493.11/1871
Memorandum by the Chief of the Division of Far Eastern Affairs (Hornbeck) of a Conversation With the Chinese Minister (Sze)
The Minister called and said that he had had a very pleasant vacation (he had been on a month’s cruise in waters to the South).
He said that one matter had come up during his absence about which he wished to give me information. His Foreign Office had telegraphed [Page 549] him with regard to the question of the American Government’s position in regard to the outstanding obligations of the Chinese Government to American creditors. He said that they felt that it would be very difficult to deal with their debts to Americans separately from and independently of their debts in general. They were, however, disposed to set up some new bureau to study the question of the debts to Americans. He did not think that the step which they proposed would be very satisfactory. He would like to know about the Department’s attitude.
I replied that the American Government had never taken the position that Chinese obligations to American citizens should be dealt with differently from or to the exclusion of their obligations to other creditors; but that, after a long period in which the Chinese Government had talked about the formulating of a general plan for dealing with all creditors and in the course of which nothing definite had been achieved, the American Government had suggested that there be created a commission to deal with the question of “American claims.” This did not mean at all that the Chinese might not at the same time create similar commissions to deal with the claims of other nations; nor that they might not formulate and adopt a general plan. It did mean that we desired that adequate attention be given to the “American claims.”
I then said that I would like to take advantage of this opportunity to say a word, in all friendliness but with extreme frankness, with regard to our view of the situation. I said that even this suggestion of ours for a commission had now been under discussion for perhaps as much as two years, high officials of the Chinese Government had expressed themselves as favorable in principle, and yet nothing had been accomplished; and now officials at Nanking were talking about creating a bureau to talk further about the matter. I said that during recent months I had been forced to take cognizance of the fact that there is an increasing disposition in many quarters, both in other countries and in this country, to become impatient of a proclivity which seems to be manifested at Nanking merely to “talk about” various matters which are of concern to other countries, of which this matter would serve as an illustration, without proceeding to do something about these matters. I said that evidence of this proclivity was having a tendency to create skepticism with regard to the capacity of China to function effectively in political matters, and thus to create sympathy for and adherence to the view which has long been uttered in various quarters and which is more and more persistently uttered: that other countries must in dealing with China resort to such methods and means as they may find necessary to look after the rights and interests of their nationals. I said that this was a development in political [Page 550] psychology which no one seeking to be guided by the principle of the “good neighbor”, by which principle we are trying to be guided in this country, could contemplate with other than the opposite of gratification. I said that we had received information with regard to the very matter which the Minister had brought up which indicated that the attitude on the part of some at least of the responsible officials at Nanking, now and in regard to this matter, is one suggestive of indifference to the rights and interests of creditors (in particular, American creditors). I said that we had long hoped for and we still hope for more encouraging signs from China.
The Minister said that he realized that there was a great deal of delay and of tendency to be defensively stubborn. This arose in part from the fact that organization has not been perfected and that the spirit of nationalism is running strong. He inquired what we thought of the proposal for the creation of a new bureau.
I replied that we had not yet formulated any view which I would wish to express but that we were thinking the matter over. It then was agreed that the Minister should call again early next week at which time we could continue the discussion of this matter.