893.105/18: Telegram
The Secretary of State to the Minister in China (Schurman)
185. Your telegram No. 289 August 21, 10 a.m.
Japanese Ambassador called late yesterday afternoon on Chief of the Division of Far Eastern Affairs, saying that he had received [Page 691] from his Government urgent instructions to consult the Department with respect to what he termed the British plan for control of railway police in China. He indicated considerable anxiety lest this Government should hastily commit itself to certain details of the plan which were felt to be inconsistent with the policies of the Washington Conference and likely to antagonize Chinese feeling.
He said his Government had instructed its Minister in Peking to present to his colleagues four proposed amendments summarized herewith:
- (1)
- To avoid the appearance of the foreign Powers sharing the responsibility of the Chinese Government in consequence of their insistence upon a particular form of organization, the Japanese Government feels that the Diplomatic Body should avoid requiring that the plan of organization should be subject to its approval; it should insist only upon having details of plan communicated to it, and dealing diplomatically with any objectionable points.
- (2)
- Japanese Government feels that to give foreign codirector equal rank and authority with the Chinese director would result in foreign control, and therefore considers that foreigner should be merely an adviser under the Chinese director.
- (3)
- Inasmuch as the functions of chief accountants and traffic managers are avowedly limited to the purpose of providing funds for the police force, Japanese Government feels they should have only powers necessary for that purpose as distinguished from the powers appropriate where their function is to protect bondholders.
- (4)
- Japanese Government considers plan should not extend to all Chinese Railways but only to those most used by foreigners.
Japanese Ambassador was informed that this Government is not committed to anything further than approval of the general principle of foreign assistance in organizing railway police, and that the details of the draft plan are still under consideration.
My own feeling is that under the guise of assuring protection the plan goes too far in the direction of placing in the hands of controlling foreign influences the power of supervision and direction of the finances and operation of the Chinese railways. In view of the strictly limited purposes in view, I do not perceive the necessity for traffic managers on the several roads, nor for giving chief accountants joint control with the Chinese managing directors over entire finances. It would seem to suffice if foreign chief accountant on each line were to have access to all accounts of the road and so much authority as would enable him to compel each month the deposit of the comparatively trifling contribution of the road for police purposes.
I think it is also important that the national status of the foreign police officers and chief accountants should be well understood in advance of the formal presentation of the plan to the Chinese Government. [Page 692] It might well be understood that the Chinese Government should be free to nominate and appoint the personnel subject to the veto of the Diplomatic Body. My own suggestion would be that at any rate the principal officers should be chosen from nationalities possessing no considerable interest with respect to Chinese Railways. You should in any case make it clear that no special right or influence with respect to the organization or personnel of the proposed services in connection with railway police should be recognized as accruing to any nationality by virtue of its financial interest in any of the Chinese railways.
As to the proposed Japanese amendments, the first appears to me well taken in avoiding any positive approval by the foreign representatives which would lend itself to the idea of a divided responsibility. The second suggestion does not seem to me well taken, as the present plan would make the foreign codirector subordinate to the Ministry of Communications, and the proposal to make him merely an adviser would almost certainly deprive him of all power of usefulness. From what has been said above you will understand that I am in accord with the third Japanese amendment and in fact inclined to go further in dispensing with traffic managers. As a practical matter it would doubtless prove difficult to install the plan on all Government railways immediately, and I therefore think that in practice it would be well to adopt the fourth Japanese amendment subject to the understanding that the Diplomatic Body could require the plan to be extended to other Government railways whenever it should judge that circumstances warrant it. I should appreciate receiving from you as promptly as possible an expression of your judgment as to the views I have indicated in regard to the plan itself and the amendments thereto proposed by the Japanese Government.
Mail copy to Tokyo for information.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .