315
2
Commission. Mr. Liang, however, reverted to the question in an after-dinner conversation at the Legation on the 24th March, and explained to Mr. Mackenzie King the difficulties he experienced in coming to an immediate decision. The substance of what passed on this occasion and of subsequent informal interviews is recorded in Mr. Mackenzie King's final Memorandum, copy of which is likewise enclosed. It was evidently felt that the question was too large a one to be fully considered and decided in the limited time covered by Mr. Mackenzie King's visit, and it was thought advisable to postpone its further discussion until the Consul- General, whom the Chinese Government are sending to Canada, reached Ottawa. This decision was communicated to me in a letter of the 28th March, copies of which and of Mr. Mackenzie King's acknowledgement to Mr. Liang are inclosed, and there the matter rests for the present.
Although no final agreement has been reached, Mr. Mackenzie King's visit has produced an excellent effect by putting the immigration question in a far bettor position than it previously occupied. The Chinese Government are now fully aware of Canada's difficulties, of her anxiety to meet them in the way least calculated to offend Chinese susceptibilities, and if, for reasons of their own, they find that the friendly offer which has been made to them cannot be accepted, they must at least recognize the sincerity of the effort that was made to come to an understanding. The question was a new one to them, so far as Canada is concerned, and it is only natural that they should desire to have reports from their Consuls before committing themselves to any definite course of action.
Apart from the immediate object he had in view, Mr. Mackenzie King has done good work in placing Canada, for the first time, in direct official communication with China, and I cannot conclude this despatch without recording my belief that both the Imperial Government and the Government of the Dominion were fortunate in having such an able and sympathetic representative to perform the task.
I have, &c.
(Signed) J. N. JORDAN.
Inclosure 1 in No. 1.
Interview between Acting President of Wai-wu Pu and Mr. Mackenzie King, March 17, 1909.
THE third interview with his Excellency Liang Tun-yen took place at the Wai-wu Pu on the afternoon of the 17th March. Mr. Liang was accompanied by two Secretaries. Sir John Jordan and I were accompanied by Mr. Campbell and Mr. Giddens. Mr. Liang began the conversation by intimating that he had not yet received word from Lord Lee (the Chinese Minister at London) with whom he had communicated, but had received a reply from his Excellency Wu Ting Fang (the Chinese Minister at Washington). Mr. Wu Ting Fang thought China might volun- tarily restrict. Mr. Liang then said: "I think we might make an agreement similar to that which you have with Japan. The Wai-wu Pu might issue a certain number of passports." I asked if a certain number were agreed upon would China issue only that number in a year; also whether the passports might be indorsed (vised) by à British Consul or other accredited Representative. Mr. Liang replied affirmatively to both questions, and then asked if passports would be required for students and gentlemen, I replied that they would be necessary as a means of identification. Mr. Liang then said that passports were not demanded in England or France, that if the practice of issuing passports were once adopted and became a precedent they would be demanded everywhere. He thought that because the United States had started the practice Canada wished to follow her example, and that soon every country would be making a similar demand. I explained that the situation was different in the case of the United States and Canada, from what it was in France or England; that the latter countries had not an immigration problem to consider; it was not necessary that they should be able to distinguish the restricted from other classes. Sir John pointed out that, as a matter of fact many Chinese going to England did apply at the British: Legation to have their passports indorsed. Mr. Liang thought that this was because they knew of the United States' requirements and thought England might have a like requirement.
1 asked again as to contract labour, saying that I regarded it as agreed that
3
contract labourers were not to be allowed to come, that I understood China did not want to encourage labourers going abroad under contract. Mr. Liang explained the reason of this, and difficulties China was having at the moment in the matter of contract labourers, and concurred that the emigration of labour under contract was not to be allowed, adding voluntarily," without the consent of the two Governments (the Chinese and Canadian). As to labour other than such as was under contract, he agreed it should be restricted by passports to be issued by the Wai-wa Pa to a number to be determined.
15
I asked Mr. Liang as to the form in which he thought an Agreement on the matter should be drawn up. He replied that he thought something in the nature of a despatch or letter would be sufficient. I mentioned that Sir Wilfrid Laurier had expressed a preference for a Treaty between the two countries, and pointed out that as legislation of the Canadian Parliament would probably he necessary to give effect to what was desired, the Government would require the Agreement to be in a form which could be given to the public and as would leave no doubt as to what had been secured. Mr. Liang said he thought an assurance from the Chinese Government as to this would be sufficient. I replied that I thought no member of the Canadian Government would doubt such an assurance, but that inasmuch as the immigration difficulties with Japan had grown out of the acceptance of an assurance, would demand, whatever the wishes of the Government might be, something more formal and binding. Some discussion followed as to Canada's power in the matter of Treaty- making. Sir John Jordan assured Mr. Liang that so far as England was concerned there would be no difficulty on this score, and mentioned as a precedent the recent Agreement between Great Britain and China with regard to Thibet, which had been negotiated and signed by both Chinese and Thibetan Representatives. I explained that the necessary formalities would, of course, be complied with, and cited as an example of the method that might be followed, the recent negotiations in the matter of a Commercial Treaty between Canada and France. The Anglo-Japanese Commercial Treaty was also referred to, and it was pointed out that the self-governing dominions acted independently of each other, and of Great Britain in their acceptance of its termis. Mr. Liang brought up the existing Treaties with Great Britain, and suggested that my proposal, if acted upon, would be equivalent to having the Chinese enter into one Treaty to do away with the provisions of another. I asked as to the particular Treaties to which Mr. Liang referred, but he was not at the moment in a position to give the reference. I explained that since he had mentioned the subject of Treaties at a previous interview, I had given the matter some attention. The Treaty to which I thought he referred guaranteed protection to the "person and property" of Chinese within British territories. This I took to refer to Chinese who were resident. The obligations of this Treaty Canada had fully recognized in compensating the Chinese residents of Vancouver in the fall of 1907, for the losses incurred in the anti-Asiatic riots in September of that year. The Treaty could never have meant that Canada was to allow every Chinese who wished, to enter, that she was to forego all rights in the matter of regulating her immigration. According to Mr. Liang's interpretation, Canada will have no right to exclude the halt, the maim, or the blind, and would be obliged to admit persons suffering from trachoma or contagions discases, all of which classes, even where they were citizens of the British Isles, were excluded under existing legislation. Sir Jolin said he thought a good and sufficient answer to Mr. Liang's contention had been made in a previous interview. That it was necessary to remember the time the Treaty was entered into, and condi- tions existing at the time. [It might have been added that the Treaty to which Mr. Liang referred was one which opened only certain ports to British subjects, whilst they were forbidden to trade, or even reside, in other ports of the Chinese Empire.]
Mr. Liang spoke feelingly on the attitude of foreigners toward China. The nations had come hammering open her door, told her that she must mix with other people, must share in their trade and enlightenment, and were now seeking to excinde her peoples from their shores. China did not want the foreigners, she would rather be left alone. He recognized, however, that intercourse with other nations was necessary, and that there were advantages to be gained by the admission of men from other countries. I replied that Chinese of the classes foreign nations were asking China to admit, were not excluded by them; restriction had to do with labourers only, and was because of the difference in standards and numbers.
Mr. Liang thought the Chinese were kept out because China was weak as a Power, that Chinese were excluded while Germans and Greeks and Italians were admitted. I replied that I did not think China was weaker than Italy or Greece,
re