THE BROKEN PARLEY

Wairarapa Age, 4 February 1927, Page 7

THE BROKEN PARLEY

CANTONESE MINISTER’S DECLARATION.

WILL NOT SIGN AGREEMENT UNDER DURESS.

SOME INVIDIOUS COMPARISONS.

There is now confirmation of yesterday’s report that Eugene Chen, Nationalist Foreign Minister, has broken off negotiations with Mr. O’Malley regarding the Hankow Concessions on the ground that the concentration of British forces at Shanghai amounts to attempted intimidation and coercion. lia.. . — SHANGHAI. February 2. Eugene Chen’s statement to Mr. O’Malley, breaking off negotiations, says: “Since the negotiations regarding the future status of the British Concession at Hankow began on January 12 a singular concentration of armed British forces has been progressing at Shanghai, the alleged object being the protection of British lives and property in the event of their being endangered by the forcible occupation of the international settlement at Shanghai.

“It is significant that though the Japanese and Americans have large vital interests in the same place they have not found it necessary to resort to the massing of armed forces there. “In a manifesto- on January 22, the Nationalist Government declared that it was the intention to have all questions relating to treaty and other cognate matters Jettled by negotiations and agreement. rThis impliedly covered and was so intended to cover the question of the future status of the International Settlement at Shanghai, which is not and never has been within the contemplation of the Government to occupy by force. “It was believed -that this might lead to the cessation or at least the slowing down of the massing of British forces in China, and accordingly the Nationalist Government decided io take no notice of what might appear to be not only a menacing but also n provocative operation by the British and negotiations were proceeded with INTIMIDATION ALLEGED.

“On January 29, the Minister of Foreign Affairs had occasion formally to raise the question of this concentration of armed forces. In reply to the proposals outlined by Mr. O 'Malley for the revision of certain British treaty rights the Minister of Foreign Affairs stated that the proposals envisaged only a fragmentary revision of some of the. treaty servitudes affecting- China, and that, while the Nationalist Goverument Could not regard such revision as satisfactory or adequate, they nevertheless wore prepared to eousider and discuss the terms outlined as a basis for a. comprehensive and reasoned settlement of existing differences between National China and British, provided, inter alia, that the discussion and negotiation took place in an atinosijhere free from the intimidation necessarily involved in the present con contration of British fighting forces. , “AN ACT OF COERCION.”

“The continued concentration of the forces referred to as a ‘Chinese Expeditionary Force’ as well as certain military information relating- to the British plan of war operations in China which has now come to the knowledge of the Nationalist Government, make it impossible for the Nationalist Government to continue to view the British concentration at Shanghai except as an act of coercion directed against Chinese- nationalism.

“To sign any agreement under these circumstances would be tantamount •‘o signing under duress of force. No agreement so signed could be real and effective. The Nationalist Government must perforce await the ending of this period of duress before authorising the signing of an agreement which would settle the status of the portion of Chinese territory knows as the British Concession at Hankow. This period could be ended immediately or at any time by the British Government re-en-visaging the effect on the Nationalist mind of the present concentration of their military and naval forces at Shanghai.”—(A. and N.Z.)