[This_Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.
AFFAIRS OF CHINA.
CONFIDENTIAL.
0.0
36988
RECO
[October 25.]REGO || NOV 09
SECTION 1.
51
[39281]
(No. 360.) Sir,
No. 1.
Sir J. Jordan to Sir Edward Grey.—(Received October 25.)
Peking, October 1, 1909. IN my despatch No. 336 of the 16th ultimo I mentioned that I had been informed that there was a possibility of the case against Constable Mears being reopened by an indictment before the Supreme Court, and I expressed the hope that the adoption of such a course might serve to satisfy Chinese public opinion and put an end to the boycott at Kiukiang.
Mr. Wilkinson, the Crown Advocate, arrived in Peking a few days later, and, after carefully examining all the papers in connection with the case and Mr. Werner's judgment, gave it as his opinion that Mears could not be tried again for the death of the Chinaman Yu Pa Ch'eng.
I have already informed you of the Crown Advocate's opinion in my telegram No. 159 of to-day's date, and I now have the honour to enclose, for your information, copies of two memoranda drawn up by Mr. Wilkinson-the first showing the reasons on which he bases his opinion that there is no legal method of revising Mr. Werner's decision, and the second criticising the action of Mr. Werner in trying the case himself in the face of the advice given to him, and further in excluding from the trial certain Chinese officials and other persons who wished to be present.
I also beg to forward a third memorandum by Mr. Wilkinson describing an interview which he had at the Wai-wu Pu with their Excellencies Na-t'ung and Liang Tun-yen, when he endeavoured to explain to them the reasons for which it was You will observe that their impossible, according to English law, to retry Mears. Excellencies then inmediately returned to the other suggestion, that Mears should be removed from Kiukiang, though, as I reported to you in my previous despatch, I had already explained to Na-t'ung that I had no power to do anything of the kind.
I have not thought it necessary to trouble you with copies of all the notes exchanged between the Wai-wu Pu and this legation on the subject of the alleged killing of Yu Fa Cheng by Constable Mears and the subsequent boycott of British shipping at Kiukiang, but I beg to enclose copies of the last note from Prince Ch'ing and of my reply thereto, and also a translation of the last proclamation against the boycott issued by the Governor of Kiangsi and subsequently by the taotai at Shanghae,
Meanwhile the boycott still continues, and, reading between the lines of the last note from Prince Ching, one may conclude that the Chinese authorities will not, in spite of the satisfactory terms of the above-mentioned proclamation, take the necessary steps to ensure the cessation of the boycott until Mears has been removed from Kiukiang, as suggested to you by the Chinese Minister. It is manifestly impossible for me to take any step in this direction myself, as any such action on my part would be regarded as a sign of weakness, and a withdrawal of support from His Majesty's consul at Kiukiang, and would further serve as a precedent which would encourage irresponsible Chinese societies to resort to boycotts on every possible occasion; but, as I telegraphed to you to-day, I have been informed by Mr. Landale, the Shanghae representative of Messrs. Jardine, Matheson, and Co., that the British firms whose interests are affected by the boycott would be willing to secure a post elsewhere for Mears in order to remove him from Kiukiang. As I before said, my only course is to remain neutral in this matter, but as I had good reason to believe, in spite of a previous denial from Mr. Werner, that he was indirectly using his influence with Mears to induce him to remain in his present post, I have to-day warned him of the grave responsibility he would be incurring by in any way influencing Mears' decision in this question. If Mears decided to leave Kiukiang without any intervention on my part, it would probably be the best solution of the difficult position into which we have been brought through the lack of judgment and common sense displayed by Mr. Werner in dealing with this case from beginning to end, but even in that case the outcome will be looked on as a victory for the advocates of the use of the boycott as a weapon of defence against the foreigner.
[2462 bb-1]
B
sc June