74
(3).
Are
resistance should be offered firstly because in no other way can the Nanking government be made to listen to representations on the subject and secondly because only the certainty of being involved in much trouble and agitation will keep the demands of the Chinese authori- ties, both now and in the future, within bounds. the merchants at Shanghai prepared to run the risks involved in a concerted refusal to pay knowing that they will be supported by all means at cur disposal short of If so the use of force? (See your telegram No. 1124). should we not encourage them to do so holding ourselves in readiness to compromise at the psychological moment?
4. You now revert to the proposal previously criticised in your telegram No. 1124 that vessels should proceed to sea without customs clearance papers, but as you also advocate "going slow" until we know the attitude of other Powers and especially Japan it is not clear what exact significance should be attached in connection with this proposal to the phrases "stand firm" and "show the
Is not this Nanking government that we mean business". a resort to the form of bluff which you rightly deprecate
If how- in paragraph 6 of your telegram under reply?
•
ever the Shanghai proposals are, as your telegram No.1211 strongly suggests, impracticable and if you concur in the reasoning of paragraph 3 above then I agree that British ships might initiate concerted resistance by refusing to pay these increased tonnage dues in the manner suggested.
5. Please consult Sir S. Barton on this suggestion and telegraph your considered views.
Repeat to Peking, Tokyo, Shanghai, Commander-in- Chief, Hankow, Canton for Hongkong.
Page 70Page 71