CO129-416 - Public Offices - 1914 — Page 243

35

239

[23853]

No. 55.

Sir J. Jordan to Sir Edward Grey.-(Received May 26.)

(No. 193) Sir,

Peking, May 9, 1913. IN October 1901 the Diplomatic Body were approached by the Wai-wu Pu with a request that they would issue instructions to their nationals that the shops and other establishments of foreign merchants in Peking must, in accordance with treaty, be removed to one of the open ports.

In the previous month the legations had received identic notes to the effect that in future Peking octroi would be levied on all foreign goods entering the city, with the exception of those destined for the diplomatic missions or for the legation guards. The Diplomatic Body, in reply to the above-mentioned note on the subject of octroi, treated at the same time the question of the removal of foreign commercial establishments from Peking. They notified their acceptance of the octroi proposal on condition that the Chinese Government should not insist on their request regarding the removal from Peking of the establishments of foreign merchants. Here the matter rested until 1903, when Prince Ch'ing returned to the charge by addressing to the Diplomatic Body a letter in which he again pointed out that Peking was not an open port, and declared that in future foreign merchants would no longer be at liberty to purchase houses or to open shops in the city. No reply was Later in the same year thu returned by the legations to this communication, question again arose during the negotiations between China and Japan, and article 10 of the Supplementary Treaty of Commerce of 1903 reads as follows;——

C

The high contracting parties hereby agree that, in case of and after the complete withdrawal of the foreign troops stationed in the province of Chihli and of the legation guards, a place of international residence and trade in Peking will be forthwith opened by China herself.”

During 1906 the Japanese Legation received protests from the Wai-wu Pu regarding the opening of certain shops by their nationals, but on each occasion refused the Chinese demand on the ground that the residence in Peking of foreign merchants for purposes of trade had become a matter of historical usage.

Since 1906 the matter lay dormant until September last, when the Diplomatic Body received from the Wai-chiao Pu a note reviving their previous demand for the removal of foreign business establishments. The note, translation of which I have the honour to enclose herewith, is couched in much the same terms as previous communications on this subject, and is chiefly interesting as furnishing an additional proof that the Chinese Republic is by no mearis behind the previous régime in its desire to restrict by all means in its power the development of foreign commerce throughout the country.

[1089]

K