Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T22:43:14.841Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Abrogation of British Extraterritoriality in China 1942–43: A Study of Anglo-American-Chinese Relations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

K. C. Chan
K. C. Chan
Affiliation:
University of Hong Kong
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The Marco Polo Bridge Incident on 7 July 1937 has been commonly regarded as the beginning of the second Sino-Japanese war. The early days of the war were a history of rapid Japanese advances and, inversely, of the equally fast retreat of the Chinese. The Chinese Nationalist Government evacuated Nanking and moved westward to the Wuhan area in late November 1937. Central China soon became untenable in face of heavy Japanese reinforcements; the Chinese government again evacuated in October 1938, this time much further west to Chungking in Szechwan. There was no declaration of war and China clearly had the sympathy of Britain and the United States. The two countries continued to recognize the government at Chungking, under the leadership of Chiang Kai-shek, as the government of China, despite the fact that it retained control only over the south-west corner of the country. Pearl Harbor strengthened the tie of relations; the Chungking government won Britain, the United States, and the Netherlands as allies in its colossal struggle against Japan.

Type
Articles
Information
Modern Asian Studies , Volume 11 , Issue 2 , April 1977 , pp. 257 - 291
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1977

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 A lucid account of the emergence and consolidation of the treaty system in China is given in Ch'ien T'ai , Chung-kuo pu p'ing-teng t'iao-yüeh chi yuan-ch'i chi ch'i fet-ch'u chih ching-kuo (The history of the unequal treaties in China) (Taipei, 1961), pp. 15–45.Google Scholar

2 The quotation is from Fishel, W.R.The End of Extraterritoriality in China (University of California Press, 1952), p. 216.Google Scholar For a detailed account of events between the commission on extraterritoriality in China and the outbreak of the Manchurian crisis, see ibid., pp. 109–87. Good summaries, however, are found in Teichman, E.Affairs of China (London, 1938), pp. 92–7;Google Scholar and Levi, W.Modern China's Foreign Policy (University of Minnesota Press, 1953), pp. 189–91.Google ScholarAn interesting account of the experiences of members of the commission on extraterritoriality who visited China in 1926, which largely shaped their opinions on the question as expounded in their report,Google Scholar is given in Gilbert, R., The Unequal Treaties (London, 1929), pp. 225–30.Google Scholar

3 For example, Hinder, E.M.Life and Labor in Shanghai (New York, 1944), pp. 225–3.Google Scholar

4 Cabinet conclusions 24 (37), Cab (Cabinet) 23/88.

5 Fishel, The End of Extraterritoriality in China, p. 217.Google Scholar

6 The bulk of the works on the question of extraterritoriality, or consular jurisdiction, was published before 1942–1943. Some of these were written as a result of the attention given to the subject during 1928–31 when the Chinese Nationalist Government was clamouring for the abrogation of extraterritoriality. Examples for the pre-1942 works are:Google ScholarChou Keng-sheng, Ling-shih ts'-paian ch'üan (Consular jurisdiction) (Shanghai, 1925);Google ScholarHuang Chih-yung, Ling-shih ts'ai-pan ch'üan tao-lun ta-kang (The problem of extraterritoriality) (Shanghai, 1929);Google Scholar and Woodhead, H.G.W.Extraterritoriality in China—The Case Against Abolition (Tientsin, 1929).Google Scholar There are also books written after 1942–1943. Of these the most authoritative and detailed study is Fishel, The End of Extraterritoriality in China, published in 1952. Despite the title, however, only 5 out of a total of 221 pages of text are devoted to the events of 1942–43. Moreover, the limited coverage suffered further from the fact that the book was published four years before the Department of State of the United States released the American government records relating to China for 1942 and two decades before the British materials were opened to the public. Vincent's, J.C. book, The Extraterritorial System in China—Final Phase, published as recently as 1970 by the East Asian Research Centre of Harvard University, deals essentially with the working of the system during 1924–1937.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

7 For the effect of the fall of Hong Kong, see Sir Archibald Clark Kerr, British ambassador in Peking, to Anthony Eden, foreign secretary, tel. 709, immediate, 22 December 1941, FO (Foreign Office) 371/27753. In his last despatch to Eden before he left China, Clark Kerr gave a graphic account of the ‘bewilderment’ and ‘disillusionment’ of the Chinese caused by the collapse of the British position in the Far East, 3 February 1942, 371/31645.

