§ Mr. C. BATHURSTasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, whether it was under his directions that the British Minister at Pekin issued a notice to the effect that any British trader would be subject to prosecution, imprisonment, and heavy fines who attempted to-supply the so-called revolutionary party with arms, grain, or other munitions of war; and whether he is aware that, in spite of the cessation of hostilities in China, such notice has not been with- 189 drawn, with the result that German, Japanese, and other foreign traders have been increasing their trade with China at the expense of British traders?
§ Mr. MONTAGUThe law for British subjects in China upon these matters is contained in Article 71 of the China Order in Council, 1904, which will be found on page 193 of the Statutory Rules and Orders, 1904. The only notices by British officials in China of the kind suggested, of which I am aware were issued by the Consuls-General at Shanghai and Tientsin, reminding British subjects of this provision. There was no need formally to withdraw any such reminder, nor would its withdrawal affect the operation of the Article. I have no reason to believe that the provision is any hindrance to legitimate British trade in China, or that it has enabled the traders of other nations to secure undue advantages.
§ Mr. C. BATHURSTCould the Consul-General at Shanghai be directed to inform British traders there are now no restrictions upon their trade?
§ Mr. MONTAGUThe hon. Member is under a misapprehension. The instructions were not due to any notification to the Consul-General. All he was instructed to do was to remind traders of the existence of this Article 71. If the hon. Member will look at the Article he will see it deals with other subjects besides those he mentioned, and there is no necessity for any action at all.
§ Mr. C. BATHURSTDoes the hon. Gentleman appreciate the fact that British traders are under the impression there are restrictions upon their trade, whereas there is none upon the trade of foreign countries?
§ Mr. MONTAGUThe restrictions upon British trade depend not upon the action of the Consul-General, but upon this Article1, which there is no intention of abrogating.