to apply.
I am sending a copy of this Memorandum to the Foreign Office.
(Signed) F. S. A. BOURNE,
Supreme Court, December 10, 1906.
0
Acting Judge.
AFFAIRS OF CHINA.
CONFIDENTIAL,
[3113]
Sir,
No. 1.
[January 28.]
SECTION-2--
C.O
7655
Sir J. Jordan to Sir Edward Grey.-(Received January 28, 1907.)]RE
(No. 527.)
Rer 28 FEE 07 Peking, December 12, 1906. WITH reference to my despatch No. 405 of the 12th October, I have the honour to inclose copies of a despatch and letter received from His Majesty's Consul at Nanking reporting interviews which he has had with the Viceroy Tuan-fang on the subject of the Shanghae riots of December 1905.
His Excellency made it plain to Mr. Ker that he was not inclined to hasten a settlement, and this disposition to delay, together with his specious interpretation of the understanding in regard to compensation, obliged me to bring the matter up again at the Wai-wu Pu on the 4th December. As their Excellencies seemed to take the same quibbling view of this point as the Viceroy, I brought to their notice Mr. Carnegie's note to Prince Ching of the 14th August (inclosed in No. 356 of the 22nd August to you), which stated the facts connected with it quite clearly, and which had remained without an answer. A long argument followed, and eventually their Excellencies consented to telegraph to the Viceroy to send his deputies to Shanghae without further delay.
Yesterday I was informed at the Wai-wu Pu by the Grand Secretary Ch'ü Hung-chi that an answer had been received from the Viceroy urging his difficulties in much the same language as that used to Mr. Ker, and objecting to being hurried into sending deputies to Shanghae carlier than he thought proper. I took exception to this attitude, pointed out that I had talked the matter over thoroughly with his Excellency on two occasions before his departure from Peking for his post, and again pressed strongly for definite instructions to be sent to him to carry out the undertaking of June last.
The Grand Secretary began by making the, nowadays, stereotyped defence that neither the Central Government nor the Wai-wu Pu had the power to compel the Viceroy to send the deputies. Then he said that he personally was very anxious to hasten a settlement, seeing that his fellow-provincial and friend Yuan Taotai was suffering a deprivation of post by the delay, but that it was in his judgment not possible to move quickly. The case was susceptible of arrangement, and it would be settled eventually, though he was not prepared to say how soon. In the end he agreed to telegraph again to the Viceroy, recommending the dispatch of the deputies to Shanghae as quickly as possible, but I have little hope that these instructions will produce any greater effect than those which preceded them.
I have, &c. (Signed)
J. N. JORDAN.
4
Inclosure 1 in No. 1.
(No. 14.) Sir,
Consul Ker to Sir J. Jordan.
Nanking, November 22, 1906. IN accordance with the instructions contained in your despatch No. 4 of the 19th October, I took the opportunity of my first visit to the new Viceroy Tuan-fang, on the 4th instant, to inquire whether deputies would soon be sent to Shanghae to discuss the settlement of the claims arising from the riots of December last. His Excellency replied that he had not yet had time to look into the matter, but would give it his early attention. A week later I asked the Viceroy to appoint a day for an interview, and he invited me to wait until after the autumn manoeuvres of the local troops, which he had to attend on the 18th, 19th, and 20th instant.
I had
I accordingly called on his Excellency by appointment yesterday afternoon. in the meantime received your telegram of the 20th instant, inquiring if the Viceroy had taken any action in the matter, and I began by informing him of this and asking how I should reply.
[2310 ee-1
-2]