C 526
[This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government47931
the timber now coming down. Who can deny our right? We do not wish to oppress the people or to injure the prosperity of the market. In a word, we are entitled to an equal share of the timber coming down from the Yalu, and the Chinese Government cannot deny our right. We have a perfect right to buy one-fourth of the timber. This Bureau cannot tolerate being robbed of all its profits. The Taotai and the Chinese Government should therefore take early steps to grant us our Treaty rights. On the other hand, they organized the Tsaimu Kungtzu (Company to cut timber), and merely sought self-profit. They did not consider in the least the injury they were doing to the local timber merchants. The organization of the Tsaimu Kungtzu and the Muchih Shanghui distinctly violate the Treaty, and our Government had the right to demand their dissolution.
Now, ask yourselves the question. Which would be the greater injury to the timber trade? The action of this Bureau in buying one log out of every four, or the imposition of heavy taxes by the Companies above-mentioned? Of these alternatives, which would be the easiest and which the hardest to bear? This question needs no answer; it should be perfectly clear to any intelligent man.
The present situation of the timber industry is a very difficult one, and we have therefore published this long Proclamation that all misunderstanding might be removed.
Meiji, 40th year, 6th month, 21st day (21st June, 1907).
CHINA TRADE.
CONFIDENTIAL,
[8005]
No. 1.
1st MAY 08
[March 7.]
SECTION 3.
Sir C. MacDonald to Sir Edward Grey.-(Received March 7.)
(No. 18.)
Tokyo, March 7, 1908. (Telegraphic.) P.
PROPOSED Convention for reciprocal protection of trade-marks in China. See your telegram No. 15 of the 28th February. As subject of Convention is very complicated and I am anxious to avoid any misunderstanding, before presenting counter-draft to Japanese Government I am referring to you again on following points
I presume that intention of Article I, paragraph 2, of our counter-project, as drafted according to your instructions, is to secure protection for trading-styles, &c., in Japan, and that of Article II is, as regards China and Corea, to place trade-marks and trading-styles, &c., on an equal footing.
The object of the Convention will then be two-fold, namely, to acquire for trading styles, &c., in Japan, the same protection as trade-marks and trade names already enjoy, and secondly, to secure protection for both trade-marks and trading-styles, &c., in China and Corea.
The preamble, as now drafted, refers only to protection of trade-marks in China and Corea.
[2889 g-3]
0
C 526
[This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government47931
:
the timber now coming down. Who can deny our right? We do not wish to oppress the people or to injure the prosperity of the market. In a word, we are entitled to an equal share of the timber coming down from the Yalu, and the Chinese Government cannot deny our right. We have a perfect right to buy one-fourth of the timber. This Bureau cannot tolerate being robbed of all its profits. The Taotai and the Chinese Government should therefore take early steps to grant us our Treaty rights. On the other hand, they organized the Tsaimu Kungtzu (Company to cut timber), and merely sought self-profit. They did not consider in the least the injury they were doing to the local timber merchants. The organization of the Tsaimu Kungtzu and the Muchih Shanghui distinctly violate the Treaty, and our Government had the right to demand their dissolution.
Now, ask yourselves the question. Which would be the greater injury to the timber trade? The action of this Bureau in buying one log out of every four, or the imposition of heavy taxes by the Companies above-mentioned? Of these alternatives, which would be the easiest and which the hardest to bear? This question needs no answer; it should be perfectly clear to any intelligent man.
The present situation of the timber industry is a very difficult one, and we have therefore published this long Proclamation that all misunderstanding might be removed.
Meiji, 40th year, 6th month, 21st day (21st June, 1907).
CHINA TRADE.
CONFIDENTIAL,
[8005]
No. 1.
IS MAY 08
[March 7.]
SECTION 3.
Sir C. MacDonald to Sir Edward Grey.-(Received March 7.)
(No. 18.)
Tokić, March 7, 1908. (Telegraphic.) P.
PROPOSED Convention for reciprocal protection of trade-marks in China. See your telegram No. 15 of the 28th February. As subject of Convention is very complicated and I am anxious to avoid any misunderstanding, before presenting counter-draft to Japanese Government I am referring to you again on following points
I presume that intention of Article I, paragraph 2, of our counter-project, as drafted according to your instructions, is to secure protection for trading-styles, &c., in Japan, and that of Article II is, as regards China and Corea, to place trade-marks and trading-styles, &c., on an equal footing.
The object of the Convention will then be two-fold, namely, to acquire for trading styles, &c., in Japan, the same protection as trade-marks and trade names already enjoy, and secondly, to secure protection for both trade-marks and trading-styles, &c., in China and Corea.
The preamble, as now drafted, refers only to protection of trade-marks in China and Corea.
[2889 g-3]
0
།་་
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.