[This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government
CHINA RAILWAYS.
CONFIDENTIAL.
[16006]
No. 1.
104
16664
[May 9.]
REC
SECTION 1Rrce 2 JUN 10
(No. 121.) Sir,
Mr. Max Müller to Sir Edward Grey.-(Received May 9.)
Peking, April 22, 1910. AS I have informed you by my telegram No. 84 of to-day's date, an identic note protesting against the permission granted by the Board of Communications for the formation of a native company to collect capital for the construction of the Hupei railways has at last been sent into the Wai-wu Pu by my French and German. colleagues and myself.
I have now the honour to transmit herewith a translation of the statement issued by the Board of Communications (Yu Chuan Pu) on the 24th ultimo. Its wording is exceedingly vague, perhaps intentionally so, but the upshot appears to be that a provincial company is to be formed for the construction of the fupei railways on the same plan as the provincial railway companies which are already constructing railways in Kuangtung and Hunan. It was a reply to the petition which formed the subject of our identic note of the 12th February, and was extorted by great pressure on the part of the Hupei delegates, exercised in true Chinese fashion. Li Ta-chen, I am informed, established himself on a mat in the court-yard of the house of Hsu Shih-cbang, the president of the Board, and remained there three days refusing food and drink, while two Hupei soldiers threatened to commit suicide at the Board of Communications. Be that as it may, the result was that the notice was issued and actually posted on the doors of the Yu Chuan Pu, while the delegates departed rejoicing to Hupei, and the native papers all joined in a pan of victory over the foreigner. The possible establishment of such a provincial railway company appeared to me to open the door to a repetition in Hupei of all the difficulties we have experienced in Kiangsu and Chekiang in connection with the Shanghae-Ningpo Railway Loan Agreement, and I thought that it was inadvisable to allow this step on the part of the Chinese Govern- ment to pass unnoticed, and in this view my French and German colleagues concurred. I was therefore much astonished when M. de Margerie informed me that he had been instructed not to join in any fresh protest, and I felt that, under the circumstances, it was best to do nothing, as I attached far greater importance to not giving the Chinese Government any reason to believe that on this point also there was disagreement between the European groups, and, besides, we always had our protest of the 12th February to fall back on.
When, finally, on the 18th April, M. de Margerie got his instructions to join in an identic note, we encountered unexpected opposition from Count Luxburg, the secretary temporarily in charge of the German Legation, and it was with difficulty that we persuaded him to join in the mild note of enquiry rather than of protest, which I now have the honour to enclose.
I have, &c.
W. G. MAX MÜLLER
Enclosure 1 in No. 1.
Statement by Board of Communications.~(Communicated to Mr. Max Müller by Chung Kuo Pao, March 26, 1910.)
(Translation.)
THE Board of Posts and Communications' answer of the 24th March to the petition re the Hupei railways is as follows:--
"On the 7th October, 1909, an Imperial decree was received ordering the Board of Posts and Communications to take over the control of the Szechuan-Hankow and Canton-Hankow Railways. As these railways concerned several provinces, it was found inconvenient that the railways should be divided up at the boundaries of each province. But the collection of capital is a necessary preliminary to the construction of a railway, and since Li Ta Chün and others of the Hupei gentry have petitioned
[2761 i-1]
Site Alain etio is thevetna so
شما یک ایران ایرانی داد
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.