70 oguly Co.
This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.]
SOUTH-WEST CHINA.
CONFIDENTIAL.
[20640]
No. 1.
487
[June 18.]
SECTION 1. C. O.
24601
REC REC 7 JUL 06.
Sir E. Satow to Sir Edward Grey.-(Received June 18.)
(No. 202.) Sir,
WITH reference to my despatch No. 113 of the 13th March and telegram No. 75 Peking, May 1, 1906, of the 10th April, I have the honour to inclose copy of a note which I addressed to-day to Prince Ching, in accordance with the instructions conveyed in your telegram No. 86 of the 28th April, on the subject of the Burmah frontier north of latitude 25° 35′.
As reported in my telegram No. 75 of the 10th April, I again discussed the subject at the Wai-wu Pu on the 9th April with the Grand Secretaries Na-t'ung and Ch'i Hung-chi and his Excellency Lien-fang. I made some geographical explanations of an elementary character to Ch'ü Chung-tang, who was under the impression that the "Salween flowed south into the Irrawaddy," and substituted another draft Article for that submitted in my interview of the 9th March in order to define the boundary more clearly. In the earlier draft I adopted the wording contained in Lord Lansdowne's despatch No. 219 of the 30th September, 1905-"The watershed between the Irrawaddy and the Salween basins up to the confines of Thibet"--but as the Shweli belongs to the Irrawaddy system and the starting point at Manung Pum is some distance from the Salween divide, I thought a more extended statement necessary to prevent misunderstanding.
Their Excellencies said that after consultation with the Viceroy of Yunnan they had come to the conclusion that my proposals were not acceptable. They involved a concession of a large portion of territory which was under Chinese jurisdiction, and this was not a thing which the Viceroy or themselves could lightly agree to.
I argued that the watershed was the natural boundary, and that the claims of the Chinese Government over any territory west of it were of a doubtful character. There were some customary presents or dues which the native Chiefs (“tu-yi") of Ming-Kuang and Teng-Keng occasionally received, and for these the Indian Government would make suitable monetary compensation.
Their Excellencies still objected, and made it evident that they had no intention of treating our proposals in a reasonable and practical way. In reply to a categorical question, Chü Chung-tang finally declared that they could not be accepted. I therefore brought the discussion to a close by saying that I should address them a note on the subject.
I have, &c.
(Signed)
ERNEST SATOW.
Inclosure in No. 1.
Sir E. Satow to Prince Ch'ing.
Your Highness,
WITH reference to the correspondence which took place between us at the May 1, 1906. beginning of this year, in which I proposed that the Board of Foreign Affairs should appoint a day for the discussion of the reports furnished by the late Mr. Litton, His Majesty's Acting Consul at Tengyueh, and Taotai Shih on their joint examination of the watershed to the north of Manang Pum, your Highness is aware that, with the object of arriving at an amicable settlement in regard to the frontier between the British and Chinese possessions northwards from that point on the 9th March, and again on the 9th April, I discussed this matter with their Excellencies Na Chung-tang, Ch'a Chung-tang, and Lien-fang. On the latter occasion I submitted to them the draft of a proposed Article in the following form :----
Whereas by the terms of Article IV of the Convention between Great Britain and China of the 1st March, 1894, it was agreed that the settlement and delimitation
[2048 - ·1]
--,- -༥་ --
70 oguly Co.
This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.]
SOUTH-WEST CHINA.
CONFIDENTIAL.
[20640]
No. 1.
487
[June 18.]
SECTION 1. C. O.
24601
REC REC 7 JUL 06.
Sir E. Satow to Sir Edward Grey.-(Received June 18.)
(No. 202.) Sir,
WITH reference to my despatch No. 113 of the 13th March and telegram No. 75
Peking, May 1, 1906, of the 10th April, I have the honour to inclose copy of a note which I addressed to-day to Prince Ching, in accordance with the instructions conveyed in your telegram No. 86 of the 28th April, on the subject of the Burmah frontier north of latitude 25° 35′.
As reported in my telegram No. 75 of the 10th April, I again discussed the subject at the Wai-wu Pu on the 9th April with the Grand Secretaries Na-t'ung and Ch'i Hung-chi and his Excellency Lien-fang. I made some geographical explana- tions of an elementary character to Ch'ü Chung-tang, who was under the impression that the "Salween flowed south into the Irrawaddy," and substituted another draft Article for that submitted in my interview of the 9th March in order to define the boundary more clearly. In the earlier draft I adopted the wording contained in Lord Lansdowne's despatch No. 219 of the 30th September, 1905-"The watershed between the Irrawaddy and the Salween basins up to the confines of Thibet"--but as the Shweli belongs to the Irrawaddy system and the starting point at Manung Pum is some distance from the Salween divide, I thought a more extended statement necessary to prevent misunderstanding.
Their Excellencies said that after consultation with the Viceroy of Yunnan they bad come to the conclusion that my proposals were not acceptable. concession of a large portion of territory which was under Chinese jurisdiction, and They involved a this was not a thing which the Viceroy or themselves could lightly agree to.
I argued that the watershed was the natural boundary, and that the claims of the Chinese Government over any territory west of it were of a doubtful character. There were some customary presents or dues which the native Chiefs (“fu-yi") of Ming-Kuang and Teng-Keng occasionally received, and for these the Indian Govern- ment would make suitable monetary compensation.
Their Excellencies still objected, and made it evident that they had no intention of treating our proposals in a reasonable and practical way, question, Chu Chung-tang finally declared that they could not be accepted. I In reply to a categorical therefore brought the discussion to a close by saying that I should address them a note on the subject.
I have, &c.
(Signed)
ERNEST SATOW.
Inclosure in No. 1.
Sir E. Satow to Prince Ch'ing.
Your Highness,
WITH reference to the correspondence which took place between us at the
May 1, 1906. beginning of this year, in which I proposed that the Board of Foreign Affairs should appoint a day for the discussion of the reports furnished by the late Mr. Litton, His Majesty's Acting Consui at Tengyueh, and Taotai Shih on their joint examination of the watershed to the north of Manang Pum, your Highness is aware that, with the object of arriving at an amicable settlement in regard to the frontier between the British and Chinese possessions northwards from that point on the 9th March, and again on the 9th April, I discussed this matter with their Excellencies Na Chung- tang, Ch'a Chung-tang, and Lien-fang. On the latter occasion I submitted to them the draft of a proposed Article in the following form :----
Whereas by the terms of Article IV of the Convention between Great Britain and China of the 1st March, 1894, it was agreed that the settlement and delimitation
[2048 - ·1]
--,- -༥་ --
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.