CO885-11 — Page 103

196

103

ཀ ། ། །

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

Reference :—

C.O.882/11

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

| ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE

BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO

194

trouble and expense. The number of strikers now in Canton has officially been reported by the Strike Committee to be about 40,000, though in point of fact the genuine strikers are believed to be under 10,000. But the Government is powerless to require proofs of the number reported, owing to the support given by the Russians to the Strike Committee.

15. Fu Peng-sheung considers that some concession should be made by Hongkong if an carly settlement were desired. He sug- gested that a portion of the Boxer Indemnity Fund might be allotted to Canton for the construction of railways. Not only would this prove our friendliness, and save the face of the Canton Government, but it would also consummate the long-cherished wish of Great Britain to link up the Kowloon-Canton Railway with the Canton-Hankow Railway. He advised us to continue using the good offices of Mr. Brenan, the new Consul-General in Canton, for pourparlers, and he thought that Eugene Ch'ên would meet him more than half way.

}

4th June, 1926.

SIR,

R. H. KOTEWALL.

ENCLOSURE 2 IN No. 20.

Republic of China Nationalist Government.

Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Canton, 5th June, 1926.

I have the honour to inform you that my Government is ready to enter into negotiation with the Government of Hongkong regarding the Canton-Hongkong strike.

My Government is prepared to appoint three delegates with plenipotentiary powers; and it believes that the Government of Hongkong will deem it advisable to appoint the same number of delegates with like powers to conduct the negotiations on its behalf.

I am, &c.,

CHEN YU-JEN, Acting Minister for Foreign Affairs.

SIR CECIL CLEMENTI, K.C.M.G.,

Governor, &c.,

Hongkong.

€ 13869/26.

No. 21.

The Governor of Hongkong to the Secretary of State for the

Colonies.

Secret.

SIR,

(Received 13th July, 1926.)

Government House, Hongkong, 11th June, 1926.

In continuation of my secret despatch of the 8th June* I have the honour to inform you that Mr. J. F. Brenan, Consul-General at Canton, arrived in Hongkong on the afternoon of that day, and that Mr. O. St. C. O'Malley, Counsellor of Embassy at Peking, arrived in Hongkong at dawn on the 10th June. Both were my guests during their stay in this Colony, and they left together for Canton on the morning of the 11th June.

2. Meanwhile, I received from Sir R. Macleay. His Majesty's Minister at Peking, a copy of his telegram† to the Foreign Office, No. 203, of the 7th June. In this telegram Sir Ronald expresses the opinion that the boycott in the Kuang-tung Province should be treated " as a purely local question between Hongkong and Canton to be settled by negotiators appointed by the Hongkong Government and the de facto Government in Canton, without the intervention of the Acting Consul-General at Canton." He sug- gests that "Mr. Brenan should only act as intermediary for the exchange of communications between the parties, and that he should take no part in the negotiations." He further states that, if Mr. Eugene Ch’ên chooses to address a communication to me suggesting the re-opening of negotiations and describing himself as the "Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Nationalist Govern- ment of Canton "-this is, in fact, what Mr. Ch'ên has done-he sees no reason why in my reply I should not give Mr. Ch❜ên the title he has assumed. Finally he considers that the question whether the claims of British subjects for losses incurred in the Kuang-tung Province should be demanded of the Canton Govern- ment is one which should be left to the discretion of the Hong- kong negotiators, and which must depend on the course of the negotiations and the nature of the claims put in by the Cantonese representatives.

3. I will take in turn the two arguments on which Sir Ronald bases these opinions. In the first place, he considers that the recently reconstituted Government in Canton, in view of the expulsion of the more moderate elements, has less claim than

† C 11596, 26; not printed.

* No. 20.