I have replied as follows:-
224
"I suppose that Viceroy is aware of written denial of Chinese Government
on page 248 of Rockhill.
"I am unwilling to embarrass Viceroy, but you should make him clearly understand, if Shêng's unauthorised undertaking is used to bar us from advantages conceded in connection with your Loan Agree- ment, I shall object strongly."
Repeated to Hong Kong.
Enclosure 2 in No. 155.
LETTER of His Excellency Sheng relative to the Preferential Right to the Hankow-Canton Line.
Imperial Administration of Chinese Railways, Shanghai, June 26, 1898. The undersigned, Sheng-Hsuan-huai, Director-General of the Chinese Railway Company, declares that he reserves to the Société d'Etudes des Chemins de fer en Chine, a preferential right as regards the railway to be built from Hankow to Canton, in case the provisional contract, as drawn up in Washington between His Excellency Sheng and the American Syndicate (Carey-Washburn), should not become a defini- tive one.
It is well understood that this preferential right is granted to the Société d'Etudes des Chemins de fer en Chine, under the terms of Article 14 of the Wuchang contract, which formally prohibits the Société Belge d'Etudes des Chemins de fer en Chine from transferring any of its rights to any company of foreign nationality.
225
It would appear that Sheng's promise, in addition to being unauthorised, became null and void on the conclusion of the final agreement with the Americans in July, 1900.
39390
(Confidential.)
SIR,
No. 156.
FOREIGN OFFICE to COLONIAL OFFICE.
(Received November 4, 1905.)
[See No. 163.]
WITH reference to the letter from this Office of the 30th ultimo,* I am directed
Foreign Office, November 3, 1905. by the Marquess of Lansdowne to transmit to you herewith, for the information of the Secretary of State for the Colonies, a copy of a telegram from His Majesty's Minister at Peking relative to the negotiations respecting a loan for the construction of a railway from Hankow to Canton.
I am to add that Lord Lansdowne is not aware of the purport of the Viceroy's despatch of September 9th last, to which reference is made in the telegram, but that an enquiry on the subject has been addressed to Sir E. Satow.
I am &c.,
F. H. VILLIERS.
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
Reference :-
FREEC.O. 882
6
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC-
COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH—NOT TO |
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
(Official seal of the
SIB,
Chinese Railway Administration.)
(Translation.)
SHENG-HBUAN-HUAI,
Director-General of Railways.
Enclosure 3 in No. 155.
The TSUNG-LI-YAMEN to Mr. BAX-IRONSIDE.
Peking, May 10, 1899. On the 6th instant we received your letter to the effect that in the prospectus issued by the Belgian Syndicate it is stated that China has promised that, in the event of the abandonment of the American contract for the Hankow-Canton Railway, the Belgian Syndicate will be entrusted with the construction of that line. You added that you had heard that this promise was given subsequently to the settlement of the Belgian Agreement, and you inquired whether such an arrangement had been made.
We have the honour to inform you that neither the Belgian Agreement in twenty- nine clauses nor the Supplementary Agreement in ten clauses contains any such stipulation, and that there has been no subsequent arrangement of any kind.
We have, &c.,
(Cards of their Excellencies the Ministers enclosed).
Annexure.
The MARQUESS OF Lansdowne to Sir E. SATOW (Peking).
(No. 183.) (Telegraphic.)
Foreign Office, October 29, 1905, 11 a.m. Your telegram, No. 191 [of the 27th instant: Hankow-Canton Railway]. Your reply to Consul Fraser approved.
Enclosure in No. 156.
Sir E. SATOW, Peking, to the MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNE. (Sent 5 p.m.; received 4.45 p.m., October 31, 1905.)
(Decypher Telegram No. 198.)
TELEGRAM.
My telegram, No. 191 [of October 27, Hankow-Canton Railway]. Following from Consul at Hankow:-
"Viceroy is aware of Tsung-li-Yamen's despatch with which Belgian and French Minister's claim was met. He begs me to report that Peking and Hunan opposition, due partly to Sheng and Wu-ting-fang, who are jealous of Viceroy's success in the matter of resumption of loan, partly to advocates of the transfer of that concession from Americans, is so vehement that sanction to a loan is not to be hoped for at present. He will try when the clamour dies down and he promises to let us know so soon as he thinks it is feasible."
I have replied as follows:--
38128
Ascertain whether Viceroy's despatch of September 9, enclosed in your despatch, No. 45, was communicated by him to the Central Government."
(No. 204.)
SIR,
No. 157.
MR. LYTTELTON to GOVERNOR SIR M. NATHAN. [Answered by No, 184.]
Downing Street, November 3, 1905.
I HAVE the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your telegram of the 13th October,† reporting that an Ordinance had been passed by the Legislative Council for raising a sum not exceeding £2,000,000, under the provisions of the Loan Ordi nance of 1893, to defray the cost of the railway from Kowloon to Canton and for other railway purposes.
I entirely agree that this is the proper procedure in all ordinary cases, and I should require very strong arguments to induce me to sanction the raising of
⚫ No. 155.
18885
↑ No. CXII in No. 169.