121
2
His Excellency first read note of the 9th October from the Wai-wu Pu, looked puzzled, then amused, and finally said he could not understand how such a note came to be written. He passed it across the table to Mr. Tsai, and asked him if he could explain.
I said that there was no escaping the fact that the note contained an Imperial Decree--for it amounted to that--the purport of which was unmistakable, which had been handed down by the Grand Council and communicated to Sir E. Satow. The Decree, officially by the Wai-wu Pu at the instance of Sheng, would seem to inaugurate a new departure in the treatment of written Agreements--abrogation at the will of one of the parties. It was hardly known abroad yet that the popular agitation in the provinces had so much countenance in the highest quarters, but it required no great acumen to foresee the inevitable consequence if financial markets came to learn that the Empress-Dowager and Emperor favour the cancelling of concessions in this offhand fashion. Where was the process to end? To-day it was the railways and mines; to-morrow it might be the loans.
His Excellency completely agreed with the general argument, which he considered self-evident. Returning to the note he repeated that it was past his comprehension. There must have been a mistake on the part of someone in the Wai-wu Pu. That was not the way to conduct foreign affairs. Of course, there was no denying that many Agreements had been made in the past that were objectionable, but the proper way of dealing with them was by negotiation. "This method," pointing to the note, "is not mine. Many people have tried to move me to do something similar in connection with the Tien-tsin-Chinking Railway Concession, but I pay no heed whatever to them."
His Excellency then read through the second document (Sir Ernest's reply of the 10th October), and when he came to the warning at the end--that Sheng would not be an acceptable negotiator, asked the reason. I explained that we had for years found Sheng wilfully obstructive and hostile, notably in negotiations connected with the Mackay Treaty, the Shanghae-Nanking Railway Loan Agreement, and the Peking Syndicate's affairs, but that Sir Ernest's immediate objection to him arose from a recent incident in which Sheng surreptitiously interpolated some words in an Agreement signed with the Peking Syndicate. It was not possible to conduct negotiations amicably with an individual capable of such a trick.
The Viceroy, while avoiding any appearance of taking up the cudgels for Sheng, felt sure from personal knowledge that the latter was opposed to the cancelling of these preliminary Agreements. He thought it quite likely that Sheng incited the Wai-wu Pu to send the note to Sir Ernest, but with the object of provoking strong remonstrances.
What Sir Ernest wanted the Chinese Government to do, I said, was quite simple. He wanted them to appoint negotiators in both cases (Canton-Kowloon and Soochow-Hangchow-Ningpo Railway Concessions). In the first case, the Wai-wu Pu has asked Viceroy Ts'en of Canton to negotiate, but the latter thought Sheng was the proper person. Sir Ernest considered that Sheng was unacceptable in either case, and told the Wai-wu Pu so.
The Canton-Hankow Railway Loan was mentioned, and his Excellency, alleging ignorance of its terms (I take it he wished to have his own information confirmed), I stated them from memory. I also described the contents of Viceroy Chang's despatch of the 7th September to Mr. Fraser, giving the first option of construction loans to British capitalists. His Excellency thought the terms and conditions very reasonable. I assured him that as to that there was not a shadow of doubt--better terms or conditions were not obtainable, yet in this case also the Grand Council and the Wai-wu Pu were listening to popular opposition, and, while accepting the loan from the Hong Kong Government, warned Viceroy Chang against acting upon his despatch of the 7th September to Mr. Fraser.
That looked uncommonly as if the Central Government were ready to perform only those portions of a contract which were advantageous to them; they seemed to forget that there were always two sides to a bargain. There must be give and take. Sir Ernest was asked to exercise patience, but patience had its limits. Though he was told confidentially of the Wai-wu Pu's views and troubles, such information could not be used publicly, and up to the present, all His Majesty's Government had to go upon to explain the attitude of the Chinese Government, was the correspondence of the Wai-wu Pu of which the note produced was an example. There was no room for delay--China's credit was in question.
3
Sir Ernest wished his Excellency to lend his weighty assistance, and counsel the Central Government to resist the popular clamour against the Railway and Mining Concessions I had mentioned, and to act up to their Treaty agreements and obligations. It should be remembered that there was a danger of the aggrieved parties, if they were met with a mere confession of weakness, going directly to the provinces for redress. In an aside, in English, to Mr. Ts'ai, I remarked that those which troubled us at the moment were very accessible--Canton, Foochow, Chekiang, Anhui.
His Excellency kept the copies of the two notes, and said that he would be going to Peking in a few days to make a personal report to the Court on the manœuvres, and he would then take the opportunity to speak to the persons concerned on these matters. Agreements should not be made lightly, but when made should be scrupulously adhered to. Throughout the conversation, his Excellency made no effort to conceal his disapproval of the provincial agitations, and this was expressed more by gesture than in words.
