;
The terminal rate was to be 5 fr. 50 c. per word. The Agreement was to be confirmed by the Imperial Commissioner for the Northern Ports, and by the Tsung-li Yamen on behalf of the Chinese Company, and by the Danish and British Ministers at Peking on behalf of the two European Companies.
M. de Coumany, the Russian Minister, who also represented Danish interests at Peking, and Sir J. Walsham agreed that they could not confirm the Agreement as if it were one between two Governments, but presented it to the Tsung-li Yamên, and promised to legalize it in the ordinary way, if necessary, when accepted by the Chinese Government. This course was approved by Her Majesty's Government.
Owing to objections in different quarters, however, the ratification of the Chinese Government has not yet been given.
October 26, 1887.
Sir J. Walsham, No.18, Telegraphic, July 6, 1888.
It may perhaps be well to explain that the lines of the Great Northern Telegraph Company of Copenhagen run north from the Chinese ports through Japan to Vladivostock and Eastern Siberia, while the English Company's lines run south through Singapore and India.
June 1, 1888.
On hearing of the Agreement, the Indian Government protested against the terminal rate of 5 fr. 50 c. per word as likely to neutralize the possible cheapening of the land service via Bhamo and Yunnan when made and connected, and urged that China should not enter into any Agreement affecting international telegraphy which would extend beyond the meeting of the next International Telegraph Congress in 1890.
On this Sir J. Walsham was asked whether the proposed terminal rate of 5 fr. 50 c. was to be applied to the Bhamo route, and told that, if so, he was to get the Bhamo route struck out of the Agreement, or obtain a postponement of the ratification.
He replied that even if ratified as it stood, the Agreement could not come into effect till the Chinese land lines had been connected with those of an adjacent country in telegraphic communication with Europe; that then the through rate would be 8 fr. 50 c., of which the Chinese Government would get the terminal rate of 5 fr. 50 c., except on messages from the ports where the Company's cables were landed. He explained that while the provisions and money divisions of the Agreement would be applicable to any Burmese line, the latter would not be obliged to accept them. As, however, the Agreement was to remain in force till 1903, when the existing Contracts of the Companies with China terminate, no harm would occur, as no adjacent country could enter into Contracts with China which would violate them.
In a previous telegram he had pointed out that, if a junction were effected through Burmah or Tonquin, China would probably object to undertake a line to Kiachta, which was of the greatest importance to the Russian caravan trade, and respecting which negotiations had been going on for years, unless China guaranteed to undertake that line, Russia would object to the ratification of the Agreement.
Up to this time the Russian Minister, as representing Danish interests, had been loyally supporting Sir J. Walsham and the interests of the Company, but his own Government's objections to the Agreement would naturally put him in an awkward position.
Sir John Pender, in reply to the India Government's objections to the 5 fr. 50 c. rate, admitted that, when added to the existing tariff to Bhamo, it would make that route dearer than the one via Singapore or Siberia, but said he was ready to recommend to his allied Companies certain reductions which would bring it to the same rate.
The Indian Government, however, still objected, and suggested a temporary Indo-Chinese rate till the next meeting of the International Telegraph Congress.
Sir John Pender, in commenting upon this, said that the danger the Company had to face, if any alteration were made in the rates fixed by the Chefoo Agreement, was that Russia would claim the right to have lower rates fixed for messages between its territory and China, which would throw the traffic into the Siberia route, to the serious damage of the pecuniary interests of the Companies, and at the risk of this country being dependent upon Russia for its telegraphic communication with China.
The Indian view was communicated to Sir J. Walsham, who was strongly opposed to it. No. 7, Telegraphic, February 15, 1889.
He said that China was not likely to accept it, and urged that, in any case, he should not be asked to present it, as his so doing would injure the interests of the Companies, and, "worse still, would be disregarding the loyalty with which my Russian colleague has hitherto supported me."
2
;
The terminal rate was to be 5 fr. 50 c. per word the Agreement was to be confirmed by the Imperial Commissioner for the Northern Ports, and by the Tsung-li Yamen on behalf of the Chinese Company, and by the Danish and British Ministers at Peking on behalf of the two European Companies.
