TROUBLE IN CHINA

Hokitika Guardian, 20 January 1927, Page 2

TROUBLE IN CHINA

(Australian & N.Z. Cable Association.]

HOSPITAL ship GOING. MALTA. Jan. IS. The warship “Dauntless” rejoins her squadron later.

The- hospital ship “.Maine” which is at present in dock, will proceed to China shortly.

1000 MARINES READY. LONDON. Jan. 18

One thousand marines at the Chatham. Portsmouth and Plymouth depots are now ready to proceed to China. They may sail next week. It is officially emphasised that the despatch of these marines, if they go, does not indicate offensive measures, but is simply a precautionary measure against rioting, and for tlie defence of British life and property. It is also officially emphasised that the despatch of cruisers is similarly intended. BRITISH NAVAL CONCENTRATION. LONDON. Jan. 19. "When the first Cruiser Squadron arrives in China, the British naval strength will lie brought up to thirteen cruisers, with an aircraft, carrier, eight destroyers and other units.

Nearly one half of the cruisers in full commission will he concent rated in Chinese waters, and the number of liavv ratings will exceed 10.000. LONDON. Jan. 19.

The Daily Telegraph's diplomatic correspondent says: “It is realised in Government circles that preparations for coping with any grave emergencies must he made in goad time, whether they arc naval, military, or aerial. If any Power is not conscious of its responsibilities. or is unwilling to shoulder them. Britain, it is asserted, will certainly shoulder her share.

BRITISH LIBERTY IN CHINA. LONDON, Jan. 19. Rt. lion Sir Douglas Ilogg, K.C. (At-torney-General) speaking in the East End of London, declared that the British Government’s paramount duty was to “see that the liberties of our people in China wore protected.” Personally, he hoped that we might he aide to negotiate an honourable understanding.. hut wo must he prepared to face the alternative. There were in Shanghai alone sixteen hundred British subjects. and there were many millions of pounds worth of British property. If Chinese authorities refused Jo safeguard those lives, it became the duty of the Government to protect such interests themselves. It was obvious that such a decision would involve possibly grave consequences.

BRITAIN’S TERMS. LONDON. Jan. IS.

'The Government's policy regarding China is unchanged. It is still based on the British Memorandum of December 2-jtli.” said the Attorney-General, Sir Douglas Ilogg, in his speech at the East End of London. He added: “If the invitation we have offered is accepted, the Chinese authorities will not find us either ungenerous or unreasonable; but if they should be encouraged by our forbearance at Hankow into a belief that similar events can lie repeated at Shanghai or elsewhere, then it is the Government’s paramount duty to see that British lives and property are protected.’’

THE CHINESE STAND. LONDON, Jan. IS,

The Daily Express publishes u special despatch which it has received from 'Eugene Chen (Canton representative at Hankow), describing the recent events at Hankow. Chen charges the British with bayoneting several Chinese who formed part of a loyal crowd on the boundnrv of the British con-

Chen also y.ivi’s detail-- of the events which led to the Chinese Municipal Commission taking charge of affairs. He goes on to say that “Britain, in the first place, subjected China to the political and economic control of the AYest .typical features of which were expressed in the British control of the Chinese Customs, the extra-terri-torialitv of the alien-administered settlements, and the other limitations of Chinese sovereignty contained ill the unequal treaties.” Chen continues: “The country has been so controlled that it lias been fettered and it, has obviously not been Independent Chinese nationalisation, therefore, demands the handing hack of the lost independence of China. Our terms are the cancellation of the unequal treaties upon which the regime of foreign imperialism in China is based. The situation arising out of the new status quo in the Concession is not only profoundly significant of Asian history, hut it is a direct summons to British statesmanship to take the lead in recognising the justice of the Chinese demand for Chinese independence, and to proceed to redress the great historic wrong.”

Chon says: “I categorically repudiate the suggestion that British humiliation is desired by us. AVe demand a settlement of the question of the concession, which shall not deny its effective re-incorporation within the Chinese territorial system ; and a settlement subject to the nationalist recognition of the valiilitv of all the property rights of the British nationals in the