Sessional_Paper_1926 — Page 95

91

At Hankow a crowd of roughs, who had been worked up a pitch of frenzy by student agitators, made a determined attack on the foreign quarter. The small British defence force, in their desire to avoid further bloodshed, remained passive until the last possible moment, and it was only after the mob had already, in its blind fury, murdered one of the foreign residents, and was in the set of invading the quarter where the others had taken refuge, that shots were fired to repel its advance.

It has been necessary briefly to recall these events in order that the subsequent tragedy at Canton should be viewed in its proper setting. Anti-foreign feeling was run- ning high in this province by the middle of June, 1925. It was definitely stated in Chinese circles in Canton and Hongkong on June the 22nd that an attack was to be made on Sha- meen on the following day, and prominent Chinese actually took refuge in Hongkong and made other dispositions to meet such an eventuality. Furthermore, on the morning of June the 23rd, two motor cars were distributing leaflets throughout the City signed by the Students' Union of the Military School of the Kwang-tung Army, inciting all and sundry to rise and chase out the foreigners.

The Shameen residents therefore, having in mind these facts and the events which had just befallen their compatriots in other parts of the country, had every reason to fear- for their own safety, and to prepare for their defence.

In these circumstances the Canton authorities permitted on June the 23rd, a very large demonstration to be conducted on the Shakee bund facing Shameen, and this de- monstration included armed troops from the military academy. During the course of this demonstration fire was opened at Shameen from the Shakee side.

We notice that in the statement of the Chinese delegation, an attempt is made to pass lightly over the question of responsibility for the first firing. It is suggested that it is a point of "secondary importance" and "is not a capital issue" and stress is laid instead on the intensity of the fire returned by the people who found themselves thus attacked. But we consider that the question of whose act gave rise to the tragedy is of vital in- portance, and on this point we must insist that not only the evidence of British and French witnesses attest the fact that the shooting began on the Chinese side, but there are also on record written statements by the Danish and Swedish Consuls, and American citizens, who were present at the time, and assert definitely of their own knowledge that the first shots were fired from Shakee. The shots were returned in self-defence by the British and French forces on Shameen, who as explained above, had reason to believe that an attack on the island was intended, and in this one action it may be noted that the state- ment of the Chinese delegation does not attempt to explain why the British have been made the sole objects of resentment for incidents in which they were not the only foreigners concerned.

The deaths and casualties caused amongst the Chinese on June the 23rd are matter for sincere regret, but the grave responsibility for the sacrifice of those lives must rest with those who wantonly began the attack, and with the Chinese authorities, who disregarding the folly and danger of their action, allowed inflammable material to be placed ready to the hands of agitators seeking for an opportunity to cause a conflagration,

The Chinese delegation, in their definition of the ensuing boycott of British trade, have implied that this movement is a voluntary abstention from all commercial relations with the British, and they add that the boycott has been sustained by the Chinese people for more than a year. With great respect we say most emphatically that that definition and that statement are entirely at variance with the facts.

The abstention is not a voluntary one. It is imposed on an unwilling people by a small but powerful organisation of persons who maintain the boycott by force of arms and who do not hesitate to shoot down their own fellow countrymen when the latter try to continue those normal relations which ought to exist between close and friendly neigh- bours, and which will certainly, sooner or later, burst through the artificial and econo- mically unsound barriers which prevent their free action at present. It would be easy to test the correctness of this assertion, and we are quite sure that if these barriers were removed the current of trade and friendly intercourse would flow freely again, bringing inutual benefit to Chinese and British alike.