CO129-343 - Public Offices & Foreign Office - 1907 — Page 71

2

is almost The difficulty of proving genuine agency, except by the possession of passes, insuperable, and the rules now in force here appear to give merchants every reasonable facility in buying produce in the interior.

[This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.]

CHINA TRADE.

CONFIDENTIAL.

I have, &c. (Signed)

E. H. FRASER.

Inclosure 2 in No. 1.

[43522]

No. 1.

68

[December 29.]

SECTION

2752

preneo JN 07

(No. 19.) Sir,

Sir J. Jordan to Consul-General Fraser.

Peking, November 7, 1906. I HAVE considered the contents of your despatch No. 66 of the 1st instant, and, if I understand it rightly, the proposal of the Ilanyang Prefect suggests that within the port area of exports in Chinese hands only those protected by a transit pass shall be free from the cess you mention, for it is clear that exports outside the port area which are not under pass are liable to this tax, irrespective of ownership. I presume, then, that the Prefect desires you to agree that the fact of goods for export being in Chinese hands, within Treaty port limits, is to be conclusive that they are Chinese- owned for the purposes of this tax, and to that general proposition I am unable to assent. The question of ownership, as distinct from mere possession, will always remain one of fact, and each case must be decided on its merits. The course of trade at Hankow may be such that the Prefect's proposal, as you say, can do little harm, but the precedent involved is serious, and Treaty provisions place it out of my power to accept any arrangement which might make bond fide British-owned exports in a Treaty port liable to local levies.

Apart from the legal aspect of the matter, which in my view does not admit of compromise, I should be disposed to recommend an attitude of caution towards any Chinese rate for educational purposes. I gather that such levies are increasing, and becoming increasingly unpopular, and if, as I am informed, they are usually associated with the foreigner and foreign methods, any assistance from us towards their collection might be misconstrued to our detriment.

I have, &c.

(Signed) J. N. JORDAN.

Sir J. Jordan to Sir Edward Grey.--(Received December 29.)

(No. 468.) Sir,

Peking, November 13, 1906. IN continuation of my despatch No. 434 of the 27th October, I now have the honour to inclose an English translation of the Trade-marks Regulations, as redrafted by the Board of Commerce, together with a translation of Prince Ching's reply to my note asking that no steps should be taken to issue these Regulations till they have been duly examined.*

An assurance on this point is given by his Highness, and further examination of the new draft has not led me to a favourable view of its provisions. The Chinese text bears exidence of having been drafted under Japanese auspices, and it is drawn up in a confused manner, with many obscurities, some passages being quite unintelligible.

At the same time, there are certain concessions made by the Board of Commerce in amelioration of their former proposals. The fees are somewhat reduced, and provision is made for the exterritorial rights of foreigners; but there is no stipulation for the deposit of marks already in legitimate use in a "special list," or for the prevention of registering "open marks.'

I am sending to Mr. Hosie, who is now at Shanghae, a copy of these draft Regulations, in order that he may be prepared on his return to Peking to advise me of the latest views of the British firms interested in the question. But Ï propose, if my colleagues share the opinion, to urge on the Wai-wu Pu that the resumption of negotiations on this subject should be on the basis of the draft prepared by the Foreigu Representatives in April 1905, and not on the present document.

I have, &c. (Signed) J. N. JORDAN,

* Not printed.

[2268 -2]

1