CO129-351 - Public Offices - 1908 — Page 117

2

where Chinese and foreign merchants might settle for the purposes of trade, and where they might build business premises and godowns for their goods. Outside the limits of this port everything is under "nei ti Regulations. There is no objection to the merchant, Edwards, coming to Nanning and establishing his agency for the import and export of goods, but the "port" is outside the Hsia Kuo Street, and the Chili Jung piece-goods shop in Sha Street is a place in the interior of China. I must therefore ask you to inform the merchant in question that he must select his premises within the limits of the "port." In the meantime, he can only reside temporarily at the Chih Jung piece-goods shop, and it is against the Regulations to make this a branch office. I am therefore unable to grant my permission, and have so informed the Commissioner of Customs.

Inclosure 3 in No. 1.

Consul-General Mansfield to Viceroy Chang.

Your Excellency,

Canton, December 4, 1907. SOME time ago I addressed a letter to the Superintendent of Customs at Nanning stating that the British merchant, Mr. Edwards and Co., was opening a branch office under the style of Hung Hsing Ho, in Sha Street, in the city of Nanning.

In his reply, copy of which I inclose, the Superintendent, according to my interpretation of his letter, states that Nanning city, being outside the " 'foreign Settlement," is the "iuterior of China," and that foreign merchants can only trade in the Settlement area.

I have the honour to point out that Nanning was first declared a Treaty port by an Agreement between Sir Claude MacDonald and the Tsung-li Yamên in 1899, and was actually opened to foreign trade at the beginning of this year 1907. It follows then that to describe the city of Nanning as "nei ti" is entirely contrary to the intention of opening Nanning as a Treaty port. I had the honour on several occasions to inform his Excellency Chou that, in the opinion of His Majesty's Government, the term “ open port," no matter in what way the port may have been opened, must be held to include the city with its suburbs, the waterway giving access thereto, and any roads connecting it with the waterway. Moreover, throughout my long residence in China, I have never heard that the city of an open port could be considered as nei ti.'

A Memorandum on this subject was handed by me in the fourth moon to Mr. Secretary Lo for transmission to his Excellency Chou.

Under these círcumstances I feel confident that your Excellency will agree that the establishment of Mr. Edwards' branch office is in accordance with Treaty and immemorial custom, and I have the honour to request that you will lose no time in instructing the Nanning Superintendent to that effect.

(Translation.) Sir,

I avail, &c.

(Signed)

R. W. MANSFIELD.

Inclosure 4 in No. 1.

Viceroy Chang to Consul-General Mansfield.

I HAVE the honour to acknowledge receipt of your despatch of the 4th instant,

Canton, December 15, 1907. stating that a British merchant named Edwards desires to open a branch office in Sha Street within the city of Nanning, bnt that the Nanning Taotai refuses his permission on the ground that foreign merchants must confine themselves to the area opoued to trade. You add that this is entirely contrary to the intention with which Nanning was opened as a Treaty port, and inclose a copy of the Taotai's letter.

In reply I have the honour to inform you that in section 1 of Part I of the Nanning Port Regulations it is stated that Nanning is, under the Imperial sanction, a self-opened port, and that the conditions of trade there are different to those prevailing at the ordinary Treaty ports. By the same section Chinese and foreign merchants are permitted to rent land and reside within the area which has been marked out as a Settlement, but no foreigner is allowed to have any voice in the

3

administration thereof. Section 1 of Part II of the same Regulations defines the position and limits of trade area, viz. :—

"Outside the city of Nanning at the place called Hsia Kuo Street. On the west it is bounded by the middle of the river; on the east by the foot of the old city wall; on the south by the old city tower, now known as the Ssu Hsiang Kung temple; and on the north by the I Chin Fang main thoroughfare. The foregoing boundaries, which are indicated by boundary stones specially erected for the purpose, constitute the limits of the area opened to international trade, and everything outside them is subject, as beretofore, to the laws governing nei ti,' or interior China."

In November 1906, Sir John Jordan, the British Minister at Peking, informed the Wai-wu Pu that he objected to the section cited above, as it was evidently intended to hamper foreign trade, and he asked the Wai-wu Pu to have it amended. The Wai-wu Pù replied that Nanning was a self-opened port; that the local authorities were the proper persons to determine the conditions of trade there; and that, as regards the marking out of a Settlement, it was from the beginning regarded as a necessary condition to the opening of Nanning that a place should be designated where Chinese and foreign merchants might congregate for the purposes of trade; aud that the intention in doing so was expressly to attract merchants of all nation- alities, A similar communication was at the same time sent to Canton by the Wai-wu Pu.

The limits of the port have thus been clearly defined from the beginning, and a foreign merchant desiring to establish a place of business there must do so within the defined area, and I am unable to allow the Regulations to be disregarded. The Taotai's reply is quite in consonance with the views of the Wai-wu Pu, and I see nothing in it to which exception can be taken. I have therefore the honour to request you to instruct the British merchant in question to obey the Regulations.

Your Highness,

Inclosure 5 in No. 1.

Sir J. Jordan to Prince Ch'ing.

Peking, January 4, 1908. IN your Highness' note of the 11th June, 1907, regarding the Regulations issued by the Chinese authorities in connection with the opening of Nanning to foreign trade, I was informed that a communication had been addressed to the Canton Viceroy and the Governor of Kiangsi to investigate the circumstances and give due consideration to these Regulations so as to make satisfactory arrangements as occasion arises.

I had hopes from this reply that the Regulations in question would be modified in the interests of trade and in accordance with the principles laid down by Treaty in reference to ports open to foreign trade. But it will be seen from the correspondence which has recently passed between His Majesty's Consul-General at Canton and the provincial authorities, copies of which I have the honour to inclose, that the city of Nanning is still held to be in "the interior."

While it is the case that the Tsung-li Yamên notified Sir C. MacDonald on the 3rd February, 1899, that Nanning should be opened as a port of international trade in a similar way to Yochow, Ch'in Wang Tao, and San-tu-ao, it was certainly never contemplated by His Majesty's Government that this formula implied merely the opening of a suburb outside the city walls. The expression "Nanning" evidently meant the city of that name, and the fact of its being opened to foreign trade "in a similar way to Yochow, Chin Wang Tao," &c., only signified that it was not opened under Treaty provision, but by special Decree.

I have already had the honour to inform your Highness that no matter how a port is opened to foreign trade, His Majesty's Government maintain that the conditions should be the same as at ports opened under Treaty. These conditions have been proved by experience to be favourable to trade, while the restrictions which have been imposed by the Chinese Government at Chinan-fu, for example, have prevented commercial development. It appears, therefore, inexplicable in the interests of trade why the provincial authorities should insist on pursuing a policy which renders the opening of such places inoperative.

The negotiations for the opening of Nanning were conducted between your Highness and Sir C. MacDonald, and are doubtless remembered by your Highness.

114