PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
Reference :-
TILTIC.O. 882
6
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO
270
CXXX.
HIS BRITANNIC MAJESTY'S MINISTER, Peking, to GOVERNOR, Hong Kong. (Despatched 1.33 p.m., October 30, 1905; received 2.22 p.m., October 30, 1905.)
Your telegram of 28th October. The reference is to a volume of treaties, &c., concerning China and Corea from 1894 to 1904, edited by W. Rockhill, and published by Government Printing Office, Washington, last year.
The Consul-General at Canton will probably have a copy.-SAtow.
44
Enclosure 2 in No. 180.
EXTRACTS from Treaties and Conventions with or concerning China and Corea," by W. W: Rockhill, (1.)
LETTER of His Excellency Sheng relative to the Preferential Right to the Hankow- Canton Line.
Imperial Administration of Chinese Railways,
Shanghai, June 28, 1898. The undersigned Sheng-Hsüan-Huai, Director-General of the Chinese Railway Company, declares that he reserves to the Société d'Etudes de 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 definite one.
It is well understood that this preferential right is granted to the Société d'Etudes de Chemins de fer en Chine, under the terms of Article 14 of the Wuchang contract, which formally prohibits the Société Belge d'Etudes de Chemins de fer en Chine, from transferring any of its rights to any company of foreign nationality.
(Official Seal of the Chinese Railway Administration.)
MM. LES MINISTRES,
(S)
(2.)
SHENG-HSUAN-HUAI,
Director-General of Railways.
Mr. BAX-IRONSIDE to the Tsung-LI-YAMEN.
Peking, May 6, 1899. On the 29th of April I called at the Yamên and referred to the agreement made on the 26th of June last year with the Belgian Syndicate for the Peking-Hankow Railway. I mentioned that in the prospectus issued by the Belgian Syndicate it was stated that China had promised that if the American agreement for the Hankow- Canton line fell through, the Belgian Syndicate would be entrusted with the construc- tion of that line.
Your Excellencies informed me that there was no such stipulation in the agree ment of twenty-nine articles or the supplementary agreement of ten articles made with the Belgian Syndicate for the Peking-Hankow line,
I have heard, however, that the promise referred to wag given subsequently to the settlement of the aforesaid agreements, and I have the honour to request Your Highness and Your Excellencies to inform me whether such an agreement has been made.
H. O. BAX-IRONSIDE.
(Translation.)
SIR,
(3.)
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
271
the Belgian Syndicate will be entrusted with the construction of the line. You added that
you had heard that this promise was given subsequently to the settlement of the Belgian agreement, and you enquired 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 stipula- tion, and that there has been no subsequent arrangement of any kind.
42781
(Secret.)
SIR,
We have, &c.,
(Cards of their Excellencies the Ministers enclosed.)
No. 181.
GOVERNOR SIR M. NATHAN to MR. LYTTELTON. (Received December 2, 1905.)
[Answered by No. 216.]
Government House, Hong Kong, November 3, 1905. IN continuation of my secret despatch of the 18th October* on the subject of negotiations for the completion of a loan agreement and of a joint working agree- ment in connection with the proposed Canton-Kowloon Railway, I have the honour to enclose, for your information and record, a paraphrase of a telegram addressed by His Majesty's Minister at Peking on the 28th of October (CXXXI.) to the Consul- General at Canton, and received by me from Mr. Scott on the 1st instant, and of a tele- gram (CXXXII.) in which I transmitted on that date the Consul-General's reply to Sir Ernest Satow.
2. As the Viceroy at Canton is the chief obstructionist to the conclusion of a loan agreement with the British and Chinese Corporation and as he would, there- fore, doubtless put obstacles in the way of that Corporation acting on any agreement concluded with another negotiator, and as, moreover, Sheng Kung Po has shown himself on various occasions to be shifty and unreliable, it seemed to me better that the Wai Wu Pu's proposal for the Viceroy to negotiate should be adopted rather than that the latter should shift the responsibility on to Sheng. His desire to do this is probably to save face before the gentry and literati of Kwang Tung, before whom he has hitherto appeared as the champion of the railway being constructed by Chinese with Chinese funds. The question of who should negotiate is one which Sir Ernest Satow can better decide than I can and you will see that I have only put my opinion before him in a tentative manner. The fact that the Wai Wu Pu have decided to negotiate is, at any rate, a step in advance.
3. I also transmit an extract of a letter, dated October 5th, from the Consul- General at Hankow to Sir Ernest Satow regarding the views of the Viceroys of Canton and Wuchang on certain points connected with the proposed agreements.
4. With regard to the first of these points-the amount of £2,000,000 which the agent of the British and Chinese Corporation proposed to enter in the blank space of Article I. of the Loan Agreement-I enclose a copy of a letter addressed by Mr.C. H. Ross to Sir Ernest Satow on the 17th of April last giving his reasons for this proposal. It is not clear from this letter why, considering a loan of £1,500,000, from which the Chinese are to get £1,350,000, provides, not only for the estimated cost of land, construction and equipment (£1,100,000), but also for the interest and ser vice of the loan during construction (£116,178), for working capital (£100,000), and for a margin (£33,822), the enormous further sum of £500,000 should be added for more margin," and I can well understand Chang and Ts'en objecting to the sum of £2,000,000 being entered even as an outside amount for a loan for a railway, the cost of constructing and equipping which, according to the engineer's estimate, will be £979,679, exclusive of the cost of land. I should think very little risk would be run by inserting in Article I. of the Loan Agreement a sum of £1,500,000 as the maxi- mum amount of the loan and by providing for its issue in three instalments of n more than £500,000 each.
not
5. With regard to the second point raised by the Viceroys, viz., the heavy foreign preponderance on the Board of Management, the present proposal is that when the fine approaches completion the joint board to be formed should consist of six members,
• No. 168.
↑ See Sub-Enclosure (2) in No. 93.