CO129-382 - Public Offices - 1911 — Page 450

2

A further telegram has now been received from the Viceroy of Yünnan and Kueichow, stating that British troops to the number of 2,000 men, with over 2,000 horses and engineer and commissariat corps, have arrived at Pien-ma.

British troops have then actually crossed the frontier, and the frontier-line not having been clearly laid down, the British military officials should not have taken this action.

I must ask you to telegraph to the British Government to withdraw these troops. As regards the question of the frontier, it is to be hoped that a definite settlement may be reached by friendly negotiation.

I have the honour to address your Excellency accordingly in the hope of a speedy reply.

I avail, &c.

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

AFFAIRS OF CHINA.

CONFIDENTIAL.

[6128]

(No. 37.) Sir,

No. 1.

448 03

LOR

of 14 MAR 1

[February 20.]

SECTION 3.

Sir J. Jordan to Sir Edward Grey.-(Received February 20.)

Peking, January 28, 1911. I HAVE the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your despatch No. 9 of the 7th instant, in which you invite my observations on a suggestion made by Mr. E. A. Hewett, chairman of the Hong Kong General Chamber of Commerce and unofficial member of the Executive and Legislative Councils of the colony, regarding the advisability, in connection with the construction of the Canton-Kowloon Railway, of claiming similar facilities for the trade between Hong Kong and China as are enjoyed by France and Russia in respect of the trade with China across their land frontiers.

To understand the question properly, it seems to me that a sharp distinction must be drawn between territory held on lease from China and territorial possessions in the ordinary acceptance of the term. Hong Kong, being an island, has no land connection with China except through the Kowloon extension, which is held on lease from the Chinese Government.

There are four countries-England, France, Russia, and, since the annexation of Corea, Japan-which have territorial possessions coterminous with China. All of these Powers, with the exception of Japan, have special agreements with China regarding their frontier traffic. Those of England and France, which relate to Burmah and Tonquin respectively, are practically the same as regards duties, while the Russian treaty of 1881, which was negotiated in connection with the retrocession of Ili, concedes, in theory at least, free trade across the frontier. The revision of this treaty is to take place this year, and it is understood that a land tariff will be one of the conditions of the new arrangement.

England and France, besides having territorial possessions bordering upon China, have also leased territories coterminous with China. So also have Japan, Germany, and so,

too, had Russia until the recent war. None of these Powers have ever, so far as I am aware, claimed the same treatment for the frontier traffic in their leased territories as has been accorded by special agreements to the similar traffic crossing the frontiers between their territorial possessions and China, and it is safe to assert that any such claim would be firmly resisted by China. China will certainly consent to no arrangement at present which can be construed as placing leased territory on the same footing as territory which is the absolute property of another Power.

I do not see, therefore, how Hong Kong can expect to receive better treatment than France at Kuangchow-wan, than Germany at Tsingtau, and than Japan at Dairen.

I have, &c.

[1909

U -3]

J. N. JORDAN.

Page 450Page 451