8 Details of the offer and the rationale of the British government for rejecting it are set out in the minute of A.L. Scott, an official in the Far Eastern Department in the Foreign Office, on a parliamentary question asked on the subject by R.V. Grimston, M.P., FO 371/31626.

9 This charge against Britain was widely known in the United States. Ashley Clarke, head of the Far Eastern Department, to Sir J. Brenan, a veteran official in the department, written while Clarke was on a short visit to Washington for consultation with the American government about various questions concerning China, 12 May 1942, and Scott's minute on it, FO 371/31626.

10 Important documents in the India Office archives relating to Chiang's visit to India are collected in Mansergh, N.The Transfer of Power 1942–7 (London, 1970), for pagination, see ch. 2 in table of contents. For Chinese accounts of the event,Google Scholar see Fu Ch'i-hsüeh , Chung-kuo wai-chiao shih (The diplomatic history of China) (Taipei, 1957), pp. 579–82;Google Scholar and Tung Hsien-kuang , Chiang tsung-t'ung ch'uan (Taipei, 1954), II, 350–7.Google Scholar

11 For example, Lord Halifax, British ambassador to Washington, to Eden, tel. 1355, immediate, 7 March; and tel. 1600, important and secret, 19 March 1942, FO 371/31633.

12 Department of State of the United States, Foreign Relations of the United States, 1942, China, hereafter cited as FRUS (Washington, 1956), p. 761.Google Scholar

13 Clark Kerr to Eden, tels 731 and 732, secret and important, 28 December 1941, FO 371/27605.

14 Clark Kerr to Eden, tel. 732, ibid., and minute 1 of war cabinet conclusions 13(42), 29 January 1942, Cab 65/29.

15 Announcement of the American loan was made on 1 February, but the treaty was not signed until 21 March 1942.

16 War cabinet conclusions 14(42), 2 February 1942, Cab 66/25.

17 British draft agreement handed to Dr P.W. Kuo, Chinese vice-minister of finance who assisted the Chinese ambassador in London, on 1 April by the Treasury, Treasury to Foreign Office, 1 April 1942, FO 371/31618; and minute of S.D. Waley, Treasury official, on the interview with Kuo, 2 April 1942, T (Treasury) 160/1108/17976/1.

18 For example, Eden to Seymour, tel. 579, 23 April; and tel. 583, 24 April 1942, FO 371/31619.

19 British official documents relating to the loan negotiations on 1942 are found in FO 371/31618–31620.

20 For example, Seymour to Eden, tel. 371, 26 March 1942, FO 371/31626.

21 Sir John Brenan's minute on Anglo-Chinese relations since the outbreak of the Pacific war, 3 November 1942, FO 371/31627.

22 Lord Halifax, as chancellor of the University of Oxford, to Clark Kerr, tel. 27, 5 June 1942, FO 371/31654; Clarke to R.T. Peel (India Office), 12 February 1942, IOR (India Office Records) External Collection 11/25; and Eden to Seymour, tel. 1512, important, secret, and personal, 23 November 1942, FO 371/31627.

23 Dulles, F.China and America (Princeton University Press, 1946), p. 240.Google Scholar

24 Tsou, TangAmerica's Failure in China 1941–50 (The University of Chicago Press, 1963), p. 91.Google Scholar

25 Ibid., pp. 92–5.

26 For example, Tung, Chiang Tsung-t'ung ch'uan, II, 343–4;Google Scholar and Tuchman, B.W.Stilwell and the American Experience in China, 1911–45 (New York, 1971), p. 352.Google Scholar

27 Tang, America's Failure in China 1941–50, p. 78.Google Scholar

28 Clarke to Brenan, confidential, 12 May 1942, FO 371/31626. Currie himself was well aware of his popularity with the Chinese, FRUS, p. 63.Google Scholar

29 Tuchman, Stilwell and the American Experience in China 1911–45, pp. 331–3.Google Scholar

30 Brenan's minute on ‘British and American Policy towards China’, 28 December 1942, FO 371/31627.

31 Cheng, and T'ang, Pai-nien t'iao-yüeh shih, p. 142.Google Scholar

32 Eden's, note to the department, 2 March 1942, FO 371/31633.Google Scholar

33 Brenan's minute, 7 March 1942, on Eden's note, ibid.

34 Clarke's minute, 11 March 1942, on Eden's note, ibid.

35 Cadogan's minute, 14 March 1942, on Eden's note, ibid.

36 Dominions Office to Foreign Office, 2 March, enclosing Canada to Dominions Office, tel. 403, 1 March 1942, FO 371/31657.

