Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T04:08:09.875Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Franco-British Rivalry over Siam, 1896–1904

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 April 2011

Minton F. Goldman
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The Franco-British rivalry over Siam in the last decades of the nineteenth century was one of the most serious of the world wide colonial conflicts between the two Powers after 1875 resolved by the Entente Cordiale agreements of 1904. Like the other colonial conflicts along the Niger and the Nile, in Morocco and Madagascar, and over the Newfoundland fisheries, the rivalry in Siam complicated and strained Franco-British relations in the last quarter of the nineteenth century and made diplomatic cooperation in European affairs very difficult, if not at times impossible.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Southeast Asian Studies , Volume 3 , Issue 2 , September 1972 , pp. 210 - 228
Copyright
Copyright © The National University of Singapore 1972

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Two very good and recent books on the conclusion of the Entente Cordiale agreements are Andrew, Christopher, Theophile Delcasse and the Making of the Entente Cordiale (New York: St. Martins Press, 1969)Google Scholar and Rollo, P.J.V., Entente Cordiale (London: Macmillan, 1970)Google Scholar; see the accompanying map for the geography of French Indo-China in the 1880's.

2 On the background of the Franco-British rivalry over Siam see Roberts, S.H., A History of French Colonial Policy 1870–1925 (2 vols.; London: P. King, 1929)Google Scholar vol. 2; Power, Thomas, Jules Ferry and the Renaissance of French Imperialism (New York: King's Crown Press, 1944)Google Scholar; Schuman, Frederick L., War and Diplomacy in the Third French Republic (New York: Whittelsey House, 1931)Google Scholar; Lafuze, George Leighton, Great Britain, France, and the Siamese Question (Urbana, Illinois: University of Illinois, Abstract of an Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, 1935), pp. 3–11.Google Scholar

3 Temple, Richard, “French Movements in Eastern Siam,” Fortnightly, vol. 60, (July, 1893), pp. 146–147Google Scholar; Curzon, G.N., “The Siamese Boundary Question,” Nineteenth Century, vol. 34, (July, 1893), pp. 34–35, 41–42, 48–47, 53;Google Scholar Salisbury to Lytton, April 3, 1889, British and Foreign State Papers, vol. 87 (1894–1895)Google Scholar, hereafter cited as BFSP etc.; the British government tried to deter the French expansion into Laos between 1889 and 1893, Salisbury to Egerton, February 10, 1892, Rosebery to Waddinton, December 23, 1892, ibid.

4 Phipps to Rosebery, June 30, 1893, Rosebery to Phipps, July 3, 1893, BFSP, vol. 87 (1894–1895); Develle to d'Estournelles de Constant, June 30, 1893, Ministere des affaires Estrangeres, Commission de Publication des Documents Relatifs aux Origines de la Guerre de 1914, Documents Diplomatique Francoises 1891–1914, first series (16 vols.; Paris: Imprimere Nationale, 1929–1953), vol. 10, hereafter cited as DDF, etc.

5 Develle to d'Estournelles de Constant, June 30, 1893, July 14, 1893, DDF, series 1, vol. 10; see also Jones to Rosebery, July 23, 1893 BFSP, vol. 87 (1894–1895); for a large study of Franco-Siamese relations in the nineteenth century, see Duke, Pensri Suvanij, Les Relations entre La France et la Thailande an XIX Siecle d'Apres les Archives des Affaires Etrangeres (Bangkok: Librairie Chalermnit, 1962).Google Scholar

6 Dufferin to Rosebery, July 23, 1893, BFSP, vol. 87 (1894–1895); between 1884 and 1898 British trade with Bangkok increased from 61% of the total to 78%, Lafuze, Great Britain, France, and the Siamese Question, p. 4.

7 d'Estournelles de Constant to Develle, July 31, 1893, DDF, series 1, vol. 10.

8 Ibid.; Develle to d'Estournelles de Constant, July 31, 1893, Dufferin to Rosebery, July 31, 1893, BFSP, vol. 87 (1894–1895).

9 “Traite,” enclosure in Dufferin to Rosebery, October 21,1893, BFSP, vol. 87 (1894–1895); see the accompanying map for the geography of French gains in the treaty of 1893.

10 See Rosebery to Dufferin, September 5, 1893, September 7, 1893, ibid.

11 Dufferin to Rosebery, August 1, 1893, BFSP, vol. 87 (1894–1895).

12 Develle to d'Estournelles de Constant, October 20, 1893, d'Estournelles de Constant to Develle, October 25, 1893, DDF, series 1, vol. 10; Hanotaux to Courcel, February 18, 1895, Courcel to Hanotaux, March 30, 1895, April 12, 1895, Hanotaux to Courcel, May 20, 22, 23 1895, ibid., series 1, vol. 11; Rosebery to Dufferin, November 14, 1893, November 21, 1893, BFSP, vol. 87 (1894–1895).

13 The terms of the treaty appear in Courcel to Berthelot, January 15, 1896, DDF, series 1, vol. 12

14 Compare the draft declaration Salisbury presented to Courcel, the French Ambassador at London, on November 25, 1895, with the final product Courcel sent to Berthelot, the French Foreign Minister on January 15, 1896, in Salisbury to Courcel, November 25, 1895, and Courcel to Berthelot, January 15, 1896, DDF, series 1, vol. 12.

15 Consult Lansdowne's memorandum to Cambon, October 24, 1902, DDF, series 2, 1901–1911 (14 vols.; Paris: Imperimere Nationale, 1930–1935), vol. 2.

16 The terms of the treaty appear in Lansdowne to Archer, October 17, 1902, Gooch, G.P. (ed.), British Documents on the Origins of the World War (11 vols.; London: His Majesty's Stationery Office, 1927)Google Scholar, vol. 2, hereafter cited as B.D., etc. See also Xuto, Somsakdi, British Foreign Policy toward Siam 1890–1900 (London: Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of London, 1958), pp. 282–286Google Scholar; Numnonda, Thamsook, “The Anglo-Siamese Secret Convention of 1897,” Journal of the Siam Society, vol. 53 (January, 1965), pp. 45–46Google Scholar; Klein, Ira, “British Expansion in Malaya 1897–1902,” Journal of Southeast Asian History, Vol. IX, No. 1 (March, 1968), pp. 54–55.Google Scholar

17 See Rousseau to Chautemps, May 21, 1895, DDF, series 1, vol. 12. 18 Salisbury to Greville, April 22, 23, 1899, Public Record Office, Foreign Office, Confidential Print 422, Siam, piece 54, hereafter cited as PRO/Fo, etc.

19 Clech, Guy, Le Siam et ses Relations Avec La France, (Paris: These de doctorat, Universite de Paris, 1947), pp. 98–99Google Scholar; Millet, ReneL'Affaire du Siam (Paris: Bureaux de Revue de Politique et Parlementarie, 1902), pp. 6–11.Google Scholar

20 Clech, Le Siam, pp. 92–94, 97–99; Millet, L'Affaire du Siam, pp. 6–11, 17–20; Maurel, Gabriel, Histoire des Relations de la France et du Siam (Paris: These de Doctorat, Universite de Paris, 1906), pp. 31–33Google Scholar, 37–40; Berjoan, A., Le Siam et Les Accordes Franco-Siamois (Paris: Imprimerie Les Presses Modernes, 1927), pp. 84–86.Google Scholar See also Xuto, British Foreign Policy toward Siam, p. 300; Archer to Lansdowne, October 3, 1901Google Scholar, PRO/FO 422/54.

21 Klobukowski to Delcasse, June 6, 1902, DDF, series 2, vol. 2; see also Lafuze, Great Britain, France, and the Siamese Question, pp. 3–4.

