[This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.]
AFFAIRS OF CHINA,
CONFIDENTIAL,
[33686]
No. 1.
[October 6.]
SECTION CO
47844
V
ROKA NOV 06
Mr. Carnegie to Sir Edward Grey.-Received October 6.)
(No. 356. Confidential.) Sir,
Peking, August 22, 1906.
WITH reference to my despatch No. 319 of the 24th July, I have the honour to inclose copy of a note which I addressed to Prince Ch'ing on the 14th August, on the delay of the Viceroy of Nanking in sending deputies to Shanghae to discuss a settlement of the riots of December last.
In answer to my instructions of the 21st July, His Majesty's Consul at Nanking telegraphed on the 30th July that the Viceroy had not admitted the principle of indemnity to him, and that the Taotais Lo and Shen told him public opinion in Shanghae was so much opposed to the idea of compensation that it would be dangerous to insist.
Mr. Sundius was also informed in strict confidence that if the Wai-wu Pu were forced to send peremptory orders to the Viceroy to pay compensation he would do so, but that otherwise he would not venture to incur popular odium and denunciation.
I communicated a portion of Mr. Sundius' reply to Mr. Tong privately on the 31st July, commented severely on the evasive tactics of the Viceroy, and warned him that if the latter was not brought quickly into line I should be compelled to write a strong note to Prince Ch'ing on the subject.
He admitted, as a private and personal expression of opinion, that the Viceroy was apprehensive of the criticism of the Shanghae native press, and promised to speak to the Prince next day at the Summer Palace.
On the 3rd August he told me that the Viceroy had been urgently requested by telegraph to send his deputies to Shanghae at once.
At the Wai-wu Pu, on the 7th August, I was told that, according to a telegram received from the Viceroy, His Majesty's Consul had proposed arbitration of the claims for compensation by a neutral person.
I replied that, as Mr. Sundius had no authority to propose anything of the sort, there must have been some misunderstanding.
This was so clearly an attempt on the part of the Viceroy to avoid fulfilling the arrangement stated in my telegram No. 122 of the 6th June to you, that I expressed my inability to explain the proceedings of his Excellency in any way which would be satisfactory to His Majesty's Government.
Mr. Tong once more promised that a telegram would be sent to Nanking urging the dispatch of the deputies to Shanghae.
From information sent to me since by Mr. Sundius, who states that the proposal for arbitration was the Viceroy's and not his, it would appear that the Wai-wu Pu, at all events in their later telegrams to Nanking, studiously avoid any reference to compensation, and for this reason I thought it necessary to put the matter clearly to Prince Ch'ing in my note of the 14th August.
There is no doubt that the reluctance of the Viceroy to move in this matter is largely attributable to the general fear of Chinese chauvinism which is clogging official action in international matters.
Taotai Lo told Mr. Sundius frankly that it was as much as his life was worth to broach the subject of compensation at Shanghae, and though this statement may be an exaggeration, it reflects the anxiety of the Viceroy's deputies to avoid entering upon the extremely ungrateful duty of discussing the question with His Majesty's Consul-General.
I should add that, in an interview of the 17th August, I again expressed to the Wai-wu Pu my strong dissatisfaction at the inability of their Excellencies to procure the due fulfilment of the arrangement come to between us two months previously, and suggested that if the telegrams of the Wai-wu Pu were ineffectual it was open to Prince Ch'ing to bring an Imperial Decree to bear upon the Viceroy.
Their Excellencies made no defence, but promised to consult with his Highness as soon as he returns to town from the Summer Palace.
I have, &c.
(Signed)
LANCELOT D. CARNEGIE.
[2183 ƒ~~9]
95
[This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.]
AFFAIRS OF CHINA,
CONFIDENTIAL,
[33686]
No. 1.
[October 6.]
SECTION CO
47844
V
ROKA NOV 06
Mr. Carnegie to Sir Edward Grey.-Received October 6.)
(No. 356. Confidential.) Sir,
Peking, August 22, 1906. WITH reference to my despatch No. 319 of the 24th July, I have the honour to inclose copy of a note which I addressed to Prince Ch'ing on the 14th August, on the delay of the Viceroy of Nanking in sending deputies to Shanghac to discuss a settlement of the riots of December last.
In answer to my instructions of the 21st July, His Majesty's Consul at Nanking telegraphed on the 30th July that the Viceroy had not admitted the principle of indemnity to him, and that the Taotais Lo and Shen told him public opinion in Shanghae was so much opposed to the idea of compensation that it would be dangerous to insist Mr. Sundius was also informed in strict confidence that if the Wai-wu Pu were forced to send peremptory orders to the Viceroy to pay compensation he would do so, but that otherwise he would not venture to incur popular odium and denunciation.
on it.
I communicated a portion of Mr. Sundius' reply to Mr. Tong privately on the 31st July, commented severely on the evasive tactics of the Viceroy, and warned him that if the latter was not brought quickly into line I should be compelled to write a strong note to Prince Ching on the subject. He admitted, as a private and personal expression of opinion, that the Viceroy was apprehensive of the criticism of the Shanghae native press, and promised to speak to the Prince next day at the Summer Palace. On the 3rd August he told me that the Viceroy had been urgently requested by telegraph to send his deputies to Shanghae at once.
At the Wai-wn Pu, on the 7th August, I was told that, according to a telegram received from the Viceroy, His Majesty's Consul had proposed arbitration of the claims for compensation by a neutral person. I replied that, as Mr. Sundius had no authority to propose anything of the sort, there must have been some misunderstanding. This was so clearly an attempt on the part of the Viceroy to avoid fulfilling the arrangement stated in my telegram No. 122 of the 6th June to you, that I expressed my inability to explain the proceedings of his Excellency in any way which would be satisfactory to His Majesty's Government. Mr. Tong once more promised that a telegram would be sent to Nanking urging the dispatch of the deputies to Shanghae.
From information sent to me since by Mr. Sundius, who states that the proposal for arbitration was the Viceroy's and not his, it would appear that the Wai-wn Pu, at all events in their later telegrams to Nanking, studiously avoid any reference to compen- sation, and for this reason I thought it necessary to put the matter clearly to Prince Ching in my note of the 14th August.
There is no doubt that the reluctance of the Viceroy to move in this matter is largely attributable to the general fear of Chinese chauvinisin which is clogging official action in international matters. Taotai Lo told Mr. Sundius frankly that it was as much as his life was worth to broach the subject of compensation at Shanghae, and though this statement may be an exaggeration, it reflects the anxiety of the Viceroy's deputies to avoid entering upon the extremely ungrateful duty of discussing the question with fis Majesty's Consul-General.
I should add that, in an interview of the 17th August, I again expressed to the Wai-wu Pu my strong dissatisfaction at the inability of their Excellencies to procure the due fulfilment of the arrangement come to between us two months previously, and suggested that if the telegrams of the Wai-wu Pu were ineffectual it was open to Prince Ch'ing to bring an Imperial Decree to bear upon the Viceroy. Their Excellencies made no defence, but promised to consult with his Highness as soon as he returns to town from the Summer Palace.
I have, &c.
(Signed)
LANCELOT D. CARNEGIE.
[2183 ƒ~~9]
95
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.