793.00/111
The British Chargé (Chilton) to the Secretary of State
[Received August 1.]
Sir: I have the honour to inform you, with reference to your note of the 23rd instant dealing with Chinese affairs, that His Majesty’s Representative at Peking has been notified that the United States Government have drafted an alternative text for the reply to the Chinese note of June 24th last, and that this text has been cabled to the United States Minister with instructions to consider it with his British and other Colleagues. At the same time Mr. Palairet has been informed that the American draft differs so radically both in form and substance from the Anglo-Japanese text that in the opinion of His Majesty’s Government there is small possibility of your being disposed to accept the latter, although both the French and Italian Governments have now agreed to it. In the circumstances, Mr. Palairet has been authorised to discuss the two texts with Mr. MacMurray and his other Colleagues in the hope of combining both in a new agreed text which, however, is to be submitted to His Majesty’s Government for approval before communication to the Chinese Ministry for Foreign Affairs.
In order to assist Mr. Palairet in his deliberations, he has been informed that His Majesty’s Government disapprove the statement in the American draft reply that the extraterritorial Commission will be instructed to make recommendations to enable the Powers to consider what steps may be taken for relinquishing their extraterritorial rights, inasmuch as my Government feel that the Commission [Page 806] should be allowed to make such recommendations as may appear to them desirable without any lead from the Powers. His Majesty’s Representative at Peking has further been informed that the statement in the American draft that the revision of treaties should contemplate ultimate tariff autonomy seems both gratuitous and likely to encourage Chinese pretensions unnecessarily. Mr. Palairet, moreover, has not been left in any doubt that, in the opinion of His Majesty’s Government, the general tone of the Corps Diplomatique’s reply should be less encouraging to the Chinese than in the American text, and it is felt that phrases such as “constant and sympathetic interest” of the United States Government towards the anticipated treaty move, and “gratification at progress in the improvement of the Chinese judicial system”, etc., should be omitted from the communication in question.
In reminding Mr. Palairet that the original object of the Powers’ declaration was to warn the Chinese Government that the former stand by the Washington principles and are not to be coerced into further concessions, he has been informed that His Majesty’s Government would like particularly to retain the passage included in the Anglo-Japanese draft reply referring to strikes and agitations.
I have [etc.]