§ 17. Lieut.-Commander Fletcherasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs 1672 whether, in connection with the international settlement at Shanghai, there are leases from the Chinese Government to the Governments concerned or only leases to individuals?
§ Viscount CranborneLand in the international settlement at Shanghai in foreign ownership, even though purchased outright from private vendors, is regarded as held on perpetual lease from the Chinese Government, and the title deeds are issued by the local Chinese authority in the form of leases in perpetuity. Properties in Shanghai are held in this way, both by foreign Governments and by individuals.
§ Lieut.-Commander FletcherIs it possible for the conditions under which the Settlement is administered to be varied without the consent of the Chinese Government?
§ Viscount CranborneI think that is a different question. This is a question partly of interpretation of the land regulations. As I explained on Friday, it is an exceedingly difficult and technical subject.
§ Mr. Noel-BakerIs it not a fact that the land regulations were made with the Chinese Government and cannot, therefore, be varied without the consent of the Chinese Government?
§ Viscount CranborneThat is true. They cannot be modified without the consent of the Chinese Government. All that I was saying was that what comes within the regulations is a very difficult question.
§ Lieut.-Commander FletcherIs it the case that there are no instruments between the Chinese Government and the Governments concerned which regulate these matters?
§ 19. Sir P. Harrisasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether any estimate has been made as to the damage to British property done by the Japanese at Shanghai; and whether any claim has been or will be made on the Japanese Government by Great Britain?
§ Viscount CranborneNo, Sir, it is as yet too early to make any such estimate; as regards the second part of the question, I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given to my hon. Friend the Member for Preston (Mr. Moreing) on 8th November.
§ Sir P. HarrisDoes not the Noble Lord think it is time that some estimate was made as to the financial losses to British interests, now that the damage has been going on for a very long time?
§ Viscount CranborneHis Majesty's Consul-General at Shanghai, as was explained the other day, has been instructed to receive and file such claims.
§ 20. Sir P. Harrisasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether there has yet been any formal declaration of war by Japan on China; and, if so, when?
§ Viscount CranborneNo, Sir.
§ Sir P. HarrisDoes it not mean that the damage done to British interests is quite illegal, as there has been no declaration of war, and is there any precedent for damage to property on a large scale without a previous declaration of war?
§ Mr. A. Henderson(by Private Notice) asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether his attention has been called to the recent statement of Prince Konoe, the Prime Minister of Japan, that it may be necessary for Japan to take military control of the Shanghai International Settlement; and whether any steps are being taken by His Majesty's Government in conjunction with the United States and French Governments to safeguard their treaty rights, including those of China?
§ Viscount CranborneI have seen in the Press a report of remarks by Prince Konoe on this subject, which do not seem to bear the interpretation put upon them by the question. In particular, there is no specific reference to the International Settlement. I am making further inquiries with a view to elucidating the matter. In the meantime, His Majesty's Government are maintaining close touch with the United States and French Governments with a view to the safeguarding of their mutual treaty rights and other interests.
§ Lieut.-Commander FletcherWill the Far Eastern situation be discussed with the French Prime Minister, who is now in London?