121
2
His Excellency first read note of the 9th October from the Wai-wu Pu, looked puzzled, then amused, and finally said he could not understand how such a note came to be written. He passed it across the table to Mr. Tsai, and asked him if he could explain.
I said that there was no escaping the fact that the note contained an Imperial Decree--for it amounted to that-the purport of which was unmistakable. which had been handed down by the Grand Council and communicated to Sir E. Satow The Decree, officially by the Wai-wu Pu at the instance of Sheng, would seem to inaugurate a new departure in the treatment of written Agreements-abrogation at the will of one of the parties. It was hardly known abroad yet that the popular agitation in the provinces had so much countenance in the highest quarters, but it required no great acumen to foresee the inevitable consequence if financial markets came to learn that the Empress- Dowager and Emperor favour the cancelling of concessions in this offhand fashion. Where was the process to end ? To-day it was the railways and mines; to-morrow it might be the loans.
His Excellency completely agreed with the general argument, which he considered self-evident. Returning to the note he repeated that it was past his comprehension. There must have been a mistake on the part of someone in the Wai-wu Pn. not the way to conduct foreign affairs. Of course there was no denying that many That was objectionable Agreements had been made in the past, but the proper way of dealing with them was by negotiation. "is not mine. Many people have tried to move me to do something similar in "This method "pointing to the note-- connection with the Tien-tsin-Chinking Railway Concession, but I pay no heed whatever to them."
His Excellency then read through the second document (Sir Ernest's reply of the 10th October), and when he came to the warning at the end-that Sheng would not be an acceptable negotiator, asked the reason. Shêng wilfully obstructive and hostile, notably in negotiations connected with the I explained that we had for years found Mackay Treaty, the Shanghae-Nanking Railway Loan Agreement, and the Peking Syndicate's affairs, but that Sir Ernest's immediate objection to him arose from a recent incident in which Sheng surreptitiously interpolated some words in an Agreement signed with the Peking Syndicate. It was not possible to conduct negotiations amicably with an individual capable of such a trick.
The Viceroy, while avoiding any appearance of taking up the cudgels for Shêng, felt sure from personal knowledge that the latter was opposed to the cancelling of these preliminary Agreements. He thought it quite likely that Shêng incited the Wai-wu Pu to send the note to Sir Ernest, but with the object of provoking strong
remonstrances.
What Sir Ernest wanted the Chinese Government to do, I said, was quite simple. He wanted them to appoint negotiators in both cases (Canton-Kowloon and Soochow-- Hangchow--Ningpo Railway Concessions). In the first case, the Wai-wu Pu has asked Viceroy Ts'en of Canton to negotiate, but the latter thought Shêng was the proper person. Sir Ernest considered that Shông was inacceptable in either case, and told the Wai-wu Pu so.
The Canton-Hankow Railway Loan was mentioned, and his Excellency alleging ignorance of its terms (I take it he wished to have his own information confirmed) I stated them from memory. of the 7th September to Mr. Fraser, giving the first option of construction loans to I also described the contents of Viceroy Chang's despatch British capitalists. His Excellency thought the terms and conditions very reasonable. I assured him that as to that there was not a shadow of doubt--better terms or conditions were not obtainable, yet in this case also the Grand Council and the Wai-wu Pu were listening to popular opposition, and, while accepting the loan from the Hong Kong Government, warned Viceroy Chang against acting upon his despatch of the 7th September to Mr. Fraser,
That looked uncommonly as if the Central Government were ready to perform only those portions of a contract which were advantageous to them; they seemed to forget that there were always two sides to a bargain. There must be give and take. Sir Ernest was asked to exercise patience, but patience had its limits. Though he was told confidentially of the Wai-wu Pa's views and troubles, such information could not be used publicly, and up to the present all His Majesty's Government had to go upon to explain the attitude of the Chinese Government, was the correspondence of the Wai-wu Pu of which the note produced was an example. There was no room for delay-China's credit was in question.
3
Sir Ernest wished his Excellency to lend his weighty assistance, and counsel the Central Government to resist the popular clamour against the Railway and Mining Concessions I had mentioned, and to act up to their Treaty agreements and obligations. It should be remembered that there was a danger of the aggrieved parties, if they were met with a mere confession of weakness, going directly to the provinces for redress. In an aside, in English, to Mr. Ts'ai, I remarked that those which troubled us at the moment were very accessible-Canton, Foochow, Chekiang, Anhui,
His Excellency kept the copies of the two notes, and said that he would be going to Peking in a few days to make a personal report to the Court on the manœuvres, and he would then take the opportunity to speak to the persons concerned on these matters. Agreements should not be made lightly, but when made should be scrupulously adhered to. Throughout the conversation his Excellency made no effort to conceal his disapproval of the provincial agitations, and this was expressed more by gesture than in words.
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.