14
No. 9.
-
SECOND CHINESE COMMUNIQUÉ.
(EXTRACTED FROM THE CANTOn Gazette of THURSDAY, THE 22ND JULY, 1920.)
The Conference resumed this morning (Wednesday) at 10.30 when the Chinese de. legation replied to the British statement read at the last sitting on July 19. This was followed by the Chinese delegation outlining two proposals in the following terms :
"Since the Chinese delegation affirm that the British are in the wrong on the three points stated in our first statement, namely, (1) the Slaameen-Shakee shooting, (2) the Blockade of Canton by Hongkong, and (3) the Refusal of Negotiation implied in the summary rejection of the demands formulated by the Nationalist Government immediately after the shooting, and since the British delegation deny being in the wrong, it is clear that this Conference ist entrust a third party in the form of an impartial court of enquiry to decide the controversial issue involved. The Nationalist Government will abide by the findings of an impartial court of enquiry. We hope that the British delegation will take the same attitude.
"If, however, the British delegation is desirous, without waiting for further enquiry, of bringing about the resumption of normal relations between Hongkong and the tor ritories of the Nationalist Government (Kuangtung. Kuangsi, Hunan) as quickly as possible. the Chinese delegation, likewise desirous of resuming such relations at the earliest date. propose that the burden arising from an immediate settlement of the Anti-British Boyent be shared by both parties. That burden is (1)The Chinese people who have sustained the boycott for a year must be given adequate guarantees that in the future there will be no repetition of the action of June 23, 1925. These guarantees lie in regulating the garrison- ing of the Shameen and in regulating the navigation and stationing of British gunboats on the river system of the territories of the Nationalist Giovernment. (2) The bereaved families of the dead and the wounded on June 23, 1925, have to be consoled and compensated on the basis of full justice. And (3) the large unemployment in consequence of the break of normal relations between Hongkong and Kuangtung, which has been a serious problem and continues to be one, requires large sums of money to be raised for its solution in order to remove serious obstacles in the way of a resumption of normal relations between the Colony and the territories of the Nationalist Government.
**It is clear that if both sides are actuated by the same desire to arrive at an amicable settlement, both sides must be prepared to make serious concessions.'
In reply to the first proposal for an impartial court of enquiry, the British de- legation stated that they would have to consult their Government. And as regards the second proposal for a sharing of the burden arising from an immediate settlement of the Anti-Britishi Boycott, they rejected the same and categorically declared that no settlement involving the payment of compensation could be entertained by them.
The Chinese delegation thereupon proposed that, pending the holding of the sug gested court of enquiry, a loan might be raised, partly through its own resources and partly by Hongkong, to enable the Nationalist Government to meet the heavy financial burden involved in an immediate settlement of the Anti-British Boycott, and that the Hongkong section of such loan would also be repaid if the court of enquiry decided in favour of the British. This proposal was also rejected by the British delegation.
The Chinese delegation then inquired if the British delegation had any proposal to make. The latter stated that they were prepared to agree to a settlement of the dispute in the form of an industrial han for the development of the Port of Whampoa conditional on the construction of the loopline connecting the Canton-Hankow and Canton-Kowloon railways and provisions of control similar to those in the Canton-Kowloon Railway Agree a British Chief- ment regarding the employment of a British Engineer-in-chief and Accountant. The British delegation intimated that they were ready to consider alternative industrial enterprises like the building of a railway to Bias Bay or to Swatow. The Chinese delegation replied that they would have to take time to consider this British proposal.
Canton, July 21, 1926.
15
No. 10.
THIRD CHINESE COMMUNIQUÉ
(EXTRACTED FROM THE Canton GAZETTE OF TUESDAY, THE 27TH JULY, 1926.) Canton July 23.-The Conference resumed this morning at 10.30 a.m. when the British 'delegation read the following statement :-
The British delegation do not propose to prepare any written reply to the state- ment read on behalf of the Chinese delegation at the meeting on the 21st July. They refrain from doing so because they feel that it would involve farther historical discussion which would at the present stage serve no useful purpose. They prefer to discuss verbally any actual proposals for the settlement of the boycott.”
The Chinese delegation also read the following statement, elaborating their pro- posal for a Court or a Commission of Enquiry which was made at the last meeting on
July 21-
"The Chinese and the British delegation have, in their respective statements, de- fined the anti-British boycott issue in terms which now necessitate resort to an impartial Commission of Enquiry for its settlement. The Chinese delegation formally propose that
“(a) such a Commission of Enquiry be constituted.
"(b) the Commission is to be made up of a Chinese and a British member with a Chairman to be agreed upon, whose country is not directly involved in the dispute,
(c) the Commission shall be empowered to determine the question of respon- sibility for the Shameen-Shakee shooting on June 23, 1925 and to make recommendations for the complete and final settlement of the resulting anti-British boycott in the Liang- Kuang,
"(d) the Nationalist Government and the British (including the Hongkong) Govern- ment agree to be bound by the lindings of the Commission and to carry out and enforce any and all recommendations made by it,
"(e) the Commission is to be opened at the earliest possible date and
"(f) in order to meet possible difficulties of the British in the case of witnesses who have already made written statements to them on the case and who are dead or cannot be traced or otherwise cannot attend before the Commission, such statements can be sub- mitted at the enquiry."
The British delegation raised the question of including the French in the Enquiry on the ground that it was impossible to exclude them since they took part in the shooting of June 23, 1925. The Chinese delegation replied that the question of French participation in the shooting was a Chinese-French issue which they preferred to keep separate from and not to join it with the question of British responsibility in the matter; but if the British in- sisted, the Chinese delegation had no objection to the inclusion or participation of the French in the Enquiry. In this case the British would have to take the necessary steps to secure the consent of the French to their participation in the proposed Enquiry. The Bri- tish delegation contended that such consent should be secured by the Chinese, but the Chinese delegation declined to accept this responsibility.
Besides raising other points (which the Chinese delegation replied to), the British delegation inquired whether, pending the holding of the Enquiry, the anti-British boycott was to continue. As the boycott is an organised patriotic movement which no exercise or application of mere force could successfully and finally terminate even if the Nationalist Government were to attempt its forcible suppression in total disregard of all vital nation- alist interests, the Chinese delegation therefore replied that the continuance of the anti- British boycott was inevitable in the circumstances arising from the British delegation's rejection of the Chinese proposal for a sharing of the burden involved in an immediate resumption of normal relations between the British and the Chinese people in the Liang- Kuang.
349