M. Coumany, the Russian Minister, who also Sir J. Walsham, represented Danish interests at Peking, and Sir J. No. 70, October 20,
Walsham agreed that they could not confirm the Agreement as if it were one between two Govern- ments, but presented it to the Tsung-li Yamên, and promised to legalize it in the ordinary way, if necessary, when accepted by the Chinese Govern-
1887.
ment. This course was approved by Her Majesty's To Mr. Pender, Governinent.
Owing to objections in different quarters, how. ever, the ratification of the Chinese Government
has not yet been given.
October 26, 1887.
Sir J. Walsham, No.18,Telegraphic, July 6, 1888.
It may perhaps be well to explain that the lines Inclosure 2 in India
Office, June 1,1
of the Great Northern Telegraph Company of 1888. Copenhagen run north from the Chinese ports through Japan to Vladivostock and Eastern Siberia, while the English Company's lines, run south through Singapore and India.
June 1, 1888
On hearing of the Agreement, the Indian India Office, Government protested against the terminal rate of 5 fr. 50 c. per word as likely to neutralize the possible cheapening of the land service via Bhamo and Yunnan when made and connected, and urged that China should not enter into any Agreement affecting international telegraphy which would extend beyond the meeting of the next Inter- national Telegraph Congress in 1890,
On this Sir J. Walsham was asked whether the proposed terminal rate of 5 fr. 50 c. was to be applied to the Bhamo route, and told that, if so, he was to get the Bhamo route struck out of the Agreement, or obtain a postponement of the ratification.
He replied that even if ratified as it stood, the No.18,Telegraphic,
Agreement could not come into effect till the July Chinese land lines had been connected with those of an adjacent country in telegraphic communica tion with Europe; that then the through rate would be 8 fr. 50 c., of which the Chinese Govern- ment would get the terminal rate of 5 fr. 50 c., except on messages from the ports where the Company's cables were landed. He explained that while the provisions and money divisions of the Agreement would be applicable to any Burmese line, the latter would not be obliged to accept
No. 17, June 13, 1888.
September 26,
1888.
India Office, January 16, 1889.
January 30, 1889.
Sir J. Walsham,
3
342.
them. As, however, the Agreement was to remain in force till 1903, when the existing Contracts of
⚫ the Companies with China terminate, no barm would occur, as no adjacent country could enter into Contracts with China which would violate them.
In a previous telegram he had pointed out that, if a junction were effected through Burmah or Tonquin, China would probably object to undertake a line to Kiachta, which was of the greatest importance to the Russian caravan trade, and respecting which That negotiations had been going on for years.
unless China guaranteed to undertake that line, Russia would object to the ratification of the Agreement.
Up to this time the Russian Minister, as re- presenting Danish interests, had been loyally supporting Sir J. Walsham and the interests of the Company, but his own Government's objections to the Agreement would naturally put him in an awkward position.
Sir John Pender, in reply to the India Govern- ment's objections to the 5 fr. 50 c. rate, admitted that, when added to the existing tariff to Bhamo, it would make that route dearer than the one via Singapore or Siberia, but said he was ready to recommend to his allied Companies certain reductions which would bring it to the same
rate.
The Indian Government, however, still objected, and suggested a temporary Indo-Chinese rate till the next meeting of the International Telegraph Congress.
Sir John Pender, in commenting upon this, said that the danger the Company had to face, if any alteration were made in the rates fixed by the Chefoo Agreement, was that Russia would claim the right to have lower rates fixed for messages between its territory and China, which would throw the traffic into the Siberia route, to the serious damage of the pecuniary interests of the Companies, and at the risk of this country being dependent upon Russia for its telegraphic communication with China.
The Indian view was communicated to Sir J. No. 7, Telegraphic, Walsham, who was strongly opposed to it. February 15, 1889.
He
said that China was not likely to accept it, and urged that, in any case, he should not be asked to present it, as his so doing would injure the interests of the Companies, and, "worse still, would be disregarding the loyalty with which my Russian
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.