HC Deb 02 February 1931 vol 247 cc1410-1
17. Mr. A. M. SAMUEL

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the Chinese Government has yet given an undertaking to His Majesty's Government that it will fulfil its obligations to British holders of the loans subscribed by them to provide funds for the building and equipment of the Hukuang, the Tientsin Pukow, the Lungtsing-u-hai, and the Canton-Kowloon railways?

Mr. DALTON

The Chinese Government informed His Majesty's Minister in June last that they were collecting data concerning loans and obligations of all kinds with a view to devising a scheme for a general settlement such as would maintain Chinese national credit and fulfil Chinese obligations. As I informed the hon. Member on the 26th of January, a Conference was subsequently held at Nanking last November, and His Majesty's Minister is now obtaining a full list of claims for submission to the Chinese Government.

Mr. SAMUEL

As it may be wished to raise the question of these grievances While the China Indemnity Bill is in Committee, or on Third Reading, will the hon. Gentleman inquire of the Chinese Ambassador here in the meantime, so that we can get the matter finally straightened out before the Third Reading of the Bill.

Mr. DALTON

His Majesty's Government, while desirous to preserve continuity with their predecessors in these matters, take the view that these debts should be treated quite separately from the Boxer Indemnity provisions. Although we are very anxious that the Minister in China should bring all pressure and influence to bear, I do not think there can be any undertaking that the two subjects will be linked together.

Mr. SAMUEL

Is the hon. Gentleman correct in saying that these are debts? Is this not rather a contractual obligation by China under which money was borrowed by China from British subjects?

Mr. DALTON

It is a particular form of debt.