706.6193/2: Telegram
The Minister in China (Schurman) to the Secretary of State
[Paraphrase]
Peking, June 30,
1924—11 a.m.
[Received 3:40
p.m.]
209. On June 27 the Chinese Minister for Foreign Affairs answered the
note of June 11 from the Dutch Minister regarding the transfer
[Page 445]
of the premises of the Russian
Legation to the Government of the Soviet Union. An informal conference
of the representatives of the protocol powers will consider the reply
tomorrow. The crucial points of the Chinese note follow:76
- “1. In reply I have the honor to observe that the
assumption by the foreign representatives of the signatories
of the protocol of 1901 of the responsibility of guarding
the buildings and premises of the former Russian Legation in
Peking was an act undertaken by the said representatives
without the consent of the Chinese Government, although it
was occasioned by the recognition [termination] of the then, Russian diplomatic
representative [representation] in
Peking decreed by a Presidential mandate of the Republic
under the date of September 23rd, 1920.
- 2. How long such custody on the part of the said
diplomatic representatives should last is a question which
in its origin does not fall within the discretion of the
said representatives but must rather depend upon the
decision of China to decree [restore]
such relations with the new Russian Government.
- 3. Your Excellency’s suggestion to consider the question
of handing over the former Russian Legation only on a
request addressed to the foreign representatives by a
Russian representative duly accredited to the Chinese
Government appears to overlook the special interest of the
Chinese Government to see the premises of the former Russian
Legation promptly handed back to an authorized
representative of the Russian Government. It will be
recalled that the Diplomatic Quarter, though under the
control of the foreign legations by the protocol of 1901,
remains part of Chinese territory and that the premises of
the Russian Legation, though situated in the said quarter,
are themselves not subject to the control of the
representatives of other powers. Indeed they cannot be
subject to such control, as they are the property of a
foreign power with which China has reestablished diplomatic
relations and which Is anxious to take possession of the
Legation through its authorized representative for use as
its Legation. In asking for the delivery of the said
premises to an authorized representative of the Soviet
Government, the Chinese Government sought only to extend to
a foreign government that act of friendly assistance which
international courtesy expected of China to do in order to
facilitate the establishment of [a] diplomatic
representative [representation] which
it has agreed to receive. They feel the more concerned
because, as I may add for your information, it is their
desire to discharge an obligation which they have undertaken
vis-à-vis the Soviet Government
in the Sino-Russian agreement of May 31, 1924.
- 4. They are further inclined to the view that the
conventional status of the Diplomatic Quarter should not
make it difficult for the foreign representatives to comply
with the request of the Chinese Government, since they have
not asked to take control themselves of the said premises
but have requested only to have them delivered to an
authorized representative of the Soviet Government.
- 5. I hope the more sincerely that Your Excellency will see
your way to arrange for compliance with this request, as any
other course
[Page 446]
of
action in the present case would not only embarrass the
Chinese Government in their desire to extend every courtesy
and facility prescribed by international usage to the
representatives of foreign government[s] maintaining
amicable relations with China, but would also appear to
prejudice the right of foreign powers to establish their
Legations on Chinese territory free from any condition other
than the consent of the Chinese Government.”
