5
4.
expression in the Agreement with the Peking Syndicate were distinctly present, and not, as the Wai-wu Pu's note asserts, absent.
By the above-quoted condition in Clause 17 of the Shansi Agreement of the 21st May, 1898, alone, the Syndicate were absolutely precluded from making a main railway in that region, and were therefore justified in waiting for the construction of the line, which was imperatively necessary before the mines could be opened with success, which the Syndicate was strictly bound down not to build itself, and which the Chinese Government had specially placed in the hands of others. So soon as that line was begun, by those to whom the Chinese Government had granted the right, the Syndicate applied for a permit under its Shansi Agreement of 1898. This was considerably more than a year ago, and it has not been issued yet.
The Syndicate, I submit, cannot be fairly accused of unreasonable delay. It has been wrongfully deprived of the enjoyment of its rights under a solemn compact made by the Chinese Government, and it must continue to hold that Government responsible for adequate compensation.
The Syndicate trusts that your Excellency will see that it receives justice.
Your Excellency,
I have, &c. (Signed) GEORGE BROWN,
Agent-General.
Inclosure 6 in No. 1.
Mr. G. Brown to Sir J. Jordan.
Tien-Isin, March 19, 1907. I HAVE the honour to inclose a statement of revenue and expenditure for the Tao-Ching Railway for the eighteen months from the 1st July, 1905, when the line was taken over by the Chinese Government, up to the 31st December, 1908. The evidence of coming prosperity, shown towards the end of last year, still continues, and there is every reason to believe that this railway will before very long become a paying concern. My object in submitting this document for your Excellency's perusal is that if, as has been the case in the past, doubts are cast on the prospects of this line, your Excellency may know the true facts.
I have, &c.
(Signed) GEORGE BROWN,
Inclosure 7 in No. 1.
Imperial Chinese Railways: Tuokou-Chinghua Line.
Agent-General.
Statement of Revenue and Expenditure from July 1, 1905, to December 31, 1906.
ג+
ני
Month,
Revenue.
Expenditure.
Taels C.
July 1905 August September
3.863 99
4,909 87
"
4.602 42
Taels 11,828 55 13,440 16 13,350 95
C.
October
7,672 89
10,187 41
November
77
9,911 29
December Jamary
8,369 18
1906
4,765 78
February
13
Marcu
6,124 86 12,565
39
April
3
12,658 46
14,219 63 11,826 40 10,979 17 10,013 28 11,869 68 11,088 24
May
9,068 40
11,521 03
June
*
4,558 42
13,498 60
July
53
9,275 31
14,940 23
August
"
9,795 10
20,649 57
September
10,777 16
12,637 83
October "1
14,903 26
12,254 36
November
ラチ
24,295 54
14,104 55
December
53
28.540 65
13,854 79
Total
186,053 06
282,264 43
Inclosure & in No. 1.
Sir J. Jordan to Prince Ch'ing,
Your Highness,
I HAVE the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your Highness' note of the
Peking, March 25, 1907. 4th March, in which it was stated that the Agreement of the Russo-Chinese Bank respecting the Cheng-t'ai Railway had no relation to the Peking Syndicate Agreement of the 21st May, 1898; that the records of the Wai-wu Pu contained nothing to show that the Agreement between the Russo-Chinese Bank and the Syndicate of the 26th April, 1898, was made in consultation with the late Grand Secretary Li Hung Chang; that the Chinese authorities in dealing with the Honan and Shansi Concessions of the Syndicate had not placed them on a different footing; that the efforts of the Syndicate to maintain an exclusive position had aroused popular discontent, which had placed it out of the power of the Governor of Shansi to issue the permit to mine; and that the resulting delay was therefore due to the Syndicate
itself.
I have consulted with the Agent-General of the Syndicate on the contents of the note under acknowledgment, and I am able to assure your Highness that the Agreement inclosed in my note of the 18th January was signed in the circumstances stated, and to point out that, if you have any doubt in the matter, M. Pokotilow, who was one of the signatories, can be applied to for whatever confirmation may be necessary. In saying that the Cheng-t'ai Railway Agreement did not affect the Peking Syndicate's Agreement, your Highness evidently overlooked Article 17 of the latter Agreement, which incorporates the main point of the subsidiary compact between the Russo-Chinese Bank and the Syndicate, and shows the interest that the Chinese Government had in arranging matters amicably at the time by providing in advance for the insertion of this stipulation. Clause 17 reads: "With reference to the Chengting to Taiyuan Railway, for the construction of which the Bureau has borrowed capital from others, the Peking Syndicate, to avoid disputes, shall not construct any railway within 100 li on cach side of it."
I must remind your Highness that this Agreement of the 26th April, 1898, between the Bank and the Syndicate was mentioned solely because stress was laid in your Highness' note of the 10th January on the fact that no immediate effort was made to survey a mining area in Shansi, and because it was necessary to show that the date of commencing work in Ping-ting Chou depended on the Cheng-t'ai Railway, the construction of which was delayed by the events of 1900 and other circumstances beyond the Syndicate's control. When your Highness states that the Chinese authorities have not treated the Honan and Shansi Concessions differently, I have only to reply that a permit to mine in Honan was issued in accordance with the Agreement, and that the Syndicate commenced work under that permit four years ago. In Shansi the permit to mine, which was applied for in the manner prescribed by the Agreement as long ago as November 1905, has not yet been issued.
I do not understand your Highness' complaint that the Syndicate has sought to maintain an exclusive position. Their object in obtaining the Shansi Concession, as explained in my note of the 18th January, is perfectly fair and reasonable, and it is well within the terms of their Agreement of the 21st May, 1898. According to my information, the opposition to the Syndicate has been manufactured by students and officials, and does not spring from the people, who are well aware that the opening of mines on a large scale can only bring them advantage. But if the opposition were spontaneous and from the people, His Majesty's Government would still look to the Imperial Chinese Government to quell it by all the means in their power, and enable the Syndicate to pursue their avocations in peace. The failure of the agents of the Chinese Government to effect this has done grave injury to the Syndicate, and for this injury, I repeat, His Majesty's Government has instructed me to maintain the elaim for compensation, put forward in my notes of the 31st December and the 18th January to your Highness.
I avail, &c.
(Signed)
J. N. JORDAN.
201
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.