693.002 Manchuria/270: Telegram
The Consul General at Shanghai (Cunningham) to the Secretary of State
395. Soong, Minister of Finance, issued general statement yesterday:
“The so-called ‘Manchuria Foreign Minister’, Mr. Hsieh Chieh-shih announced on September 15th that ‘Manchukuo’ would henceforth treat China wholly as an alien nation in matters of customs, tariff, commerce, and navigation as in all other respects. Beginning on September 24th, he added, export and import duties would be imposed on all merchandise between China and ‘Manchukuo’.
In view of the above the National Government has instructed the Ministry of Finance that since for the time being the customs authorities are unable to collect the lawful customs duties at Manchukuo port[s], the customshouses there are to be closed until further notice and the duties that should have been collected there will be temporarily collected as far as possible at all customs stations south of the Great Wall. Detailed announcements to that effect are being made by the respective Commissioners of Customs at the various ports.”
2. Soong also issued comment on above measures [of] which following is summary:
China throughout showed good example of forbearance when Japan [Page 274] in this guise of “Manchukuo authority” commenced to seize various customshouses in Manchuria and which culminated in the seizure of Dairen customs in June. Chinese Government made no move to change its practice governing transit of domestic goods and duty paid foreign goods arriving from Manchuria at other Chinese ports. It has refrained from taking retaliatory measures primarily because Manchuria is Chinese territory and 96 percent of its inhabitants are Chinese. Chinese Government would rather endure temporary loss of customs revenue than to initiate measures herself to sever Manchuria from the rest of China. Another consideration was the fact that Lytton Commission had been conducting its inquiry and Chinese Government has consistently endeavored to follow injunction of League of Nations to refrain from measures tending to aggravate situation.
Japan through mouthpiece of so-called Manchukuo Minister of Foreign Affairs has at last announced that she is severing Manchuria from the rest of China not only politically but economically since which time building a tariff wall between Manchuria and the rest of China in defiance of all international treaties and economic laws. Further announcement of Manchukuo Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs on September 16th that:
“Manchukuo does not intend to open the interior of the country for residence, investment or concessions to the nationals of any power except those who grant de jure recognition to the Manchukuo Government and who at the same time relinquish extraterritoriality” shows that open door is closed not only to all foreign nations except Japan but even to China herself. However, in spite of this provocation Chinese Government is not resorting to retaliatory measures but is merely adopting means to collect such of the Manchurian customs duties as are possible at customs stations outside of Manchuria because China’s stake in Manchuria is overwhelmingly greater than that of Japan and any action that would further increase difficulties of economic relations between Manchuria and the rest of China would simply mean playing into the hands of Japan.
Following is a summary of customs notification issued by Superintendent and Commissioner of Customs.
Shanghai, September 24th. In accordance with instructions of the Government, the public are notified that in view of occupation of Manchuria by Japan, National Government is unable temporarily to collect lawful Chinese customs revenue at Manchurian ports and instructions have been issued that customshouses at Harbin, Newchwang, Antung and Lungchingtsun are to be closed on September 25th and that customs duties which should legally be collected at those ports will temporarily be collected at other Chinese ports. Duty treatment of cargo shipped to above ports will accordingly be as follows: [Page 275]
“Native goods including factory products no change. Foreign goods: Exemption certificate and duty paid on import cargo: no change. To pay cargo; to pay import duty at point of transshipment. Non-duty paid transshipment cargo; to pay import duty at port of transshipment. Cargo ex-bond; to pay import duty at port of shipment. The duty treatment of cargo on arrival from any of the above Manchurian ports will be as follows: Native goods to pay interpret duty and interpret surtax. Factory products to pay factory products taxes and surtaxes which would normally be collected at the above ports. Foreign goods to pay import duty.
Owing to the failure of the Japanese authorities to permit the Chinese customs to function in the Kwantung Leased Territory in accordance with the Dairen agreement, it is impossible for the customs to ascertain the province and destination of cargo from and to Dairen—therefore, the following duty treatment will apply; cargo to Dairen: native goods to pay export duty. Factory products irrespective of ultimate destination to pay factory products tax. Foreign goods same duty treatment as for other Manchurian ports (see above) cargo from Dairen: All cargo to pay import duty. The relative revenue and flood-relief surtax will also be collected.
Customs documents covering cargo sent to the above ports will be handed to shippers. Document issued at the above ports to cover cargo shipped after 25th September 1932 will not be recognized.
Duty will not be levied on through cargo from abroad, i. e., cargo consigned to the above ports but remaining on original vessel or on native through cargo from the above ports consigned to foreign ports but remaining on original vessel.
Tonnage dues certificate issued in the above Manchurian ports on and after 25th September 1932 will not be recognized.”
I learn that “to pay” cargo meant to be foreign cargo which cannot be identified as such and which previously would have paid duty at a Manchurian port.
Repeated to the Legation.
- Telegram in two sections.↩