[This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.]
AFFAIRS OF CHINA.
CONFIDENTIAL.
[21604]
No. 1.
C 0. 27192 [July 10
SECTION 2., 30 JUL 07
538
(No. 230.) Sir,
Sir J. Jordan to Sir Edward Grey.-(Received July 1.)
Peking, May 15, 1907. IN my telegram No. 75 of the 9th instant I had the honour to communicate to you the substance of a note which I had received from the Wai-wu Pu submitting proposals from the Viceroy at Nanking for a Joint Commission to investigate the Shanghae riot case, and I requested your approval to my submitting these proposals to the Judge of His Majesty's Supreme Court and requesting him to consult with His Majesty's Consul-General and report whether he considered that the proposals could be usefully adopted as they stood or in a modified form.
In your reply, telegram No. 49 of the 11th May, you approved my suggested action, but stated that it would be far preferable to eliminate from the proposed inquiry the points referred to under No. 1 of the Chinese Memorandum.
I now have the honour to transmit to you copy of the note from the Wai-wu Pu embodied in my telegram and a copy of a despatch which I have addressed to Sir II. de Sausmarez as a result of your instructions. In this despatch I stated shortly the present condition of the case and your views, and forwarded copies of my Memoranda communicated to the Wai-wu Pu on the 1st January and 8th March, copies of which were inclosed in my despatches No. 18 of the 8th January and No. 133 of the 16th March respectively, as well as a copy of the present proposals. I indicated the attitude adopted by myself in regard to the relevancy of the arrest of Mme. Li and of the Mixed Court fracas to the issue, namely, our claim for damage done during the riots, and pointed out that the Wai-wu Pu declined to dissociate the opening incident from the events which followed. At the same time it appeared to me not impossible that a modification of the present proposals in the sense desired by you might, coming from Sir Havilland as a judicial expression of opinion, carry more weight and be accepted by the Viceroy, who will naturally be guided by his legal adviser. Before concluding my despatch with a request for the Judge's opinion, I stated my view that the Chinese Government, if it has to pay compensation, wishes to justify its action in the eyes of its own people by showing that it only yielded as a result of a full investigation of the circumstances.
46
In this connection I take the opportunity of forwarding to you articles from the South China Daily Journal," which are of interest as setting forth the Chinese view of the whole question.
At my weekly interview with the Ministers of the Wai-wu Pu yesterday I informed them of your views in regard to the points referred to under No. 1, and added that, if they could be eliminated, the remaining proposals seemed to form a suitable basis for an inquiry. I had, however, referred the matter to the Judge of His Majesty's Supreme Court for his opinion, which I would not fail to communicate to their Excellencies when I received it.
The Ministers did not appear to insist on the retention of the objectionable points, provided the principle of an inquiry was accepted by us, and promised to telegraph your views to the Viceroy at Nanking.
I have now informed Sir H. de Sausmarez of the result of my interview.
(Translation.) Sir,
I have, &c. (Signed)
J. N. JORDAN.
Inclosure 1 in No. 1.
Wai-wu Pu to Sir J. Jordan,
May 7, 1907.
WE have telegraphed repeatedly to the Viceroy at Nanking with regard to the joint judicial inquiry into the Mixed Court case at Shanghae, and are now in receipt of a telegram from his Excellency.
[2570 a-2]
B
Page 540T
1