Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T07:43:46.890Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Increased Disunity: The Politics and Finance of Guangdong Separatism, 1926–1936

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

John Fitzgerald
John Fitzgerald
Affiliation:
University of Melbourne
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

There are two lemons in the larder of Modern China's history. Stalin's, dating from April 1927, is certainly the better known:

Chiang Kaishek is submitting to discipline. The Kuomintang is a bloc, a sort of revolutionary parliament, with the Right, the Left and the Communists. Why make a coup d'etat? Why drive away the Right when we have the majority and the Right listens to us?… Also, they have connections with the rich merchants and can raise money from them. So they have to be utilized to the end, squeezed out like a lemon, and then flung away.

Type
Articles
Information
Modern Asian Studies , Volume 24 , Issue 4 , October 1990 , pp. 745 - 775
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1990

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

An earlier version of this paper was presented at the Conference on the Nanking Decade, University of Hong Kong. I wish to thank conference organizers and participants for their assistance and suggestions, in particular Professor Li Ngok and Dr Alfred Lin.

1 Cited in Isaacs, Harold, The Tragedy of the Chinese Revolution, 2nd rev. edn (Stanford, 1961), p. 162. Isaacs notes that this speech was never published.Google Scholar

2 Abend, Hallett, My Years in China (London 1944), p. 33.Google Scholar

3 Lary, Diana, Region and Nation: The Kwangsi Clique in Chinese Politics, 1925–1937 (Cambridge, 1974), p. 62.Google Scholar

4 See Sheridan, James E., China in Disintegration: The Republican Era in Chinese History, 1912–1949 (New York, 1975), pp. 193–5.Google Scholar

5 Yatsen, Sun, speeches of 30 December 1923 and 24 August 1924, in hui, Dang shi (ed.), Guofu quanji (Taipei, 1971), 6 vols, II, 602 and 719–23.Google Scholar

6 Luo Yangqing, ‘Di si jun zhengzhi by nanzheng zhengzhi gongzuo jingguo gailue’, Junshi zhengzhi yuekan, 6 (August 1926), 4–6. Miao Xiangchu, ‘Nanzheng zhengzhi xuanchuan gongzuo zong baogao’, ibid., 4 (April 1926), 11.

7 Luo Yangqing, ‘Di si jun’, 9–10. Miao Xiangchu, ‘Nanzheng’, Pt. 2, ibid., 5 (July 1926), 14–18.

8 Zhang Qixiong, ‘Dongzheng shiqi zhi zhengzhi gongzuo gailue’, ibid., 2 (February 1926), 18. Chun Tao, ‘Dongzheng jilue’, Zhengzhi zhoubao, 3 (20 December 1925), 13–14.

9 (Ruan) Xiaoxian, , ‘Liao xiansheng Zhongkai xunnan yizhou nian jinian yu nong-min’, Litou zhoukan, 13 (18 08 1926), 16–17.Google Scholar

10 Yangqing, Luo, ‘Di si jun’, 9–10.Google Scholar

11 Zhengzhi gongzuo rikan, 16 February 1926.Google Scholar

12 Chesneaux, Jean, ‘The Federalist Movement in China, 1920–1923’, in Gray, Jack (ed.), Modern China's Search for a Political Form (London, 1969), pp. 112–14.Google Scholar

13 Sicheng, Mao, Shiwu nian yiqian zhi Jiang Jieshi xiansheng (Hong Kong reprint, 1965), pp. 0459:1, 0478:38, and 0558:25–6.Google Scholar

14 Guangdong caizheng ting, ed., Guangdong caizheng jishi (n. p., 1933), 4 vols, 1, 49–50.Google ScholarWoodhead, H. G. H. (ed.), The China Yearbook (Tianjin, 1921–1939), 1928, p. 1340.Google Scholar

15 Guangdong caizheng ting, Guangdong caizheng, I, p. 53.Google Scholar

16 Woodhead, , China Yearbook, 1928, p. 1339.Google Scholar

17 Monthly receipts increased from 585,000 to 1·4 million yuan: ting, Guangdong caizheng, Guangdong caizheng, I, p. 53.Google Scholar

18 Xiangchu, Miao, ‘Nanzheng’, Pt. 2, 16–18. ‘Ge xianshi dangbu ji choubei chu gongzuo baogao’, Zhongguo guomindang guangdong sheng dangbu dangwu yuebao, I (02 1926), 17.Google Scholar

19 The kerosene tax quota for the year 1926/7 was 200,000 yuan, and that of the salt tax 220,000 yuan. See Miao Xiangchu, ibid., ‘Ge xianshi dangbu’ and Ceng Jian, Hainan dao zhi (Shanghai, 1933), p. 138.

