CO129-337 - Public Offices & Foreign Office - 1906 — Page 706

"Second condition not acceptable. Chinese Government must do its utmost to stop piracy, and to deal with each case as it arises. "Continue pressure on these lines."

(11.)

Consul-General, Canton, to Sir E. Satow (Telegraphic), July 4, 1905.

Reference to telegram of the 22nd June from Sir E. Satow.

"After a week's negotiation, the Viceroy would only agree to add to the second condition an assurance that he would use his best efforts to suppress piracy. He has now called upon the Wuchow Taotai for a report."

(12.)

Consul-General, Canton, to Sir E. Satow, July 6, 1905.

Summarizes situation up-to-date.

Copy of this despatch was sent to the Foreign Office direct from Canton.

(13.)

Consul-General, Canton, to Sir E. Satow, July 6, 1905.

Transmits copy of a despatch from His Majesty's Consul at Wuchow inclosing translation of a Memorial from the Board of Commerce dated the 15th December, 1904, in which Chinese local authorities are instructed to forestall foreign enterprise in the matter of inland steam navigation. "There appears no doubt that the present action of the Viceroy is the direct consequence of these instructions."

(The above Memorial was the subject of a note from Sir E. Satow to Prince Ching dated the 31st July, 1905. Vide Inclosure 6 in Sir E. Satow's No. 184 of the 17th April, 1906, to Sir Edward Grey.)

(14.)

Sir E. Satow to Consul-General, Canton (Telegraphic), July 7, 1905.

Reference to telegram of the 4th July from Canton.

Presumes that general absurdity of second condition has been pointed out to Viceroy, and suggests that it might be useful to warn him privately and amicably that corollary to Chinese Government disclaiming responsibility for piracies is some one else undertaking preventive duties.

6

(22.)

GA7

Consul-General, Canton, to Sir E. Satow, August 17, 1905.

Viceroy still obstructive. He claims that certificates to ply between inland places were illegally used.

His Majesty's Consul-General suggests that the difficulty would be solved by the effective opening of Nanning.

(23.)

Consul-General, Canton, to Sir E. Satow, August 22, 1905.

Viceroy still holds that certificates were illegally issued, and that until Nanning is open launches have no status there; but says that he has no objection to the opening of Nanning, and at the request of His Majesty's Consul-General has undertaken to telegraph to the Wai-wu Pu in that sense.

(For correspondence with Wai-wu Pu about opening of Nanning, see Sir E. Satow's despatch No. 150 of the 5th April, 1906, to the Foreign Office.)

(24.)

Consul, Wuchow, to Sir E. Satow (Telegraphic), October 10, 1905.

Viceroy has prohibited the issue of inland navigation certificates to launches plying above Wuchow.

(25.)

Sir E. Satow to Consul-General, Canton (Telegraphic), October 11, 1905. Reference to despatch from Canton of the 22nd August and telegram of the 10th October from Wuchow.

Wai-wu Pu were asked on the 14th September to open Nanning effectively. Yesterday they replied that the matter had been referred to Viceroy of Canton and Governor of Kuangsi, from whom no communications had yet been received. Points out that this seems inconsistent with contents of Canton despatch of the 22nd August, Press Viceroy again.

(26.)

Consul-General, Canton, to Viceroy, October 14, 1905.

Objects to the prohibition referred to in Wuchow Consul's telegram of the 10th October to Sir E. Satow as contrary to Treaty.

(15.)

(27.)

Consul, Wuchow, to Sir E. Satow, July 11, 1906.

A general report on the extension of inland steam navigation in Kuangsi.

Consul, Wuchow, to Consul-General, Canton, October 16, 1905.

Gives details on the subject of the stoppage of launch navigation above Wuchow.