Office of the Historian

861.77 Chinese Eastern/55: Telegram

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

Peking, July 20, 1929—7 p.m.
[Received 8 p.m.]

604. Legation’s 602, July 20, 2 p.m.93

1.
From a report made by the Naval Attaché concerning a trip made by him to Manchuria last month, it would appear that the question of some action being taken by the Manchurian authorities with regard to the Chinese Eastern Railway had been under consideration for some time, certain advisers advocating confiscation of the railway and another set of advisers suggesting assumption of control with all of the liabilities and assets. Among the arguments advanced for the assumption of control by China are the obligations which China is said to have under article V of the nine-power treaty relating to principles and policies concerning China94 and under resolution 12 of the Washington Conference regarding the Chinese Eastern Railway95 and the obligation “in the nature of a trust” which China may be deemed to have in view of the terms of resolution 13 of the Washington Conference regarding the Chinese Eastern Railway.96 Although the foregoing provisions were drawn up with a view to holding China responsible for “discrimination”, the view is now maintained by the advisers of the Mukden Government that China cannot carry out her engagements in these particulars without assumption of full control of the railway.
2.
It is further argued that since the Peking agreement of May 31, 1924, provides (article 2) that “the railway is a purely commercial enterprise” and (article 6) that “the Governments of the two contracting parties further pledge themselves not to engage in propaganda against the political and social systems of either contracting party”, the Chinese are justified in taking over the railway inasmuch as the provisions of these articles have been repeatedly broken by the Soviet Government, the railway, its funds and employees being used for political purposes in undermining the Government of China.

Code text by mail to Tokyo.

MacMurray
  1. Not printed.↩
  2. Foreign Relations, 1922, vol. i, pp. 276, 280.↩
  3. Ibid., p. 297.↩
  4. Ibid., p. 298.↩