[This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.]
400
AFFAIRS OF CHINA.
CONFIDENTIAL.
[February 6.]
7234
SECTION 1.
[4274]
No. 1,
(No. 21.) Sir,
Sir J. Jordan to Sir Edward Grey.-(Received February 6.)
Peking, January 14, 1911. IN continuation of Mr. Max Müller's despatch No. 411 of the 11th November last, I have the honour to report on the further course of the negotiations with regard to the Whangpoo Conservancy question. At the time this despatch was written the position was briefly this. The foreign representatives had agreed to intimate to the Wai-wu Pu that they would be prepared to consider the claims of any candidate proposed by the Chinese Government for the post of chief engineer to the conservancy works on condition that the engineer in question furnished satisfactory certificates of technical knowledge and practical experience, and that his contract should only be for a period of one year. At the same time the taotal at Shanghai, acting under instructions from the Viceroy at Nanking, had notified the commissioner of customs that the 1905 agreement was abrogated, that the Conservancy Board was dissolved, and that the maintenance work on the river would be in the sole charge of the taotai. It is true that the Wai-wu Pu had conveyed to the doyen of the diplomatic body a verbal assurance that they recognised the binding effect of existing engagements with regard to the Whangpoo; and that, according to Na-t'ung, the Viceroy had been instructed not to dissolve the Conservancy Board, not to consider the agreement of 1905 abrogated, and not to hand over the powers of the Conservancy Board to the taotai.
These instructions, if they were ever sent, produced no effect whatever at Shanghai. Sir Pelham Warren, to whom as senior consul frequent telegraphic enquiries were addressed during the months of November and December, invariably replied, on the authority of the commissioner of customs, that no instructions had been received from the Viceroy cancelling those previously issued, which provided for the abolition of the board, the abrogation of the convention of 1905, and the delegation of the control of the conservancy work to the taotai alone. The commissioner of customs had been told verbally by the taotai that the Conservancy Board would be retained in name and that he would remain a nominal member of it, but would have little or nothing to say in its administration.
The doyen of the diplomatic body was, however, satisfied with the verbal assurances which he had received from the Wai-wu Pu, and wished us to authorise him to signify our acceptance of M. Heidenstam's appointment as soon as we had inspected that gentleman's certificates of competency, copies of which were furnished to the various legations.
After consulting Mr. Max Müller, whose experience of the previous negotiations has been of great service to me, I did not feel justified in acceding to the doyen's request, and the French Minister equally demurred to giving his approval of the chief engineer's appointment until the verbal assurances regarding the retention of the Conservancy Board had been confirmed in writing by the Wai-wu Pu. In a note, therefore, copy of which is enclosed, the board were reminded of the assurances given on this point to the doyen, and were invited either to instruct the Viceroy to declare by letter that the Conservancy Board would be maintained in its present form and with its present powers, or to address an identic communication themselves in this sense to the foreign representatives.
In their reply of the 3rd January, copy of which is likewise enclosed, the board gave an explicit assurance that the Conservancy Board, under its altered name of Maintenance Board, would be maintained; that treaty stipulations would be observed; that the convention of 1905 would not be abandoned; and that the control of the board would continue to rest with the Shanghai taotai and commissioner of customs. The Wai-wu Pu therefore asked the foreign representatives to give their consent to the appointment of M. Heidenstam as engineer-in-chief in succession to M. de Rijke.
The majority of our colleagues were in favour of acceding to this request, but the
[1909 -1]
B
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.