37 Draft telegram to Canada, FO 371/31657.

38 Clarke's minute on draft telegram to Canada, ibid.

39 D. Scott's minute, 12 March, and Cadogan's minute, 14 March 1942, on draft telegram to Canada, ibid. As Chinese secretary and counsellor of the embassy, Teichman had been deeply involved in the Sino-British negotiations over the question of extraterritoriality in 1930–31. He resigned from the position in the autumn of 1936 and was reappointed adviser to the embassy in February 1942.

40 Eden's, minute, 15 March, on his note to the Far Eastern Department of 2 March 1942, FO 371/31633.Google Scholar

41 Cadogan's minute, 23 March 1942, on Eden's note, ibid.

42 Eden to Seymour, tel 410, secret, 27 March 1942, FO 371/31633.

43 Seymour to Eden, tel. 447, secret, 4 April 1942, FO 371/31657.

44 Brenan's minute, 8 April 1942, on Seymour to Eden, ibid.

45 Peterson's minute, 8 April 1942, on Seymour to Eden, ibid.

46 Cadogan's minute, 8 April 1942, on Seymour to Eden, ibid.

47 Law's minute, 10 Apil 1942, on Seymour to Eden, ibid.

48 Eden's minute, 10 April 1942, on Seymour to Eden, ibid.

49 Brenan's minute, 13 April and Clarke's minute, 14 April 1942, on Seymour to Eden, ibid.

50 Minutes of Peterson, Cadogan, and Beckett, 15 April 1942, on Seymour to Eden, ibid.

51 Brenan'S, minute on the meeting, 17 April 1942, FO 371/31657.Google Scholar

52 Eden to Seymour, tel. 410, secret, 27 March, repeated to Washington; Eden to Halifax, tel. 1979, secret, 27 March 1942, FO 371/31633; and Halifax to Eden, tel. 2159, confidential, 12 April 1942, FO 371/31657.

53 Eden to Halifax, tel. 2559, confidential, 19 April 1942, FO 371/31657.

54 FRUS, pp. 277–8.Google Scholar

55 Law's minute, 4 June; and Eden's minute, 9 June 1942, FO 371/31633.

56 Ashley Clarke's minute on the parliamentary question raised by Captain Peter Macdonald which was later withdrawn, 18 June 1942, FO 371/31633.

57 Campbell to Clarke, 22 July 1942, FO 371/31658.

58 The address was published by the Office of War Information under the title The War and Human Freedom (Washington, 1942).Google Scholar

59 See paraphrase of telegram in FO 371/31658.

60 FRUS, pp. 282, 287–8.Google Scholar

61 See minutes of Brenan, Clarke, Butler, Peterson, and Eden on paraphrase of telegram from the American embassy, FO 371/31658.

62 See British reply in FO 371/31658.

63 Hull, CordellThe Memoirs of Cordell Hull (London, 1948), II, 1257–8;Google Scholar and Pratt, J.W.Cordell Hull, 1933–44 (New York, 1964), II, 653.Google Scholar

64 Foreign Office to Dominions Office, 10 September 1942, FO 371/31658.

65 Eden to Seymour, tel. 1229, important and secret, 15 September 1942, FO 371/31658.

66 Seymour to Eden, tels 1323, 1324, 24 September; tel. 1339, 26 September; and Brenan's minute, 3 October 1942, FO 371/31658.

67 Winant to Eden, 5 October 1942, enclosing paraphrase of the telegram from the Department of State of 3 October, FO 371/31658.

68 Eden to Winant, 6 October 1942, FO 371/31689; and Dilks, D. (ed.), The Diaries of Sir Alexander Cadogan 1938–1945 (London, 1971), p. 482.Google Scholar

69 Winant to Eden, 8 October 1942, FO 371/31689.

70 FRUS, pp. 304–8; and Eden to Seymour, tel. 1329, immediate, 9 October 1942, FO 371/31659.Google Scholar

71 Compare messages in The Times (14 October 1942).

72 The Daily Telegraph (14 October 1942).

73 Ibid.

74 The British ambassador in Washington wrote to the British prime minister: ‘From here one gets the impression that, although Chiang Kai-shek sent you a very wise message about extraterritoriality, there was a certain atmosphere of feeling that, although we did quite the right thing, we did it because of the Americans and not on our own’. Halifax to Churchill, private, 22 October 1942, Prem (Prime Minister Office) 4/27/9.

