496
20
It was, therefore, somewhat with a feeling of dismay that the first communica- tion we received giving the actual terms of renewal stated that buildings were to be included, though only to half their value. These terms were learnt in Tien-tsin nearly seven years after the Government committee had visited our port, on the 9th July last year, since when we have been waiting in vain for the Government's further proposals for the practical application of the scheme as outlined. As far as Tien-tsin is concerned we have not up to the present thought fit to fight the inclusion of the building values. realising that the main thing was to get the actual terms settled in order that the development of the concession may no longer be retarded to the advantage of other national concessions.
During the past fifteen months urgent communications have been addressed to His Majesty's Government requesting a decision in the matter. These communi- cations have gone from the British Chamber of Commerce, the British Municipal Council and from various land-renters. What is the position to-day? After waiting seven years we are still without practical proposals. All we are told is that Mr. C. S. Simpson, of His Majesty's Board of Works, is being sent to China to make a valuation of the buildings. We have asked for bread and we are given a stone. It is stated that Mr. Simpson will probably take about a year to complete his task. and he has no authority to do anything more. It is absolutely incomprehensible why the Government have chosen to ignore the means available to them out here to obtain all the information that they should require. Land values are fixed from time to time by municipal assessors and were submitted to the official representing the Treasury in 1913. Records are in existence in regard to all buildings that have been erected for years past. In the meantime, landholders are naturally very chary of putting up new and extensive buildings for which payment may be exacted by the Government.
"
THE SHAW CASE OFFICIAL STATEMENT OF ASSOCIATION'S VIEWS.
At the conclusion of the conference on Saturday, the 6th November, Mr. A. W. Burkill, chairman, said :--
-
In my opening address on Wednesday last, I made a short reference to the case of Mr. G. L. Shaw, and stated that I would deal with this to-day. You will all appreciate that a question of such a political nature as the case of Mr. G. L, Shaw cannot be discussed when His Majesty's Chargé d'Affaires is present at our conference. As, however. Mr. Clive has had to return to Peking this morning, I am at liberty publicly to state the views of this Association of British Chambers of Commerce in China and Hong Kong towards Japan and her policy.
I will, however, first deal with the case of Mr. Shaw. I think it may be useful if I recall the facts. These have reached us from time to time in somewhat distorted form, and it is only recently that we have learnt the whole truth.
Mr. Shaw has carried on business as a merchant in Antung for a number of years. Antung is adjacent to the Korean frontier and he was the only British merchant in that part of Manchuria. In addition to his own business he acted as agent for two of the biggest British merchant firms in Shanghai. He was an active and energetic associate member of the British Chamber of Commerce here, was respected by the Chinese in Manchuria, and by all who had business dealings with him, as a patriot who had been indefatigable in supporting Allied aims during the war. At the beginning of this year there were rumours that the Japanese bad had trouble with Mr. Shaw and had alleged that the ships for which he acted as agent were being used to convey Korean malcontents from Shanghai to Korea. Early in the summer these complaints occurred again, and I understand that the British consul from Mukden visited Antung at the end of June in order to ascertain the truth about these reports and to advise Mr. Shaw not to interfere between Japanese and Koreans. Care was taken to point out to everyone concerned in Antung that the British courts were available if there was any actual charge against him. No charges were in fact forthcoming, and Mr. Shaw's family was therefore greatly disturbed when only a fort- night later he was suddenly arrested by the Japanese just inside the Korean frontier. He was then charged with being in Korea without a passport. His house in Antung was picketed by Japanese police and he was placed in solitary confinement in a Japanese prison Various charges have been urged against him from time to time, that he was in Korea without a passport, that he allowed Korean malcontents,
21
carrying arms and explosives, to leave Shanghai for Korea on his ships, ships, be it noted, for which he was merely the agent in Antung and over whose crew, cargo, or passengers he could exercise no control while they were loading in Shanghai. At Antung the customs is staffed almost entirely by Japanese, and we may safely assume that they would not allow Korean malcontents to land arms or explosives from any ship, whether Mr. Shaw's or anybody else's. With regard to the charge of harbour- ing Korean malcontents we have no information, but many worthy people in all countries harbour discontented subjects of other countries and even show their sympathy for them in more practical form, but such sympathy has never yet been regarded as a crime for which a person can be indicted.
On what grounds, therefore, did the Japanese authorities arrest Mr. Shaw and keep him in prison? So far as we can ascertain they have never brought him to trial, and we can only therefore judge the grounds of their complaint from the inspired communiqués which have appeared in the Japanese press. The nature of these complaints I have indicated above. They have amounted to an assertion that Mr. Shaw was in the habit of befriending and assisting disaffected Koreans. The Japanese authorities claim that this amounts to plotting against the safety of the State. I am given to understand that a legal point of some interest is involved in the Japanese authorities" attitude towards Mr. Shaw, namely, whether the State has the power to try the subject of another State for an offence committed outside its own border and its own jurisdiction. It appears that the practice of various countries differs on this point. Some continental countries, including France and Germany, hold that they have the right to try such offenders if once they place them- selves within jurisdiction. Great Britain and America claim no such right, which indeed appears to be repugnant to Anglo-Saxon tradition.
+
Mr. Shaw was arrested in Korea and imprisoned in a Japanese gaol for an offence alleged to have been committed in China, where Mr. Shaw was living within the jurisdiction of the British courts. Had Mr. Shaw been brought to trial immediately and the charges against him openly proved, we should probably have heard very little of these fine points of international law practice. But Mr. Shaw was kept in prison for four months during all the heat of summer, was cut off from communica- tion with his friends and was never brought to trial on any charges whatever.
"Gentlemen, I think I am putting it moderately, when I say that we cannot regard that as a conciliatory act on the part of the Japanese Government. Mr. Shaw is one of our associate members and has been a bulwark of British commerce in Antung. He had been an outspoken critic of Japanese methods in Manchuria when- ever he believed that such methods constituted discrimination against British trade. Under these circumstances it is not to be wondered at if a suspicion has arisen that that is his real offence in Japanese eyes. We received a telegram yesterday informing us that Mr. Shaw has been released on bail. I feel certain that I voice the opinion, not only of this conference, but also of the whole British community in the Far East when say that that is not a satisfactory solution of, or termination to, the case.' (Applause.)
If Mr. Shaw has committed any offence let him be duly charged and brought to an open and speedy trial before a court of competent jurisdiction. If no charge can be brought against him, then British opinion will demand that he be amply compensated for the outrage that has been inflicted on him.
Gentlemen, 1 have dealt thus fully with the case of Mr. G. L. Shaw, as I deem the principle involved by his arrest of the greatest importance and it is viewed with a grave feeling of apprehension by some of our affiliated Chambers.
"This association's views on Japanese attitude and policy in Tsingtao, and the obnoxious quarantine regulations imposed this summer, which appear to us to be economic weapons in disguise, have been fully dealt with recently so I do not propose to touch on them again. "I mention them, however, as taken in conjunction with our attitude on the Shaw case, it lays us open to the charge of being anti-Japanese; I would like to take this opportunity of stating publicly that we are not anti-Japanese in the sense that we are opposed to Japan's legitimate aspirations. We realise the vital character from her point of view of many of her aims, and we are perfectly willing that she should succeed and prosper in such aims. Both from a political and an economic standpoint we see how much is to be gained from co-operation and compromise, and how much there is to lose from mutual jealousies and antagonisms. In a word, we want as far as possible to work with Japan and not against her. Whilst we wish this, indeed because we wish it, we are bound when we think that.
[5815 e-3]
G