CO129-371 - Public Offices - 1910 — Page 113

[This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Governmen

112

2765

CHINA RAILWAYS.

CONFIDENTIAL.

[Janu

28 JAN 10, SECTION 1.

[122]

(No. 3.)

No. 1.

Sir Edward Grey to Sir J. Jordan.

(Telegraphic.) R.

CHINCHOW-AIGUN [Railway].

My telegram No. 204 [of 28th December, 1909].

Foreign Office, January 5, 1910.

M. Isvolsky has enquired whether His Majesty's Government would give or had given support to project, and whether Chinese Government had granted concession. He expressed doubts whether notes exchanged between Sir C. Scott and Count Mouravieff in April 1899 ("Treaty Series, No. 11, 1899") did not exclude Great Britain from participation, and said that China had given assurances to Russin that latter should have first offer of concessions in regions affected. He hinted that Russia might have to remind China seriously of her promises, as line would be of strategic importance. He also intimated that he considered action of United States Government as regards railway and their attitude as to Harbin as hardly friendly.

A note has also been received from the Russian Embassy in which allusion is made to an agreement already arrived at " between Great Britain, the United States, and China in regard to the Chinchow-Aigun line.

I have replied to effect that no agreement has been arrived at between the three Governments mentioned, and have explained frankly the attitude of His Majesty's Government towards the American and British enterprise engaged (see "China Railways" print, October 26, section 2), saying that as it was not a question of a railway concession as contemplated in the notes of 1899, but one of provision of funds for railway purposes, it appeared to His Majesty's Government hardly to come within scope of that agreement. I have also pointed out that we made no objection when the Russians expressed a desire to participate in the loan which is under negotiation for the Yang-tsze Valley line, to which, according to Russian interpretation, the 1899 agreement would equally apply.

I added that the British financiers had acted entirely independently of us, and without our having so far taken any action on their behalf, and that I should be very pleased to see provision made for Russian and Japanese participation.

Sir A. Nicolson explained the foregoing to M. Isvolsky on 1st January, and does not think that the latter will raise any further question as to 1899 engagements.

M. Isvolsky much doubted whether Japan would be inclined to participate, and could give no indication as to Russian attitude until he had studied matter carefully.

Repeat to Tokyo.

[2581 e-

e-1]

1