File No. 893.773/31.

Consul Pontius to the Secretary of State .

No. 46.]

Sir: For the information of the Department, I have the honor to enclose herewith copy of my No. 38, of even date, reporting further to the Legation at Peking concerning the reduction instituted by the South Manchuria Railway covering railway freights on foreign importations, and transmitting further evidence of discrimination in this regard.

I have [etc.]

Albert W. Pontius.

Consul Pontius to Minister Reinsch .

No. 38.]

Sir: Referring to my No. 31, dated October 17, 1914, I have the honor to transmit herewith additional information1 which clearly shows the facilities and reduction accorded “through” shipments of cotton goods to points in Manchuria from Shanghai via the South Manchuria Railway steamers to Dairen and thence onward over the railway line of the latter institution. * * *

It will be remembered that in my last despatch mention was made that the local South Manchuria Railway stationmaster in a written communication averred that “only such shipments are to be ranked as ‘through cargo’ as are shipped through to stations on the South Manchuria Railway under Nippon Yusen Kaisha (South Manchuria Railway steamship) through bills of lading.” It was considered advisable to ascertain what special treatment would be accorded cargo shipped from Shanghai to Manchuria along the routes referred to by the stationmaster. It might be mentioned in this connection that the Nippon Yusen Kaisha maintains no regular steamship service between Shanghai and Newchwang, consequently “through cargo” would necessarily have to be shipped from Shanghai via Dairen.

What is now plainly apparent is that foreign shipping is discriminated against in that only Japanese steamship lines may be used in order to obtain the 30 per cent reduction quoted, and the port of Newchwang discriminated against owing to the fact that no Japanese steamers ply regularly between the ports of Shanghai and Newchwang. The discrimination against the port of Newchwang as regards “local freights” has also been conclusively proved in my No. 31, dated October 17, 1914, and there seems to be every justification for firmly protesting against the unfair tactics of the South Manchuria Railway in so plainly disregarding the principle of equal opportunity openly professed in the past by the Japanese Government.

I have [etc.]

Albert W. Pontius.
  1. Not printed.