893.841 Surtax/25: Telegram
The Chargé in China (Mayer) to the
Secretary of State
Peking, August 12,
1927—3 p.m.
[Received August 12—1
p.m.]
805. 1. Legation’s No. 773, July 29, 5 p.m. The following reply July 29,
4 p.m., was sent by the Senior Minister to the Senior Consul:
“Please wire as soon as possible whether consular body are
convinced that the duties which [according to] paragraph 4 of
your telegram would be imposed upon various consulates can be
effectively carried out by them.
Also whether in opinion of military and naval commanders
necessary protection outside Settlement likewise mentioned in
paragraph 5 is a practical proposal.”
2. In a telegram dated August 6, 5 p.m., in response to an inquiry from
Cunningham as to his participation in discussions of consular body
regarding tonnage dues, the Legation advised him as follows:
“August 6, 5 p.m. Your August 5, 5 p.m. While I do not consider
that you should unduly restrict yourself in your discussions
with your colleagues of the Senior Minister’s telegram, it is
obvious from the Department’s instructions, repeated to you in
the Legation’s August 4, 6 p.m., that you should not lead your
colleagues to believe that you can be associated in any plan
which directly or in the last analysis may involve the use of
American military or naval forces. You should avoid on the other
hand any such categorical statement, unless necessary, as might
encourage the Chinese to increased illegality by reason of the
belief that the United States would in no case use force to
protect its treaty rights.”
3. Following telegram, dated August 9th, was sent by Senior Consul at
Shanghai to Senior Minister:
- “(1) Referring to Your Excellency’s telegram July 29th.
The consular body carefully considered these questions on
August 5th and answered both in the affirmative. It was the
opinion that should the Customs continue to issue
assessments of duties due on imported articles the carrying
out of the fourth paragraph was easily within the power of
the various consulates. If the Customs however do not
continue to function in this capacity the various consulates
would meet the difficulties which they did not regard as
insuperable since each would be able to draw upon the
general Chamber of Commerce for experts in appraising
merchandise, and warehouses could be secured in principle as
by the Customs at present. The consul general for the United
States of America made it clear that he was not authorized
to subscribe completely to this policy.
- (2) In regard to paragraph 5 of my telegram July 27th the
naval authorities considered the proposal as quite
practical. The following is the report of the senior naval
officer: ‘At a meeting held on the 4th August at which the
British, French, Japanese, United States, Spanish, Italian,
and the Portguese senior naval officers were present, the
question
[Page 451]
of
preventing interference with foreign shipping in the event
of the imposition of extratreaty taxes was discussed. As
regards the protection of wharves outside the Settlement
area, the only nations present [owning?] such wharves are
the American, British, and Japanese. It is understood that
guards will be provided by the nations concerned. As regards
the protection of ships and cargoes in the stream, it was
proposed that warships of each nation should look after the
sections in their immediate vicinity and protect the
property of any other nation in that section. This was
agreed to, and the following areas were provisionally
allocated: Upper section A to American Navy; upper section B
to Portuguese Navy; upper section C and section 1 to
Japanese Navy; sections 2 and 3 to French Navy; sections 4,
5 and 6 to British Navy; section 7 to Spanish Navy; section
8 to Italian Navy; Sections 9 and 10 to British Navy;
section 11 and [apparent omission] belong to American Navy.
It was considered that continual patrol would probably not
be necessary but that each warship would require to keep an
armed launch or boat ready to proceed at once if any
interference was observed.’
- (3) The senior American naval officer has handed to the
consul general for the United States of America the
following comments: ‘That contingent on the receipt of
proper instructions from superior authorities I believe it
is practicable to protect American interests in the subject
[sic] under control.’
- (4) With reference to proposed protection of foreign
wharves outside Settlement limits (i. e., on Pootung shore
of harbor) it may be added that such protection has been in
operation for some months past, guards having only recently
been withdrawn from the west point for climatic
reasons.”
4. I assume than [that?] an early meeting of the
diplomatic body will be called to discuss the foregoing telegram. I do
not believe that the Heads of Legation are in any doubt as to our policy
as set forth in the Department’s 304, August 2, 1 p.m., and preceding. I
shall, however, make certain at any such meeting that [there is] no
misapprehension.
