C. O.
9183
[This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.]
IRECP
106
Page 14 MAR 08
CHINA TRADE.
CONFIDENTIAL.
[5340]
No. 1.
[February 15.]
SECTION 1.
Sir,
Board of Trade to Foreign Office.-(Received February 15.)
Board of Trade, February 14, 1908.
I AM directed by the Board of Trade to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 6th ultimo, transmitting copy of a despatch from His Majesty's Minister at Peking, in which he forwards a translation of Draft Mining Regulations issued by the Chinese Government.
The Board have given careful consideration to the document referred to, and now desire me to express their entire concurrence with Sir E. Grey's opinion that the Regulations as a whole are unsatisfactory and inadequate as a fulfilment of the engagements entered into by China under Article IX of the Mackay Treaty of 1902. They do not propose, therefore, for the present to offer detailed criticism of these provisions, for which purpose, if it were deemed advisable, it would be necessary for them to take steps to obtain the opinion of experts on various matters of a technical character. It seems clear, however, that the requirements referred to in the second paragraph of your letter constitute an absolute violation of the extra-territorial rights of British subjects in China, so far as concerns persons engaged in mining operations, and it would also appear to be highly improbable that British subjects would be ready to risk the investment of capital in mining undertakings under the proposed conditions as regards subjection to Chinese jurisdiction, submission to the present and subsequent Regulations, and virtual deprivation of Diplomatic and Consular protection.
At the same time the Board desire me to ask you to be good enough to draw the attention of Sir E. Grey to the following points to which they think strong exception should be taken in addition to those specially mentioned in your letter:
Page 3, Section 5.-The provision making the Provincial Bureaux and the Chinese Board of Agriculture, Industry and Commerce, the authority for judging of the suitability or otherwise of an applicant for a prospecting permit is unsatisfactory and should be replaced by that in Mr. Cockburn's draft Regulations, which required a certificate from the applicant's national Minister at Peking.
Page 5, Section 7-It is not explicitly stated that if owners of existing mining rights do not submit the Report referred to within the prescribed period of two years their privileges will be withdrawn and their property dealt with under Chinese orders, but if (as would appear) this is intended the section is wholly objectionable so far as foreign owners are concerned.
Page 5, Section 8.-The requirement that holders of existing Concessions shall conform to the new Regulations contravenes the last paragraph of Article IX of the Mackay Treaty, and it further appears to imply a breach of faith on the part of the Chinese Government in respect of the understanding under which contracts have been entered into and arrangements made. There is no provision in the Regulations for compensation for disturbance of existing rights, which alone could render this section capable of being seriously considered.
Page 7, Section 10 (paragraph 2).-The provisions with regard to shares would prove unnecessarily restrictive on the investment of British capital, and to this extent would again conflict with Article IX of the Mackay Treaty.
Page 10, Section 14.--The statement that the Chinese Government takes 50 per cent. of the net profits appears, so far as regards mines of Class C, to be at variance with the provisions of section 18. The share to be taken by the Government is in any case fixed at such an excessive proportion as to lead to the surmise that it is not seriously intended to frame satisfactory Regulations as stipulated by the Treaty of 1902.
Page 15, Section 20.--It is undesirable that decisions respecting transfers of mining property should be relegated to the discretion of the Mine Deputy.
Pages 15-17, Section 21.-Without prejudice to the observations contained in your letter under reply on the point as to foreigners only being allowed to mine in concert with the Chinese, it may be pointed out that this section is inequitable in
[2842 p-1]
Z
C. O.
9183
[This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.]
IRECP
106
Poe 14 MAR 08
CHINA TRADE.
CONFIDENTIAL.
[5340]
No. 1.
[February 15.]
SECTION 1.
Sir,
Board of Trade to Foreign Office.-(Received February 15.)
Board of Trade, February 14, 1908.
I AM directed by the Board of Trade to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 6th ultimo, transmitting copy of a despatch from His Majesty's Minister at Peking, in which he forwards a translation of Draft Mining Regulations issued by the Chinese Government.
The Board have given careful consideration to the document referred to, and now desire me to express their entire concurrence with Sir E. Grey's opinion that the Regulations as a whole are unsatisfactory and inadequate as a fulfilment of the engagements entered into by China under Article IX of the Mackay Treaty of 1902. They do not propose, therefore, for the present to offer detailed criticism of these provisions, for which purpose, if it were deemed advisable, it would be necessary for them to take steps to obtain the opinion of experts on various matters of a technical character. It seems clear, however, that the requirements referred to in the second paragraph of your letter constitute an absolute violation of the extra-territorial rights of British subjects in China, so far as concerns persons engaged in mining operations, and it would also appear to be highly improbable that British subjects would be ready to risk the investment of capital in mining undertakings under the proposed conditions as regards subjection to Chinese jurisdiction, submission to the present and subsequent Regulations, and virtual deprivation of Diplomatic and Consular protection.
At the same time the Board desire me to ask you to be good enough to draw the attention of Sir E. Grey to the following points to which they think strong exception should be taken in addition to those specially mentioned in your letter:
Page 3, Section 5.-The provision making the Provincial Bureaux and the Chinese Board of Agriculture, Industry and Commerce, the authority for judging of the suitability or otherwise of an applicant for a prospecting permit is unsatisfactory and should be replaced by that in Mr. Cockburn's draft Regulations, which required a certificate from the applicant's national Minister at Peking.
Page 5, Section 7-It is not explicitly stated that if owners of existing mining rights do not submit the Report referred to within the prescribed period of two years their privileges will be withdrawn and their property dealt with under Chinese orders, but if (as would appear) this is intended the section is wholly objectionable so far as foreign owners are concerned.
Page 5, Section 8.-The requirement that holders of existing Concessions shall conform to the new Regulations contravenes the last paragraph of Article IX of the Mackay Treaty, and it further appears to imply a breach of faith on the part of the Chinese Government in respect of the understanding under which contracts have been entered into and arrangements made. There is no provision in the Regulations for compensation for disturbance of existing rights, which alone could render this section capable of being seriously considered.
Page 7, Section 10 (paragraph 2).-The provisions with regard to shares would prove unnecessarily restrictive on the investment of British capital, and to this extent would again conflict with Article IX of the Mackay Treaty.
Page 10, Section 14.--The statement that the Chinese Government takes 50 per cent. of the net profits appears, so far as regards mines of Class C, to be at variance with the provisions of section 18. The share to be taken by the Government is in any case fixed at such an excessive proportion as to lead to the surmise that it is not seriously intended to frame satisfactory Regulations as stipulated by the Treaty
of 1902.
Page 15, Section 20.--It is undesirable that decisions respecting transfers of mining property should be relegated to the discretion of the Mine Deputy.
Pages 15-17, Section 21.-Without prejudice to the observations contained in your letter under reply on the point as to foreigners only being allowed to mine în concert with the Chinese, it may be pointed out that this section s inequitable in
[2842 p-1]
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.