20 Guangdong caizheng ting, Guangdong caizheng, iv, p. 26.Google Scholar

21 Yangqing, Luo, ‘Di si jun’, 15–16.Google Scholar

22 Xuezeng, Huang, ‘Nanlu banshichu huiwu baogao’, Zhongguo nongmin, 6/7 (07 1926), no serial pagination.Google Scholar

23 ‘Ge xianshi dangbu’, 18.Google Scholar

24 On the social aspects of the dung tax see ‘Ge xianshi dangbu’; on those of the kerosene tax, see Woodhead, , China Yearbook, 1928, p. 1339.Google Scholar

25 Yangqing, Luo, ‘Di si jun’, 15–16.Google Scholar

26 Qiyuan, Luo, ‘Gongzhai piao yu nongmin’, Litou zhoukan, 12 (4 08 1926), 12–15.Google Scholar

27 Ibid., 15.

28 (Ruan) Xiaoxian, ‘Liao xiansheng Zhongkai’, 16–17.Google Scholar

29 See the comments by Peng Pai appended to Luo Qiyuan, ‘Gongzhai piao’, 16–19.Google Scholar

30 Ibid., 15.

31 Guangdong caizheng ting, Guangdong caizheng, I, pp. 56–8.Google Scholar

32 Ibid., p. 65.

33 Ibid., pp. 65–7.

34 Ibid., pp. 94–6.

35 Woodhead, , China Yearbook, 1936, pp. 391–2. This estimate of provincial government expenditure appears to have been based on the fictitious premise that Chen 'Jitang's military expenditure was a ‘national’ expense, and hence to be excluded from provincial calculation.Google Scholar

36 Guangdong caizheng ting, Guangdong caizheng, IV, p. 33.Google Scholar

37 Coble, Parks M. Jr, The Shanghai Capitalists and the Nationalist Government, 1929–1937 (Cambridge, Mass., 1980), pp. 88–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

38 Zhenzhi, Huang, ‘Zhongguo caizheng zhengli wenti’, Zhongguo daobao, 6 (5 08 1931), 53–66.Google Scholar

39 Guangdong caizheng ting, Guangdong caizheng, I, p. 53.Google Scholar

40 Chungshu, Kwei (ed.), The Chinese Yearbook (Shanghai, 1934–), 1934–1935, p. 1381.Google Scholar

41 Ibid., p. 1382. Hung-Mao Tien, Government and Politics in Kuomintang China, 1927–1937 (Stanford, 1972), p. 191.

42 Guangdong caizheng ting, Guangdong caizheng, I, pp. 49–50.Google Scholar

43 Ibid., I. p. 53 and III, p. 973. Opium tax revenue grew from 3.5 million yuan in 1926 to 9·2 million yuan in 1928: see ibid., IV, pp. 26–8. See also Mao Sicheng, Shiwu nian yiqian, pp. 0746–9.

44 Guangdong caizheng ting, Guangdong caizheng, IV, pp. 26–8.Google Scholar

45 Chungshu, Kwei, Chinese Yearbook, 1936–1937, p. 697.Google Scholar

46 Guangdong caizheng ting, Guangdong caizheng, I, p. 53.Google Scholar

47 Ibid., I, pp. 54–6.

48 Military expenditure totalled 63 million yuan in 1927 and 71 million yuan in 1928: ibid., IV, p. 32.

49 Ibid., I, p. 58.

50 Ibid., pp. 60, 68–9.

51 Ibid., I, pp. 66–7. The nature of these national expenses is not spelt out, but the clear implication is that Nanjing was taking far more than its agreed share of revenue from the Province. It is possible that the forfeited 2·6 million yuan did not leave the Province, but was used to cover the expenses of Chen Jitang's Eighth Route Army which had reverted to central control after Li Jishen's arrest: ibid., I, p. 69; Chen Jitang, Chen Jitang zizhuan gao (Taipei, 1974), p. 34. If this is the case, then it clearly made little difference to Chen Jitang, to his units, to the Provincial Treasury or to Guangdong taxpayers whether the army was designated central or provincial.

52 ting, Guangdong caizheng, Guangdong caizheng, I, p. 67.Google Scholar

53 Ibid.

54 Ibid., I, p. 66.

55 Ibid., I, p. 94. Woodhead, China Yearbook, 1936, p. 160. Coble, Shanghai Capitalists, p. 88.

56 Kann, E., ‘The Provincial Bank of Kwangtung No. 6’, Finance and Commerce, 20 11 1940, 453–4.Google Scholar

57 ting, Guangdong caizheng, Guangdong caizheing, I, p. 102.Google Scholar

58 Jitang, Chen, Chen Jitang zizhuan gao, p. 42.Google Scholar

59 ting, Guangdong caizheng, Guangdong caizheng, p. 67.Google Scholar

60 Ibid., I, p. 97.

61 Ibid., I. pp. 99–100.

62 Chungshu, Kwei, Chinese Yearbook, 1934–1935, pp. 1378–9. I have taken the figure of 4·85 million yuan appearing in this source to refer to the national currency, and so have converted it to the Guangdong small-dollar currency used throughout the present essay.Google Scholar