22 Lansdowne to Monson, August 6, 1902, B.D., vol. 2; Cambon to Delcasse, August 9, 1902, DDF, series 2, vol. 2; CD. Cowan, Nineteenth Century Malaya: The Origins of British Political Control (London: Oxford University Press, 1961), p. 258.Google Scholar

23 Lansdowne to Archer, October 7, 1902, PRO/FO 422/56; Kennedy, J., A History of Malaya (London: Macmillan, 1962), p. 245Google Scholar; a detailed discussion of British policy toward Kelantan and Trengganu in 1902 appears in Thio, E., British Policy in the Malayan Peninsula (London: unpublished thesis, University of London, 1956)Google Scholar; see also Klein, Ira, “British Expansion in Malaya 1897–1902,” Journal of Southeast Asian History, Vol. IX, No. 1 (March, 1968), pp. 56–66.Google Scholar

24 Memorandum, enclosure in Archer to Lansdowne, July 15, 1902, PRO/FO 422/56; Cowan, Nineteenth Century Malaya, p. 259.

25 Monger, George N., End of Isolation: British Foreign Policy 1900–1907 (London: T. Nelson, 1963), p. 78.Google Scholar

26 Proces Verbal de la Conference Tenue le Samedi, 13, Septembre 1902 au Ministere des Affaires Etrangeres Sur les Affaires du Siam, DDF, series 2, vol. 2; even the British Minister to Bangkok Archer admitted the influence of the Japanese in Siam, Archer to Lansdowne, September 29, 1902, PRO/FO 422/56.

27 Delcasse aux Representatives de France a Rome, Constantinople, Vienne,.... October 7, 1902, footnote no. 3, Cambon to Delcasse, October 16, 1902, DDF, series 2, vol. 2.

28 Cambon to Delcasse, October 16, 1902, DDF, series 2, vol. 2.

29 Lansdowne to Monson, October 15, 1902, BD, vol. 2.

30 Ibid.

31 Lansdowne to Archer, October 17, 1902, BD, vol. 2; for a French view, the faults of the Franco-Siamese Treaty of October 1902, see Andrew, Theophile Delcasse, pp. 198–200, 257–258; Maurel, Relations de la France et du Siam, pp. 42–47.

32 Enclosure in Lansdowne to Monson, October 22, 1902, BD, vol. 2.

33 Lansdowne to Monson, November 19, 1902, ibid.

34 Cambon to Delcasse, November 20, 1902, DDF, series 2, vol. 2. Lansdowne to Monson, November 19, 1902, BD, vol. 2.

35 See Rollo, Entente Cordiale, pp. 110–123; Monger, End of Isolation, pp. 104–155.

36 Sir Lee, Sidney, King Edward VII (2 vols.; London: Macmillan, 1923), vol. 2, p. 223.Google Scholar

37 Lansdowne to Monson, July 2, 1903, BD, vol. 2.

38 Lansdowne to Monson, July 7, 1903, ibid.

39 Memorandum of interview between the Siamese Minister … and Lord Lansdowne … the 18th of June, 1903, PRO/FO, 422/58.

40 Paget to Lansdowne, July 7, 1903, PRO/FO, 422/58.

41 Monger, End of Isolation, p. 130.

42 Lansdowne to Cambon, October 1, 1903, BD, vol. 2.

43 For further discussion of the Franco-British negotiations on Egypt and Morocco, see Rollo, Entente Cordiale, pp. 171–271; Andrew, Theophile Delcasse, pp. 180–215.

44 For further discussion of the Newfoundland problem see Thompson, Frederic, The French Shore Problem (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1961).Google Scholar

45 Boissonnas to Delcasse, October 5, 1903, DDF series 2, vol. 4.

46 Delcasse to Boissonnas, October 19, 1903, ibid.

47 Boissonnas to Delcasse, December 2, 1903, 1903, DDF, series 2, vol. 4.

48 Paget believed that French fears of Japanese influence were exaggerated and based upon reports from the “Siam Free Press”, an organ of the French Colonial Party, which deliberately misrepresented and exaggerated the facts to arouse French anxiety that important Japanese interests stood in the way of French policy in Siam, Paget to Lansdowne, September 14, 1903 PRO/FO, 422/58.

49 Paget to Lansdowne, October 25, 1903, PRO/FO, 422/58.

50 Lansdowne to Paget, December 8, 1903, January 11, 1904, ibid.

51 Delcasse to Boissonnas, February 13, 1904, DDF, series 2, vol. 4.

52 Lansdowne to Cambon, February 5, 1904, BD, vol. 2.

53 The terms of the Declaration appear in BD, vol. 2, pp. 396–397.