75 For example, Brenan's minute on Board of Trade to Foreign Office, 7 October 1942, FO 371/31659.

76 FRUS, pp. 312, 321, 323, 328.Google Scholar

77 Text of draft in FRUS, pp. 298–301.Google Scholar

78 Clarke's minute, 14 October 1942, on the inter-departmental meeting of 13 October, FO 371/31659. See Eden's explanation of his insistence on this point in his memorandum to the war cabinet, 2 November 1942, W.P. (42) 503 Cab 66/30.

79 The British note and list of amendments are available in FRUS, pp. 313–17.Google Scholar

80 FRUS, pp. 318–19.Google Scholar

81 Eden to Winant, 25 October 1942, FO 371/31660.

82 Cadogan's minute, 24 October 1942, on conversation with the Chinese chargé d'affaires, FO 371/31660.

83 FRUS, pp. 337, 340.Google ScholarOn the sourness of Britain, Cadogan wrote in his diary on 22 October: ‘Americans really have bounced us over this, and behaved v. badly’,Dilks, The Diaries of Sir Alexander Cadogan 1938–1945, p. 485.Google Scholar

84 Eden to Seymour, tel. 1353, 17 October 1942, FO 371/31659.

85 See draft in FO 371/31661.

86 Clarke to Seymour, confidential, 9 November 1942, FO 371/31661.

87 Government of Canada to Dominions Office, tel. 228, 21 October 1942, transmitted to the Foreign Office, FO 371/31660; government of Australia to Dominions Office, tel. 467, immediate, 24 October 1942, communicated to the Foreign Office; government of New Zealand to Dominions Office, tel. 378, secret, 29 October 1942, forwarded to the Foreign Office; and D.B. Sole (of the South African High Comminssion) to Dominions Office, 30 October 1942, sent to the Foreign Office, FO 371/31661.

88 Governor of India to the secretary of state for India, tel. 8364, 21 October, in India Office to Foreign Office, 23 October 1942, FO 371/31661.

89 China Association to Foreign Office, 30 October 1942, FO 371/31661.

90 Seymour to Eden, tel. 1466, 26 October 1942, FO 371/31660.

91 Eden to Seymour, tel. 1414, 31 October; and Eden to Winant, 5 November 1942, FO 371/31660.

92 FRUS, pp. 343–4.Google Scholar

93 Enclosed in Winant to Eden, 12 November 1942, FO 371/31662.

94 Pratt, Cordell Hull, 1933–44, II, 654;Google Scholar also message from the Department of State 11 November, enclosed in Winant to Eden, 12 November 1942, FO 371/31662.

95 Brenan's minute, 13 November, on Chinese modifications enclosed in Winant to Eden, ibid.

96 Ibid.

97 Seymour to Eden, tels 1550, 1552, secret, 13 November; and tel. 1551, 14 November 1942, FO 371/31662. It has to be mentioned here that in the Chinese counter draft to Britain the employment of an Englishman as inspector-general of the Chinese Customs was included in the list of rights to be abrogated in an exchange of notes. In a note of 13 February 1898 the Chinese government undertook to employ an Englishman as inspector-general of Customs for as long as British trade with China exceeded that of all other countries. For some years before the Pacific war British trade had roughly taken fourth place. The British government, therefore, could see ‘no strong contractual ground’ for demanding that a British subject, or any other foreigner, should continue to fill the post of inspector-general. See Brenan's minute, 18 November 1942, on Seymour to Eden, tel. 1551, ibid.

