Office of the Historian

793.003/580: Telegram

The Minister in China (Johnson) to the Secretary of State

[Paraphrase]
Nanking, March 28, 1931—4 p.m.
[Received March 29—5:32 a.m.83]

Continuing my March 28, 10 a.m. The following comments concern the quotations therein:

1.
Transfer of jurisdiction. The British presented this section to the Chinese as new matter, and I understand the Chinese have accepted it with the exception of the words in parentheses in the opening sentence. This section is a redraft by the British Foreign Office of the first part of article 1 of the American October 28 draft. The Chinese exception to the words in parentheses is an indication of their attitude on the subject of the reservation of criminal cases.
2.
The declaration. This is section (e) of article 3 of the October 28 draft. The Chinese decline to accept the provisions of section (f), article 3, October 28 draft, either in the preamble or in the form of a declaration.
3.
Lawyers and interpreters. This paragraph is new, to be added at the end of the text quoted in my March 17, noon, as paragraph 6. The British Foreign Office suggested it.
4.
Lawyers’ diplomas interpretation. Agreed minute. This will be an unpublished understanding between Lampson and C. T. Wang regarding British lawyers.
5.
Legal counselors. The sentence which refers to Chinese legal counselors was inserted between sentences 1 and 2 of the text quoted in my March 17, noon, paragraph 2. There has been substituted for the last three sentences of the text quoted in the same telegram, paragraph 2, the two paragraphs commencing “In all cases” and ending with “provided in this article.”
6.
Declaration attached to article on legal counselors. This covers the character of contract[s] and includes a provision for legal counselors to officiate at the trial of cases which involve British subjects.
7.
Taxation. It will be noted by the Department that paragraphs (b), (c), (d), and (e) are redrafts, which originated in the British Foreign Office, of the text quoted in my March 17, noon, paragraph 8.
8.
Arbitration. This replaces the text quoted in my March 17, noon, paragraph 9, and was written into the redraft which originated in the British Foreign Office. The Department will take note of paragraph 2 of this text in regard to procedure and of the text of the letter to be attached thereto explaining that the law covered by this paragraph is not the present Chinese arbitration law. The inclusion of this paragraph, I understand, was insisted upon by the Chinese who said there might be a law setting up procedure at some future date. Paragraph 4 of this text, making the entire article reciprocal, should also be noted by the Department. Lampson informs me that the article in general describes a procedure which has long been recognized in Great Britain.
9.
Rights in immovable property. The Department will note that the sentence regarding the temporary use in case of grave emergency of British property has been dropped. Lampson and I regarded this sentence as dangerous, since it might be interpreted to legalize and to invite temporary occupation upon payment of nominal compensation. At the instance of the British Foreign Office, the quoted sentence has been added to the text quoted in my March 17, noon, paragraph 10.
10.
The exchange of notes regarding rights in immovable property. The quoted sentence is an amendment suggested by the Department’s March 21, 3 p.m., paragraph (7), and has been added to the text of the exchange of notes just before the final sentence (see my March 17, noon, paragraph 10).
11.
Military service, forced loans, etc. This is a British Foreign Office redraft of the text quoted in my March 17, noon, paragraph 12.
12.
Treatment of companies. This is a British Foreign Office redraft of the text quoted in my March 17, noon, paragraph 13, and was discussed with and agreed to by the Chinese. I find it an improvement over other texts.
13.
Nondiscriminatory treatment. The text in my March 17, noon, paragraph 15, has been redrafted. Lampson tells me that his Government is more or less committed to accept reciprocal treatment. In his opinion, we should have no difficulty in this phraseology if read in connection with all the other articles of the proposed agreement, since reciprocity is confined to matters which are provided for in the treaty.
14.
These texts have been sent to the British Foreign Office for its comment and approval. The texts are, with the exceptions indicated, I understand, acceptable to the Chinese. It will be noted by the Department that Lampson has not yet touched upon the following articles in the October 28 draft: evocation; arrest, detention and trial; personal status matters; reservation of settlements and concessions; and portions on shipping in article 10 and on rights of residence and trade in article 13. Except for shipping and personal status, all of these are connected with the problems of reservation of criminal jurisdiction and reserved areas. Lampson is expecting comments from the British Foreign Office by March 31.

Johnson
  1. Telegram in two sections.↩