174
!
[This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.
OPIUM.
CONFIDENTIAL.
[January 6.]
SECTION 3.
[642]
1
(No. 500.) Sir,
No. 1.
Sir J. Jordan to Sir Edward Grey.-(Received January 6, 1913.)
Peking, December 23, 1912. WITH reference to my despatch No. 486 of the 12th instant and previous correspondence on the subject of the opium destruction at Anking, I have the honour to enclose copies of further correspondence between the Wai-chiao Pu and myself regarding this case.
The Chinese Government, it will be seen, continue to support the Tutu of Anhui's contention that no breach of treaty was committed, and refuse to pay the compensation demanded. In my reply I have pointed out that the Wai-chiao Pu have ignored the facts of the case as already amply demonstrated, and I have renewed the claim for compensation.
The statement of the Wai-chiao Pu that the province of Anhui has imposed no restrictions whatsoever on Indian opium regularly imported, is, as I have pointed out in my memorandum in reply, the reverse of the truth. As regards Wuhu, I have since ascertained by telegram that actually no Indian opium has been brought into that port since the 9th instant, the date on which the dealers ceased business in accordance with the bond which they had to sign.
The losses occasioned to British merchants by the stoppage of the trade are not confined to the province of Anhui, for complaints are pouring in from Hankow and other places that Indian opium has been turned back, although it has paid duty and been regularly imported in strict conformity with the terms of an agreement with which, on its conclusion only nineteen months ago, the Chinese authorities expressed themselves as entirely satisfied.
As pointed out in my communication to the Wai-chiao Pu, the Central Government can no longer defend itself from responsibility for treaty infringements on the plea that it is powerless to enforce its will on the provinces. By way of further evidence that the present widespread agitation against the agreement of 1911 is directly encouraged by the Central Government, I take this opportunity to enclose two articles on the Anking case which have recently appeared in the Peking "Daily News." Apart from the general question of that paper's connection with the Government, the articles contain internal evidence of being directly inspired.
I have, &c.
Enclosure 1 in No. 1.
J. N. JORDAN.
!
Memorandum communicated to Sir J. Jordan by Wai-chiao Pu
(Translation.)
Peking, December 13, 1912. THE Wai-chiao Pu have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of the memorandum, with six enclosures, of date the 21st ultimo, in which His Majesty's Minister repeated his demand for payment of compensation for the value of the opium seized and destroyed at Anking, and the publication in Anhui Province of a proclamation embodying the terms of the former Wai-wu Pu's circular telegram of last year to the provinces.
This ministry has already fully explained to Sir John Jordan the reasons given by the Tutu of Anhui for the seizure and destruction of this Indian opium, and there is no purpose in further enlarging thereon. But with regard to compensation, the Indian opium being in the hands of Chinese merchants, has ceased to have any connection with the foreign merchants, and the foreign merchants having suffered no loss, there can be no question of compensating them. If it is said that the compensation is demanded for a breach of agreement by Anhui Province, and not for the loss suffered by the Chinese merchants, then, no matter whether there has been a breach of
[2766 1-3]