CO129-529-4 China- extraterritoriality 23-11-1931 - 31-12-1931 — Page 105

105

2.

that administrative interference by Ministry of Justice with decisions of courts was as objectionable to them as it should be to us; any such appeal should lie not to

Ministry but to Supreme Court. The new agreed version

represents result of lengthy discussion on above points.

4. As regards attached declaration Minister for

Foreign Affairs while not definitely committing himself to

acceptance of exact figure of £3,000 said he would do his

best to meet us. He earnestly requested deletion of last paragraph to which Wang Chung-hui took strong exception. Their arguments are that in a case where two foreigners appear on different sides it would be wrong for the legal counsellor to be of the nationality of one of them; and also that the whole principle of legal counsellors is designed to ensure efficient administration of justice and

not to protect national interests. I did not give way but undertook to report these arguments to you. I

request instructions.

soms

Taxation. There has never-

theless been a re-arrangement but we have all we want.

5. My telegram No.80.

6. My telegram No.81.

Arbitration. Chinese

то

readily admit their arbitration law has not boon

applicata in the case of such arbitration. "Office for

arbitration of civil disputes" under that law is part of the court. New wording supported by attached letter seems to give us all we want.

7.

My