42
1615
China Indemnity
HOUSE OF COMMONS
[Mr. Locker-Lampson.] was in the Foreign Office that was the case. I do not know whether the Ameri- cans have been re-admitted, but when I was in the Foreign Office that board was composed solely of Chinese members. This is British money, to be used for the benefit of this country and China, and surely it is common sense that British members should feature as one of the provisions of the Bill.
The Bill is founded on the report of the Willingdon Committee and the sub- sequent report of Lord Buxton's Com- mittee. At this late hour I do not want to trouble the House, but I could quote passages from both those reports showing that it was their intention that in the distribution of this money in China the board of trustees should consist of British members as well as Chinese members. This is the point where the Government have definitely departed from the policy laid down by the late Foreign Secretary. In the Bill which was prepared by my right hon. Friend, British members were included in the committee. Under that arrangement, the
the British Government were to have a voice, not only in the ex- penditure of the money upon railways, but in the expenditure of the money upon educational and cultural objects. I can- not believe that the Chinese Government would object to these words being in- serted in the Bill. I should like to ask the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the Chinese Government were ever asked, if they did object and, if they were asked, whether they declined to assent to this proposal? I do not believe that they would object to the pro- mise which they made being put into an Act of Parliament. I know that the Under-Secretary may say that if we do insert these words here, they will not be binding upon the Chinese Government. I quite realise that. They will not be binding upon the Chinese Government, but I look upon them as very valuable as a declaratory statement, and, if the terms made on these Notes and the pro- mise included in our Act of Parliament should be violated at any time by the Chinese Government, this provision will give our Government a locus standi to make representations and protests.
Without that statement in our Act of Parliament I do not think our Govern- ment would have any locus standi at all. As I have said, this Bill, in other
1616
(Application) Bill. respects, carries out the policy with which my right hon. Friend, the ex- Foreign Secretary and the late Govern- ment completely agreed, but Parliament ought not to pass this Measure without including definite words to embody the pledge given to our Minister in Pekin that British subjects should be on the Committee.
The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Mr. Dalton): As the right hon. Gentleman has said, the words which he desires to include, are based on a passage in the Note of the Chinese Government, which is No. 1 of the series in the hands of hon. Mem- bers and the Chinese Government have clearly expressed their intention-which we accept without any question at all, after the friendly negotiations between the two Governments-of appointing cer- tain British members on the board of trustees. In my view, the right hon, Gentleman's Amendment is un- necessary, but I appreciate the fact that he may attach importance to it for the reasons which he has explained, and, in view of the fact that he considers this to be the only respect in which our Bill can be im- proved, I have no objection to accepting the Amendment.
Amendment agreed to.
Mr. LESLIE BOYCE: I beg to move, in page 2, line 2, to leave out the words "United Kingdom," and to insert instead thereof the words "British Empire."
This Bill is founded on an agreement concluded between His Majesty's Govern- ment and the Chinese Government on 22nd September last. At that date there had already accumulated an indemnity fund of approximately £3,515,000. Under the terms of the agreement and of this Bill, a sum of £465,000 is to be devoted to Chinese education in this country and in China, and the balance, which is slightly in excess of £3,000,000 is to be allocated to a Chinese Purchasing Com- mission in London, which is to be con- stituted under the Bill for the purchase of railway and other materials for China and those materials must be manufac- tured in this country. I have no objection whatever to that proposal; on the con- trary, it is an admirable one if it is mutually beneficial to the Chinese and ourselves. It means that, after setting