493.11/938
The Minister in China (Schurman) to the Secretary of State
Peking, November 5,
1923.
[Received December 3.]
No. 1905
Sir: With reference to my telegram No. 124, of
April 27, 7 P.M., 1923, and to my despatch No. 1450 of April 2nd,14 and to the
previous pertinent correspondence referred to therein, relative to the
payment in gold of the Indemnity of 1901 by the Chinese Government, I
have the honor to transmit herewith for the Department’s information a
copy and translation of a further note on this subject which I joined
with the Ministers of Belgium, Spain, France and Italy15 in presenting, on November 3, 1923, to the
Minister for Foreign [Page 595] Affairs.
This note, which quotes the text of our note of February 24, 1923, has
been occasioned by the failure of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to
reply to this prior communication.
I have [etc.]
[Enclosure—Translation15a]
The Representatives in China
of the Powers Signatory to the Protocol of 1901 to
the Chinese Minister for Foreign Affairs (Wellington
Koo)
Peking, November 3,
1923.
Mr. Minister: We the undersigned
representatives of the powers signatory to the protocol of 1901 have
the honor to remind Your Excellency that on February 24th last we
addressed the following note to your predecessor:
“The Ministers of Belgium, Spain, France and Italy have
communicated to the representatives of the powers signatory
to the protocol of 1901 the contents of the letter which
Your Excellency’s predecessor addressed to them under date
of December 28th last on the subject of the payment of the
indemnity of 1900 [1901].
“In this letter it is stated that the expressions ‘gold debt’
and ‘payable in gold’ contained in article VI of the
protocol of 1901 have no other meaning than to designate a
gold standard debt with a view to differentiating it from
the silver standard debt in which the total amount of the
indemnity is expressed; and that the different rates
indicated in the protocol cannot be applied to the actual
exchange of the sums payable.
“We the undersigned representatives of the powers signatory
of the protocol of 1901 have submitted the point of view
expressed in the above-mentioned letter to our respective
Governments and in reply we have received instructions to
inform Your Excellency of the unanimous opinion of our
Governments that there can be no doubt that the protocol of
1901 and the arrangement of July 2, 1905, establish in an
absolutely clear and incontestable manner the fact that the
indemnity of 1901 should be paid in gold, that is to say
that for every Haikwan tael owed to each power China should
pay the amount in gold indicated in the said article 6 as
the equivalent of a tael.”
We regret having to state to Your Excellency that the Chinese
Government has never replied to this note which, however, was
designed to inform it of the unanimous opinion of the powers
signatory to the protocol of 1901 on a point regarding the execution
of this agreement and we are obliged to bring to Your Excellency’s
most earnest attention the necessity of settling, in accordance with
the treaties in force and in very short order, a question which has
been allowed to remain too long in suspense.
We avail ourselves [etc.]
[No signatures indicated]