63 Jitang, Chen, Chen Jitang zizhuan gao, p. 42.Google ScholarZhengmou, Chen et al. (eds), Zhongguo nongjing zilao senzhong (Taipei, 1971), I, pp. 344–6.Google Scholarju, Guangdong sheng dizheng (ed.), Guangdong dizheng (Guangzhou, 1940), p. 17.Google Scholar

64 Faure, David, ‘The Plight of the Farmers: A Study of the Rural Economy of Jiangnan and the Pearl River Delta, 1870–1937’, Modern China, XI:I (01 1985), 3–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

65 Chungshu, Kwei, Chinese Yearbook, 1934–1935, p. 1801.Google Scholar

66 See Lin, Alferd H. Y., ‘The Agrarian Crisis in Pre-Communist China—The Case of Kuangtung Province’, in Ngok, Lee and Chi-Keung, Leung (eds), China: Development and Challenge (Hong Kong, 1979), 2 vols, I, pp. 98–102.Google Scholar

67 Ibid., pp. 101–2. Guangdong farmers failed to make up the difference represented by the decline in rice imports resulting from the tariffs: Huazi ribao, 3, 9 and 10 June 1936.

68 ‘Yue dianding hou zhi juanshui’, Guowen zhoubao, XIII: 31 (10 08 1926), 3–4.Google Scholar

69 Lin, , ‘The Agrarian Crisis’, pp. 97–8.Google Scholar

70 Jitang, Chen, Chen Jitang zizhuan gao, pp. 44–5, 48–9.Google Scholar‘Chen Jitang xiansheng zhi sixiang yu gongxian’, in Shaoquiong, He et al. (eds), Chen Jitang xiansheng jinian ji (Hong Kong, 1957) pp. 54–9.Google Scholar

71 ‘Chen Jitang xiansheng’, pp. 54–9.Google Scholar‘So wang fang yuesheng xin dangju zhe’, Guowen zhoubao, XIII: 32 (17 08 1936), 3–4.Google Scholar

72 ‘Chen Jitang xiansheng’, pp. 54–9.Google Scholar

73 Ibid., pp. 39–40.

74 Ibid., pp. 46, 54. Kwei Chungshu, Chinese Yearbook, 1934–1935, pp. 1690–1.

75 ‘Yue ju dianing hou,’ 3–4.Google Scholar

76 ‘Cong zhengli yuesheng gongye tandao yiban gongye’, Guowen zhoubao, XIII: 34 (1 09 1936), 4.Google Scholar

77 ‘Jiang weiyuan zhang dao yue hou’, Guowen zhoubao, XIII: 33 (24 08 1936), 1.Google Scholar

78 ‘Jinhou zhi yue ju’, Guowen zhoubao, XIII: 33 (24 08 1936), 10.Google ScholarChungshu, Kwei, Chinese Yearbook, 1936–1937, p. 696.Google Scholar

79 ‘So wang fang yuesheng’, 3.Google Scholar

80 ‘Yuesheng nuli feichu keshui’, Guowen zhoubao, XIII: 31 (10 08 1936), 3.Google Scholar

81 Chungshu, Kwei, Chinese Yearbook, 1936–1937, pp. 697–9.Google Scholar

82 The factories which suffered most were the nine (including those producing chemicals, synthetic fibres, ships, machinery, sugar and hydro-power) which had not yet moved into production by the time of Chen Jitang's downfall: ‘Chen Jitang xiansheng’, pp. 54–9.Google Scholar

83 ‘Lui Weizhi tan jianshe jihua,’ Guowen zhoubao, XIII: 32 (17 08 1936), 3. ‘Cong zhengli yuesheng’, 4.Google Scholar

84 Coble, , Shanghai Capitalists, pp. 229–30.Google Scholar

85 Chungshu, Kwei, Chinese Yearbook, 1936–1937, p. 697. ‘Yuesheng nuli feichu keshui’, 3.Google Scholar

86 Kwei Chungshu, ibid.

87 Coble, , Shanghai Capitalists, pp. 114–15.Google Scholar

88 On a phase of provincialism considered transitional to nationalism, see Fincher, John, ‘Political Provincialism and the National Revolution’, in Wright, Mary Clabaugh (ed.), China in Revolution: The First Phase, 1900–1913 (New Haven, 1968), pp. 185–228.Google Scholar

89 See Bush, Richard C., The Politics of Cotton Textiles in Kuomintang China, 1927–1937 (New York, 1982), ch. 7, passim.Google Scholar

90 Esherick, Joseph W. (ed.), Lost Chance in China: The World War II Despatches of John S. Service (New York, 1974), p. 48.Google Scholar