HC Deb 01 May 1933 vol 277 cc490-1
15. Sir JOHN WARDLAW-MILNE

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is yet in a position to say whether any memorial comparable with that secured by the United States of America in the shape of the Peking University has been arranged to mark the sacrifice of the British taxpayer in remitting his share of the Boxer indemnity to an amount approximately five times as great as that in the case of the United States of America?

Mr. BALDWIN

My hon. Friend is misinformed in his comparison of the sums involved. The amount remitted by the United States of America was approximately 35,000,000 gold dollars out of a total of 53,348,145 gold dollars, i.e., approximately 65½ per cent.; while the amount remitted by this country was £11,362,517 out of a total of £16,573,810, approximately 68 per cent. The funds remitted by His Majesty's Government are, first of all, invested in rehabilitating and building railways and in other productive enterprises in China, thus creating an endowment to be subsequently devoted to the educational purposes mentioned in the report of the Buxton Advisory Committee. Under the Agreement with the Chinese Government and the Act of 1931, the allocation of the funds for these purposes is within the discretion of the Board of Trustees appointed by the Chinese Government. Though this may not result in a memorial such as that referred to by my hon. Friend, His Majesty's Government consider it to have been the most practical arrangement in the interests of both countries.

Sir J. WARDLAW-MILNE

While I apologise, if there has been any mistake in the figure which I put on the Paper as regards the comparative amounts given up by the British taxpayers and those of the United States, is it not the case that the United States have secured a very remarkable memorial in the shape of the Peking University to the sacrifices of the American taxpayers, whereas the British taxpayers have no such memorial; and whether he will ask the Foreign Secretary to bear that in mind?

Mr. ANNESLEY SOMERVILLE

Is it not a fact that a considerable yearly contribution from the Indemnity Fund is paid to the University of Hong Kong?

Mr. BALDWIN

I am afraid that I could not answer that question without notice.