34
January 16th. As I feared would be the case, I was unable to
accomplish much. The Chairman and Marshal Chen informed me
that the Agreement was opposed by Chinese commercial interests
in Kwangtung, no doubt with a view to avoiding a directly
negative attitude towards my request, but they promised to
investigate the matter with a view to discovering whether or
not this opposition could be overcome. I may mention, however,
that recently in a private conversation here (see above) the
Minister of Finance told me that the real explanation of Canton's
attitude in opposing the Agreement was that Marshal Chen's
brother was a principally interested party in the smuggling
now going on: and I have no reasons to doubt the truth of
this remark; quite apart from the attitude of Tang Shao-yi
who still presides over the destinies of the "free port" area
of the Chung-shan district near Canton - see correspondence at
the time that the draft agreement was blocked by the Cantonese
party.
Shortly after I passed through Hongkong the Inspector-
General of Customs paid a visit to the Colony and to Canton,
but, apart from Sir Frederick Maze's letter of February 9th
(a copy of which was forwarded in my despatch No.218 of
February 22nd), my information as to what passed during his
trip to the South is confined to that contained in Sir William
Peel's despatch to the Colonial Office of February 1st above
referred to. From this I learn that Sir Frederick Maze also
raised the question of the Customs Agreement at Canton, that
his representations met with no greater success, and that he
informed Sir William Peel that there was little hope of the
Agreement being signed in the near future.
6. As regards the Chinese side of this Hongkong smuggling
question, Mr. Ingram on receipt of your despatch No.828
above referred to called for reports from the three southern
ports,
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.