98 Message from the Department of State, 27 October, enclosed in Winant to Eden, 28 October 1942, FO 371/31661.

99 Message from the Department of State, 31 October, enclosed in Winant to Eden, 1 November 1942, FO 371/31661.

100 Enclosure in Eden to Winant, 12 November 1942, FO 371/31661.

101 For example, Seymour to Eden, tel. 1515, 4 November, and Brenan's minute, 7 November 1942, on it, FO 371/31661.

102 Minute of Monson, W.B.L. of the Colonial Office, on the meeting, 14 October 1942, CO 129/588.Google Scholar

103 Seymour to Eden, 1515, 4 November 1942, FO 371/31661.

104 On Seymour to Eden, tel. 1558, 15 November 1942, Eden minuted: ‘I am d—d if we will do this’, FO 371/31663.

105 Message from the Department of State, 17 November, enclosed in Winant to Eden, 18 November 1942, FO 371/31662.

106 Memorandum in Eden to Winant, 23 November 1942, FO 371/31662.

107 Seymour to Eden, tel. 1564, 17 November 1942, FO 371/31662.

108 Clarke's minute, 20 November 1942, on Seymour to Eden, tel. 1564, ibid. The Colonial Office memorandum referred to here is enclosed in Colonial Office to Foreign Office, 18 August 1942, FO 371/31777.

109 Brenan's minute, 20 November 1942, on Seymour to Eden, tel. 1564, ibid.

110 Cadogan's minute, 21 November 1942, on Seymour to Eden, tel. 1564, ibid.

111 Eden's minute, 22 November 1942, on Seymour to Eden, tel. 1564, ibid.

112 Clarke's minute, 23 November 1942, on Seymour to Eden, tel. 1564, ibid; and Eden to Seymour, tel. 1548, 4 December 1942, FO 371/31663.

113 Message from the Department of State, 25 November, enclosed in Winant to Eden, 27 November 1942, FO 371/31663.

114 Clarke's minute on enclosure in Winant to Eden, 27 November 1942, ibid; and Eden to Seymour, tels 1552, 1553, important, 30 November 1942, FO 371/31663.

115 War cabinet conclusions 162(42), 30 November 1942, Cab 65/28.

116 FRUS, pp. 383–5; and message from Department of State, 1 December, enclosed in Winant to Eden, 2 December 1942, FO 371/31664.Google Scholar

117 Brenan's minute, 3 December, on Winant to Eden, 2 December 1942, ibid.

118 Eden to Winant, 7 December 1942, FO 371/31664.

119 Sung and Kung, brothers-in-law to each other and both brothers-in-law of Chiang Kai-shek, were vying with each other for power and influence.

120 Seymour to Eden, tel. 1678, immediate, 15 December 1942, FO 371/31664.

121 Message from the Department of State, 9 December, enclosed in Winant to Eden, 11 December 1942, FO 371/31664.

122 Winant to Eden, 16 December 1942, FO 371/31664.

123 Eden to Seymour, tel. 1622, immediate, 23, December; and tel. 1625, most immediate, 24, December 1942, FO 371/31665.

124 Eden to Seymour, tel. 1629, 24 December 1942, FO 371/31665.

125 Seymour to Eden, tel. 1721, immediate and confidential, 25 December 1942, FO 371/31665.

126 Seymour to Eden, tel. 1720, immediate, 25 December, 1942, FO 371/31665.

127 Seymour to Eden, tel. 1732, immediate, 27 December 1942, FO 371/31665.

128 Clarke's minute, 28 December, after having consulted Peterson and Cadogan, on Seymour to Eden, tel. 1732, ibid.

129 Note prepared by Clarke for Eden on the question of the New Territories for discussion at the cabinet meeting on 28 December 1942, FO 371/31665.

130 War cabinet conclusions 173 (42), 28 December 1942, Cab 65/28. Also Eden to Seymour, tel. 1641, most immediate,28 December; Eden to Winant, 29 December; and Eden to Halifax, tel. 8264, immediate, 29 December 1942, FO 371/31665.

131 Seymour to Eden, tel. 1736, immediate, 28 December; tels 1745, 1746, immediate, 30 December 1942, FO 371/31665.

131 Seymour to Eden, tel. 1753, 31 December; Eden to Seymour, tel. 1663, 31 December 1942, FO 371/31665.

133 Halifax to Eden, tel. 6310, immediate, 31 December 1942, FO 371/35679.

134 Clarke to Hornbeck, 13 February 1943, FO 371/35679.

135 Fishel, The End of Extraterritoriality in China, pp. 213–14.Google Scholar

136 For an account of America's reception of Madame Chiang, see Dulles, China and America, pp. 239–40.Google Scholar