CO129-351 - Public Offices - 1908 — Page 512

CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案 All AI Reviewed

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

[A]

AFFAIRS OF CHINA,

CONFIDENTIAL.

[14245]

No. 1.

[April 27.]

SECTION 3.

(No. 197.) Sir,

Sir A. Nicolson to Sir Edward Grey.-(Received April 27.)

St. Petersburgh, April 18, 1908.

IN the course of conversation the other day with the Japanese Minister, I asked him whether he was aware in what position the question of Russian jurisdiction over the railway territory at Harbin stood at present, as I noticed that the press here was beginning to occupy itself with the subject. I added that I understood that the Japanese Government supported the Russian contention while the United States appeared to adopt a different view.

Baron Motono said that he believed that the contention of the Russian Government was justifiable, and that on principle it would be imprudent to permit the Chinese Government to exercise authority in a settlement which would be so largely peopled by foreigners. The United States always had objected, he believed, to their citizens in the foreign settlements in China being subject to any other jurisdiction than American, and it was logical from their point of view to raise similar protests in regard to Harbin. It was true that the railway had secured at Harbin a large area of territory, but the rights of the Russians were incontestable so far as he could judge. The question was naturally of importance to the Japanese Government, as the solution which might eventually be reached would form a similar condition of affairs in Southern Manchuria. He inquired if I had discussed the matter with M. Isvolsky. I told Baron Motono that some weeks ago his Excellency had mentioned the matter to me when travelling together in a railway carriage, but at that time I was in ignorance of the details of the question, and that I did not intend to recur to it unless he reopened it; and, moreover, I had received no information as to the views of my Government on the subject.

I have, &c.

(Signed) A. NICOLSON,

[2021 dd-3]

Edit History

2026-06-06 06:10:56 · NVIDIA / meta/llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct
Live
View comparison
AI Proofread
[This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.] [A] AFFAIRS OF CHINA, CONFIDENTIAL. [14245] No. 1. [April 27.] SECTION 3. (No. 197.) Sir, Sir A. Nicolson to Sir Edward Grey.-(Received April 27.) St. Petersburgh, April 18, 1908. IN the course of conversation the other day with the Japanese Minister, I asked him whether he was aware in what position the question of Russian jurisdiction over the railway territory at Harbin stood at present, as I noticed that the press here was beginning to occupy itself with the subject. I added that I understood that the Japanese Government supported the Russian contention while the United States appeared to adopt a different view. Baron Motono said that he believed that the contention of the Russian Government was justifiable, and that on principle it would be imprudent to permit the Chinese Government to exercise authority in a settlement which would be so largely peopled by foreigners. The United States always had objected, he believed, to their citizens in the foreign settlements in China being subject to any other jurisdiction than American, and it was logical from their point of view to raise similar protests in regard to Harbin. It was true that the railway had secured at Harbin a large area of territory, but the rights of the Russians were incontestable so far as he could judge. The question was naturally of importance to the Japanese Government, as the solution which might eventually be reached would form a similar condition of affairs in Southern Manchuria. He inquired if I had discussed the matter with M. Isvolsky. I told Baron Motono that some weeks ago his Excellency had mentioned the matter to me when travelling together in a railway carriage, but at that time I was in ignorance of the details of the question, and that I did not intend to recur to it unless he reopened it; and, moreover, I had received no information as to the views of my Government on the subject. I have, &c. (Signed) A. NICOLSON, [2021 dd-3]
Baseline (Original)
505 [This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.] [A] AFFAIRS OF CHINA, CONFIDENTIAL. [14245] No. 1. [April 27.] SECTION 3. (No. 197.) Sir, Sir A. Nicolson to Sir Edward Grey.-(Received April 27.) St. Petersburgh, April 18, 1908. IN the course of conversation the other day with the Japanese Minister, I asked him whether he was aware in what position the question of Russian jurisdiction over the railway territory at Harbin stood at present, as I noticed that the press here was beginning to occupy itself with the subject. I added that I understood that the Japanese Government supported the Russian contention while the United States appeared to adopt a different view. Baron Motono said that he believed that the contention of the Russian Govern- ment was justifiable, and that on principle it would be imprudent to permit the Chinese Government to exercise authority in a settlement which would be so largely peopled by foreigners. The United States always had objected, he believed, to their citizens in the foreign settlements in China being subject to any other jurisdiction than American, and it was logical from their point of view to raise similar protests in regard to Harbin. It was true that the railway had secured at Harbin a large area of territory, but the rights of the Russians were incontestable so far as he could judge. The question was naturally of importance to the Japanese Government, as the solution which might eventually be reached would form a similar condition of affairs in Southern Manchuria. He inquired if I had discussed the matter with M. Isvolsky. I told Baron Motono that some weeks ago his Excellency had mentioned the matter to me when travelling together in a railway carriage, but at that time I was in ignorance of the details of the question, and that I did not intend to recur to it unless he reopened it; and, moreover, I had received no information as to the views of my Government on the subject. I have, &c. (Signed) A. NICOLSON, (2021 dd-3]
2026-06-06 06:10:56 · Baseline
View content

505

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

[A]

AFFAIRS OF CHINA,

CONFIDENTIAL.

[14245]

No. 1.

[April 27.]

SECTION 3.

(No. 197.) Sir,

Sir A. Nicolson to Sir Edward Grey.-(Received April 27.)

St. Petersburgh, April 18, 1908. IN the course of conversation the other day with the Japanese Minister, I asked him whether he was aware in what position the question of Russian jurisdiction over the railway territory at Harbin stood at present, as I noticed that the press here was beginning to occupy itself with the subject. I added that I understood that the Japanese Government supported the Russian contention while the United States appeared to adopt a different view.

Baron Motono said that he believed that the contention of the Russian Govern- ment was justifiable, and that on principle it would be imprudent to permit the Chinese Government to exercise authority in a settlement which would be so largely peopled by foreigners. The United States always had objected, he believed, to their citizens in the foreign settlements in China being subject to any other jurisdiction than American, and it was logical from their point of view to raise similar protests in regard to Harbin. It was true that the railway had secured at Harbin a large area of territory, but the rights of the Russians were incontestable so far as he could judge. The question was naturally of importance to the Japanese Government, as the solution which might eventually be reached would form a similar condition of affairs in Southern Manchuria. He inquired if I had discussed the matter with M. Isvolsky. I told Baron Motono that some weeks ago his Excellency had mentioned the matter to me when travelling together in a railway carriage, but at that time I was in ignorance of the details of the question, and that I did not intend to recur to it unless he reopened it; and, moreover, I had received no information as to the views of my Government on the subject.

I have, &c. (Signed) A. NICOLSON,

(2021 dd-3]

Comments

Approved members can add comments, bookmarks, and private notes.

No comments yet.

Private Research Note

Private notes are available after approval.