CO885-11 — Page 58

58

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

Reference :-

C.O.882/11

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- |

COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH—NOT TO

104

ENCLOSURE 1 IN NO. 7.

[TELEGRAM.]

From H.M. Minister, Peking (No. 8) to H.M. Consul-General, Canton.

Paraphrase.

(Despatched 31st January, 1926.)

(Received 11 a.m. 1st February.)

Following is repetition of telegram from Foreign Office, No. 35.

Reference my telegram No. 30.* It appears that no very help- ful recommendations have resulted from conference with O'Malley in Hongkong. The problem is most difficult, and the methods which have so far been suggested for solving it are as follows. If there should be a resort to force, presentation to Canton of an ultimatum demanding expulsion of Russians and termination of boycott; the next step, if necessary, to be an aerial bombardment of the forts and Whampoa Military College. This scheme would not only involve actual hostilities but also recognition of an inde- pendent Canton Government, and it has consequently always been rejected. It has also been assumed that such action would unite the Chinese against the British, and lead to a revival of the boycott throughout the country. Does this last objection in your opinion still hold good, and do you generally deprecate action on these lines?

Blockade.

2. This would entail either (a) joint international action in co-operation with Washington Powers, or (b) independent British action, such as insistence upon unloading at Hongkong of Scheme (b) would, all ships with cargo for or from Canton. unless powers concerned gave tacit consent, inevitably lead to friction; and scheme (a), which Mr. Palairet suggested to his colleagues last year, was not then cordially welcomed. Would it be of advantage to press the representatives of the principal Powers here more strongly to take concerted action now? Has any treaty been broken, either in letter or in spirit, by the Can- tonese? And could joint action be justified on the ground of any such breach of treaty? Is it not the case that Canton has actually closed the open door against the British? And does not the action of certain Powers in profiting by the boycott amount to an in- fringement by them of the Washington Nine-Power Treaty- Articles 1 (3 and 4) and 3? And should not action be taken under Article 7? Do you think it would be feasible to intercept and detain Russian ships without serious consequences?

•Not printed.

105

Assistance.

3. Is there any anti-Red leader to whom help with men or money might be given? Is it possible that either Sun or Wu General would ever have sufficient strength to coerce Canton? Chiang and the cadets appear to be the most powerful factor in Canton could he possibly be detached from the Bolsheviks either (a) by direct negotiation, or (b) by influencing him through moderate Cantonese? Or are you of opinion that, even regards Canton, we should still be guided by our general policy of non-intervention between contending parties in China?

Pressure on Moscow to discontinue propaganda and repress Canton agents.

as

4. Withdrawal of British Mission from Moscow is the only threat that could be employed, and it is questionable whether even this threat would have any effect. It is to be feared that the whole of China might regard it as an illustration of our helpless- ness and as evidence of the success scored by the Bolsheviks against us.

Conciliation.

5. Until the recent conversations with Hongkong broke down These it seemed possible that a settlement might be arranged. hopes were, however, disappointed owing to intimidation and to Are the pressure brought to bear by Russians and extremists. Cantonese demands still the same five which were reported in Canton despatch to Peking No. 15 of June 29th*-(1) apology for incident of June 23rd; (2) punishment of officials; (3) withdrawal What of naval units; (4) return of Shameen; (5) compensation? objection is there to direct negotiations between Hongkong Government and strikers?

It is essential that we should know, before can hope to deal successfully with Canton, what are their real of professed griev- ances e.g. recognition of Canton Government, Customs inde- pendence, interference with telegraphs by Hongkong, retention of Shameen in its present fortified state, &c. What are their There is grievances? If they are genuine they must be met.

also the fiction that Peking controls Canton, and it must be care- fully considered whether the time is not near at hand, if it has not in fact actually arrived, when this fiction should be abandoned; its effect seems to be merely to hamper our action at Canton, whether friendly or hostile. I should be glad to have your con- sidered opinion.

The

It is only natural that, so long as Canton receives arms and money from the Russians and nothing from us, some proportion of the Cantonese at all events should prefer the Russians. only counter-offer which it occurs to us that the North might make is possibly the control of local Customs revenues, for which Canton has been clamouring ever since 1918.

• Not printed.