356
2. I also enclose a copy of the despatch of the 30th January from the Consul- General to the Viceroy referred to in the telegram which I send to Peking on the 7th of February (XII.) after Mr. Scott had informed me that he had received no reply to the despatch, and that he did not expect that any local representation could "have any effect in inducing the Viceroy to modify his unfriendly and antagonistic attitude to this and other questions affecting British interests.
3. On the 1st instant I received from Mr. Scott the accompanying translation of telegram which had been sent by the Wai Wu Pu to the Viceroy, and of which the Chinese text had been communicated to the Consul-General by Sir Ernest Satow.
4. To the enquiry I made yesterday (telegram XIII.) as to whether the Wai Wu Pu's message had had any result, Mr. Scott informed me (telegram XIV.) that it had had none.
5. In these circumstances, and in view of the Viceroy's disingenuous action as further evidenced by his telegram to the Chinese Minister in London, of which I received a translation last night in your secret despatch of the 8th February, 1906,
have thought it necessary to send to-day the last of the telegrams (XV.) of which paraphrases are transmitted herewith.
I have, &c.,
to
357
Secretary of State for the Colonies. The Viceroy at Canton cannot be induced to negotiate regarding the Canton-Kowloon Railway in spite of official instructions received from the Wai Wu Pu. The time seems to have come for His Majesty's Government to make the strongest possible representations to the Chinese Govern- ment even going so far as urging the removal of the Viceroy, and of reminding how in 1899 it was necessary, on account of the duplicity of the then Canton Viceroy, occupy Shan Chun beyond the New Territories of Hong Kong. At the same time it should be pointed out that this Government has every desire to support Chinese sovereignty rights, and has given striking proof of this by the loan for the redemption of the Canton-Hankow Railway, and that in the case of the Canton-Kowloon Rail- way would be prepared to accept any reasonable modification of the preliminary agreement which may be settled on in friendly negotiations between the Chinese Authorities and the British and Chinese Corporation, but that His Majesty's Govern- ment confident that the Chinese Government desire to give effect to their solemn engagements are unable to accept any further delay in the negotiations for the construction of this railway."
Do you concur?—NATHAN.
Enclosure 1 in No. 238.
M. NATHAN,
Governor.
PARAPHRASE OF TELEGRAPHIC CORRESPONDENCE.
XII.
GOVERNOR, Hong Kong, to His BRITANNIC MAJESTY'S MINISTER, Peking. (Despatched February 7, 1906.)
Viceroy has not replied to the despatch of 30th January from Consul-General refusing claim to annul the Canton-Kowloon preliminary agreement,
I suggest further pressure from Peking.-NATHAN.
XIII.
GOVERNOR, Hong Kong, to Hts BRITANNIC MAJESTY'S Consul-GENERAL, Canton. (Despatched 10.30 a.m., March 8, 1906.)
Has the telegram from the Wai Wu Pu to the Viceroy of which a translation was forwarded in your letter of February 28th had any result?-Nathan.
XIV.
HIS BRITANNIC MAJESTY'S CONSUL-GENERAL, Canton, to GOVERNOR. Hong Kong. (Despatched 12.30 p.m., March 8, 1908; received 1 p.m., March 8, 1906.) Your telegram of to-day. No result-SCOTT.
(Translation.)
Enclosure 2 in No. 238. WAI WU PU to VICEROY.
The British Minister, in a personal interview, has been urging the negotiation of a final agreement for the Canton-Kowloon Railway. In 1899 the Tsung Li Yamen received a communication from Sir C. Macdonald requesting that Sheng Kung Tao might be instructed to execute a preliminary agreement consisting of five articles with the British firm of Jardine, Matheson, and Company, which Sheng accordingly
did.
Such being the case we were obliged to put forward proposals on our side. In Article 2 it is laid down that Clause 1 of the Preliminary Agreement is subject, as far as may be practicable, to the terms and conditions bereafter to be agreed to in the Final Contract for the Shanghai-Nanking Railway when ratified. So that, although the Final Agreement should follow the lines of the Shanghai-Nan- king Railway Agreement, yet we must remember that the Shanghai-Nanking Rail- way is both long and costly, whereas the Canton-Kowloon line is short and inexpen- sive; a difference which, makes it incumbent on us whilst adhering to the original Agreement, to carefully consider the advantages and disadvantages accruing from the authority conferred by Article 2, and to do our utmost to obtain a modification.
We, therefore, trust that you will delegate representatives to come to a satis- factory understanding with the British and Chinese Corporation, and will keep us informed by telegraph of the progress of the negotiations. Translated by
J. GRANT JONES.
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
Reference :--
LLC.O. 882
6
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO
XV.
GOVERNOR, Hong Kong, to His BRITANNIC MAJESTY'S MINISTER, Peking.
(Despatched 3.20 p.m., March 9, 1906.)
Mr. Scott informs me that the telegram from the Chinese Foreign Office to the Viceroy regarding the Canton-Kowloon Railway of which you sent him the Chinese text has had no result. I have also heard from London that the Viceroy has been telegraphing to the Chinese Minister there to get the preliminary agreement with the Corporation set aside on the grounds that it was a private engagement with Sheng. In these circumstances I propose sending the following telegram to the
• L.F. transmitting ́edpy of No. 199,
(Translation.)
Enclosure 8 in No. 238. CONSUL-GENERAL to VICEROY.
YOUR EXCELLENCY,
I BEG to refer Your Excellency to your letter of the 6th instant, in which you
Canton, January 30, 1906. claim that the concession for the Canton-Kowloon Railway, as negotiated between Director-General Sheng of the Railway Administration and the representative of Messrs. Jardine, Matheson, and Company and the Hong Kong and Shanghai Bank- ing Corporation, is merely a draft agreement, and has not the binding effect of a regular contract. Your Excellency further claims that under the last article of the Agreement, which provides for certain possible arrangements in connection with local conditions you are free to alter the Agreement.
In reply, I beg to state that I duly communicated your letter to His Majesty's Minister and to the Governor of Hong Kong. I am now in receipt of an answer from the Governor, requesting me to point out to Your Excellency with regard to your first claim, that this Agreement was accepted by the Tsung-li Yamen and His