893.05/293
The Consul General at Shanghai (Cunningham) to the Minister in China (Johnson)10
Sir: Referring to this Consulate General’s despatch No. 6438 of March 28, 1930,11 relative to the implementing of the new court agreement, I have the honor to enclose, for the Legation’s information, a copy of a supplemental memorandum on this subject by Consul General J. F. Brenan and Consul J. E. Jacobs,11 representing the Legations concerned, the original of which is being sent through the Senior Consul concerned to the Senior Minister concerned. This memorandum is not only supplemental to that transmitted with my despatch above referred to but is the final memorandum of Messrs. Brenan and Jacobs on this subject since all the matters connected with the implementing of the new court agreement have now been concluded.
In spite of the fear expressed in the last paragraph of my despatch referred to, that there might be some difficulty in connection with the inauguration of the new courts on April 1, 1930, the Chinese authorities appointed the Presidents of the two new courts on March 30th and the inauguration ceremonies took place, as scheduled, on April 1st. Since their inauguration these courts have functioned satisfactorily although the Prosecutor for the Police states that there is still some confusion incident to the necessary readjustments in the personnel and procedure. Two questions, however, did arise in regard to the recording of processes of the new courts served by the Process Servers and in connection with the service of criminal summonses by these officers which were referred by the Senior Consul concerned to Messrs. J. F. Brenan and J. E. Jacobs, the foreign members of the Permanent Committee Constituted under Article IX of the new Agreement. They succeeded in effecting an informal settlement of these questions with the President of the Branch High Court without an actual meeting of the Permanent Committee. The reason for an informal settlement of this kind was the attitude of the Chinese members of the Permanent Committee as regards the proper procedure for referring such questions [Page 345] to the Committee. This difficulty will be the subject of a communication from the Senior Consul concerned to the Senior Minister concerned in order that the procedure may be regularized for the future.
With reference to the Permanent Committee constituted under Article IX of the agreement, it is not believed that this Committee will be of much assistance in settling disputes which may arise out of the operation of the new agreement. As constituted under the agreement it is nothing more than an advisory board whose recommendations may or may not be adopted by the Chinese and foreign authorities concerned. It would seem, therefore, that the most expeditious way of settling such disputes will be through the medium of formal and informal representations to the Presidents of the two new courts which has already worked satisfactorily as pointed out in the above paragraph.
Although the new courts have only been functioning for about two weeks, it is believed that the relations between the authorities of these courts and of the International Settlement will be friendly and mutually helpful if the same conciliatory spirit which has characterized their mutual efforts for the past two weeks continues.
I have [etc.]