CONFIDENTIAL.
No. 1.
Sir E. Satow to the Marquess of Lansdowne,—(Received December 16.)
(No. 355. Confidential.)
Lord,
Peking, October 30, 1905.
FOLLOWING the suggestion of Na-t'ung, mentioned in my despatch No. 343, Confidential, of the 18th instant, I called by appointment on his Excellency Ch'i ng-ch'i at his residence on the 23rd instant and had a private conversation with him on the present unsatisfactory treatment of British railway, mining, and commercial interests.
The general burden of my complaint was stated in much the same language as that used in my conversation with Na-tung (reported in my despatch No. 343), and his Excellency resisted the charge of hostility as strongly as Na-t'ung did. He ascribed the railway difficulties mainly to the dubious reputation of Shêng Hsüan-huni, whose management of railway matters had produced a crop of troubles, and was viewed with suspicion by everybody, including himself. He thoroughly understood my grounds of objection to the present course of affairs, and assured me that the Wai-wu Pu were well aware of the necessity of strictly observing the terms of the written agreements, but the volume of popular feeling had to be reckoned with, and if the Wai-wu Pu were too hasty in suppressing the demands for abrogation, and showed themselves too regardless of local opinion, they would be attacked on all sides and their position rendered precarious. He also recommended patience, and made it quite evident that in his view no advance could be expected until the provincial onslaught on Shêng was over. When I enlarged upon the objectionable features of my correspondence with the Wai-wu Pu, his Excellency insisted that they were doing their best with the Viceroy of Canton, who supported the movement in favour of construction by local capital, and he defended the non-appointment of a special negotiator on the ground that under the circumstances no one could be appointed but Shêng, who was not acceptable to us. No one would be willing to undertake the task, knowing that Shêng was standing by with the right to criticize given to him by the fact of his having been the negotiator of the preliminary Agreement.
I based a strong objection to the Wai-wu Pu's note of the 9th instant in regard to the Soochow-Hangchow-Ningpo Railway (inclosed in my despatch No. 335 of the 12th instant), on the fact that the Decree mentioned in it was framed in the Grand Council, of which his Excellency is a member. He contended that the objectionable part of the Decree was a mere quotation from the words of the Censor, upon whose Memorial the Decree was drawn up, and that the action taken by Shêng at Shanghae was not in accordance with the intention of the Decree, which clearly enjoined a discussion with the British and Chinese Corporation, and not a direct challenge to abrogate. Shêng's proceedings disclosed a deliberate intention to come in conflict with the Corporation, and that course was obviously promoted by a desire to curry favour with the provinces and to counter the violent attacks which his railway transactions had provoked everywhere. His Excellency again counselled patience.
I asked how long I was expected to exercise patience, and dwelt on the difficulty in which His Majesty's Government would be placed meanwhile to explain the hostility of the Chinese authorities towards British enterprises. What his Excellency said to me privately could hardly be made use of publicly, and it followed that all His Majesty's Government had to go upon were the notes of the Wai-wu Pu, which were far from satisfactory.
His Excellency was unable to commit himself to any indication of the length of time which might be necessary to arrange matters. He thought that after his frank explanation—an explanation which he could not have made at the Wai-wu Pu or otherwise than for my private information—I must, from my knowledge of Chinese methods, be convinced of the expediency and reasonableness of delay. I must have noticed, he said, that no answer had yet been returned to my note of the 10th October; that was because its contents were still under careful consideration, and were being used to reason with the people who were pressing for abrogation.
I invited his Excellency to seriously consider the effect of China's reputation and
[2295 q--2]
7
CONFIDENTIAL.
>
No. 1.
Sir E. Satow to the Marquess of Lansdowne,-(Received December 16.)
). 355. Confidential.)
Lord,
Peking, October 30, 1905. FOLLOWING the suggestion of Na-t'ung, mentioned in my despatch No. 343, afidential, of the 18th instant, I called by appointment on his Excellency Ch'i ng-ch'i at his residence on the 23rd instant and had a private conversation with bim the present unsatisfactory treatment of British railway, mining, and commercial erests.
The general burden of my complaint was stated in much the same language as that d in my conversation with Na-tung (reported in my despatch No. 343), and his cellency resisted the charge of hostility as strongly as Na-t'ung did. He ascribed › railway difficulties mainly to the dubious reputation of Shêng Hsüan-huni, whose magement of railway matters had produced a crop of troubles, and was viewed with He thoroughly understood my ich suspicion by everybody, including himself. ounds of objection to the present course of affairs, and assured me that the Wai-wu I were well aware of the necessity of strictly observing the terms of the written greements, but the volume of popular feeling had to be reckoned with, and if the ai-wu Pu were too hasty in suppressing the demands for abrogation, and showed emselves too regardless of local opinion, they would be attacked on all sides and their sition rendered precarious. He also recommended patience, and made it quite ident that in his view no advance could be expected until the provincial onslaught on pêng was over. When I enlarged upon the objectionable features of my correspondence ith the Wai-wn Pu, his Excellency insisted that they were doing their best with the iceroy of Canton, who supported the movement in favour of construction by local apital, and he defended the nou-appointment of a special negotiator on the ground that nder the circumstances no one could be appointed but Sheng, who was not acceptable ɔ us. No one would be willing to undertake the task, knowing that Shông was tanding by with the right to criticize given to him by the fact of his having been the egotiator of the preliminary Agreement.
I based a strong objection to the Wai-wu Pu's note of the 9th instant in regard to he Soochow-Hangchow-Ningpo Railway (inclosed in my despatch No. 335 of the 12th instant), on the fact that the Decree mentioned in it was framed in the Grand Council, of which his Excellency is a member. He contended that the objectionable part of the Decree was a mere quotation from the words of the Censor, upon whose Memorial the Decree was drawn up, and that the action taken by Shêng at Shanghae was not in accordance with the intention of the Decree, which clearly enjoined a discussion with the British and Chinese Corporation, and not a direct challenge to abrogate. Sheng's proceedings disclosed a deliberate intention to come in conflict with the Corporation, and that course was obviously promoted by a desire to curry favour with the provinces and to counter the violent attacks which his railway transac- tions had provoked everywhere. His Excellency again counselled patience.
I asked how long I was expected to exercise patience, and dwelt on the difficulty in which His Majesty's Government would be placed meanwhile to explain the hostility of the Chinese authorities towards British enterprises. What his Excellency said to me privately could hardly be made use of publicly, and it followed that all His Majesty's Government had to go upon were the notes of the Wai-wu Pu, which were far from satisfactory.
His Excellency was unable to commit himself to any indication of the length of He thought that after his frank time which might be necessary to arrange matters. explanation-an explanation which he could not have made at the Wai-wu Pu or otherwise than for my private information-I must, from my knowledge of Chinese methods, be convinced of the expediency and reasonableness of delay. I must have noticed, he said, that no answer had yet been returned to my note of the 10th October; that was because its contents were still under careful consideration, and were being used to reason with the people who were pressing for abrogation.
I invited his Excellency to seriously consider the effect of China's reputation and
[2295 q--2]
7
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.