861.77 Chinese Eastern/6
The Consul at Harbin (Hanson) to the Minister in China (MacMurray)63
Sir: I have the honor to report that on December 29th the Chinese Nationalist flag was hoisted at Harbin, along the Chinese Eastern Railway and at other places in North Manchuria. No particular enthusiasm over the event was expressed by the local Chinese residents, but it is reasonable to conclude that they are relieved by this outward sign that North and South China are united. This union will have little effect on the administration of Harbin and the Special Area of the Eastern Provinces, whose officials have been appointed by Mukden. As far as foreign affairs are concerned, China proper and Manchuria will present a united front to the outside world. As far as internal affairs are concerned, Nanking will have little voice in Manchuria matters.
[Page 187]As the Legation is aware, the flag of the Chinese Eastern Railway was a combination of the Chinese five colored flag and the Soviet flag, the former being above and the latter below. Orders were issued not to permit the raising of this flag after December 28th. The Management and Board of Directors of the Railway are now discussing the design of a new flag for the line, but a decision of this sort taken by them would have to be approved by the Nanking Government and Soviet Regime. As the Chinese officials appear determined to strip the Railway of all functions except those which they consider to be of a simple transportation nature and have been greatly encouraged in this respect by the lack of opposition they encountered when they took over the Railway’s telephone system, it will probably be sometime before they will permit the Soviet flag, even in conjunction with the Nationalist flag to wave over the property of the Railway.
In an interview given to representatives of the local Russian press, Mr. Chang Ko-chen, who is a secretary of Marshal Chang Hsuehliang,64 is Chief of the local Chinese Educational Administration and has made himself spokesman for the newly installed Chinese authorities, probably because he was educated at Harbin and speaks excellent Russian, stated that unless the local citizens of the U. S. S. R. would not [sic] be completely loyal to China, in which they lived, and would not [sic] submit to its laws, and, unless the Soviet Administration of the Railway would not [sic] introduce full parity of employment and otherwise live up to agreements, the local authorities would have to take measures against them similar to those which were taken at one time by the southern government. As local Russians know what vindictive measures the nationalist officials in the south took against Soviet consular officers and citizens, this outburst of Mr. Chang’s caused considerable uneasiness among the Russian community.
The Soviet officials, outwardly do not appear to be worried over the newly created situation. Mr. V. G. Chilkin, Soviet Vice-President of the Board of Directors of the Railway, remarked to a member of the staff of the Consulate that he believed all local foreigners had their troubles with the Chinese authorities and that these were to be expected. There is much talk regarding the taking over of the entire railway by the Chinese authorities. It is believed that the Japanese officials of the South Manchuria Railway would take active measures to forestall a movement of this sort, which could be used as a precedent against the Japanese line. Perhaps, there exists some sort of an understanding between the Soviet and Japanese officials in this respect or, at least, the Soviet side might have some [Page 188] knowledge of the attitude of the Japanese railway officials toward this question.
There exists an agreement dated May 31, 1924 between Soviet Russia and the Peking Government65 and an agreement dated September 20, 1924 between Soviet Russia and the Mukden Government of General Chang Tso-lin,66 who was considered by the Peking Government to be a rebel when the agreements were signed, regarding the Chinese Eastern Railway and other questions. These agreements differ, although not radically. The Mukden agreement cuts down the concession period of the Railway by 20 years, while the Peking agreement does not. It would appear, therefore, that the Soviet Regime must now come to an understanding with the Nanking Government, as representing China as a whole in foreign affairs. It is presumed that the Mukden agreement will remain in force until such an understanding is reached. However, it can be expected that the local Chinese authorities will interpret this agreement in ways that suit their own interests and that the Soviet side will be too powerless to resist the Chinese officials in this respect.
I have [etc.]
- Copy transmitted to the Department by the Consul in his despatch No. 4715, of the same date; received January 30, 1929.↩
- Chief commander of the Northeastern Frontier Army, head of the Mukden Government, and son of the late Marshal Chang Tso-lin.↩
- Foreign Relations, 1924, vol. i, p. 499.↩
- See telegram No. 368, September 27, 1924, and No. 377, October 4, 1924, from the Chargé in China, ibid., pp. 509, 510.↩