Direct representation to the Peking Government to secure the
effective enforcement of the armistice having so far produced no
tangible result, the Southern Delegation deemed it advisable to
appeal to the Diplomatic Corps in Peking to use its friendly
offices towards the removal of the deadlock in the Conference so
as to secure early peace to the country.
The following is a translation of the telegraphic appeal
dispatched yesterday.
His Excellency Sir John Jordan, Peking.
Although an armistice had long been mutually agreed upon
between the North and the South and a special mandate was
issued by the Peking Government on the 13th February
ordering cessation of hostilities on the part of the
Northern forces,26 the Tuchun of
Shensi, General Chen Shu-fan, has been continually carrying
on offensive warfare against the Constitutionalists’ forces
in Shensi, in flagrant violation of a solemn obligation and
subversion of military discipline, causing suffering and
distress to the people and ruin along the path of his
advance. All this is allowed to continue in face of the
Peking Government’s peace avowals and the actual convening
of the peace conference at Shanghai and the repeated appeals
of the Southern Delegation to the Peking Government for
effective enforcement of armistice in Shensi. In view of
this state of things, the Southern Delegation is in duty
bound to protest and to resolve not to proceed further with
the peace negotiations, until the cause of the trouble is
removed and the armistice given full effect, as demanded not
only by the Southern Delegation formally on behalf of the
Southwest but by the people of Shensi and the unanimous
public opinion of the whole nation as well. Since the Peking
Government has not shown any disposition to comply with the
unanimous demand of the South or even to faithfully meet its
solemn obligation as regards the cessation of hostilities,
it is obvious that all effort towards continuing peace
negotiations under such conditions would be futile and
incompatible with reason. Your Excellency is therefore again
appealed [Page 305] to by me
on the behalf of the Southwest in the earnest hope that Your
Excellency and Their Excellencies, the Ministers of the five
friendly Powers, in manifestation of your warm interest in
the welfare of the people of our whole nation, will make
suitable representation to the Peking Government, to the end
that the armistice may be faithfully observed by the North
and the Tuchun responsible for its flagrant violation to the
dire distress of the Shensi people and to the detriment of
the internal peace be forthwith dismissed from office, so
that the deadlock in the peace conference may be removed,
negotiations resumed and peace restored to the country at an
early date. I may also add that on account of the
irresponsible attitude of the Peking Government, the
Northern Delegates as a body have tendered their
resignation.
Tong Shao-yi
Translation of a telegram of the 28th February from Mr. Chien
Neng-hsun (Premier of the Peking Government) to Mr. Tong
Shao-yi, the Southern Chief Delegate.
Mr. Tong Shao-yi, Shanghai.
Referring to your telegram (addressed to Mr. Hsu Shih-Chang)
the question of the War Participation Bureau has been the
subject of much criticism in your several telegrams, but our
previous telegram in reply thereto dealt with accomplished
facts and yet you would characterise my explanations as
forced expressions of extenuation. Your telegram of the 27th
(Feby. to Mr. Hsu Shih-Chang) is couched in terms even
stronger. To carry on a futile debate with arguments going
back and forth would needlessly consume valuable time on
both sides. And after all what advantage would it bring? I
would therefore suggest that you, in a spirit of equanimity,
listen to a last word from me on this subject.
The War Participation Bureau was the outcome of (our
participation in) the European war. At the time the allied
Powers, Great Britain, the United States, et alii, were all willing to loan us arms and
funds and ships for transportation. The result of these
offers of assistance was the conclusion of the said Japanese
loan agreement. This step therefore was in consonance with
the united wish of the allied Powers and cannot be regarded
as introducing particular foreign influence by us to the
detriment of the balance of power between nations.
As the formation of the War Participation Army has been
completed, and as the said agreement clearly specified that
the termination of the European war is to be the day when
the European peace is signed and the forces on both sides
are withdrawn, it is to be seen that until that day comes
the War Participation Bureau cannot be dissolved and hence
the War Participation Loan Agreement must continue to be in
effect. The foregoing is therefore valid reason for the
continued existence of the War Participation Bureau. When
the War is finally brought to a close on the signing of the
peace treaty, the War Participation Army will naturally lose
its distinctive designation and pass into the control of the
Ministry of War. [Page 306]
The question of its disbandment or otherwise will, however,
be dealt with by the said Ministry in connection with the
general scheme of military reduction and retrenchment. The
above is the present policy as regards the future
disposition of the War Participation Bureau.
As to the remark in your telegram that the people of the
nation entertain the most [serious?] misgiving regarding
this matter and that the (Peking) Government held something
in concealment from the public, may I ask, Misgivings on
what account? And, What is held in concealment from the
public? Will the consequences be sufficiently great to
really compass the downfall of the nation, if the War
Participation Bureau is not at once dissolved and the said
loan agreement forthwith terminated? Or do you intimate that
the Government by some secret act yielded special rights in
connection with the War Participation Loan for which we
should find difficulty to face the nation?
As to both questions, after examining the real facts, I
venture to reply in the negative. I would like to be
enlightened, therefore, as to the reasons which lead you so
persistently to insinuate doubts regarding the subject.
As to your statements of “Complicity with the evil-doing
faction,” “Bringing calamity upon the nation,” and
[“]willingly sell the country” etc., I wish to ask—Who
compose the evil-doing factions? What nation has suffered
calamity? In what respect is the country being sold? It will
not do to fill the ears of the nation with empty
phraseology.
As to the statement that the War Participation Bureau is an
obstacle to the restoration of peace, may I ask if this were
so, are we to conclude that the declaration of independence
by the Southwest, and the convening of the peace conference
between the North and the South were both directed against
the War Participation Loan, and that upon the disbandment of
the War Participation Army and the termination of the said
loan agreement, the unification of the nation would be at
once accomplished, thus disposing of all questions at issue?
Is this so or not?
Granting that this was not so, and that the (Peking)
Government really desired to break up the peace movement,
what impelled the Government to resort to such exhaustive
measures to bring about the convening of the conference? If
the North relied upon military force in its dealing with the
Southwest, would it be logical to conclude that with the War
Participation Army disbanded, the North would allow itself
to await with folded arms its complete subjugation?
The recent initiative taken by the (Peking) Government
towards the restoration of peace was prompted by its desire,
after mature consideration of the whole situation, to
endeavour to rescue the nation from ruin. If no effort is
made to examine into the facts or enquire into the
circumstances which actually transpired, but simply engage
in idle crimination and recrimination, while allowing the
important negotiation to stagnate and the light of peace no
opportunity to glow, then someone will have to bear the
blame. I trust the above expressions of my heart will
receive your due consideration.
Translation of a telegram from Mr. Tong Shao-yi to the Peking
Government dated March 1st, 1919.
Mr. Hsu Shih-Chang, Peking.
I have repeatedly telegraphed you requesting for the
discontinuation of the War Participation Loan and the
cancellation of the Military Agreements. I have hoped that
you would take the initiative yourself in order to save the
nation from calamity and ruin. And my suggestions are for
your own good as well as for the good of the country. I was,
therefore, quite surprised to receive a telegram from Chien
Neng-Hsun on 28th inst. [ult.]
containing so much sentimental talks without any regard for
facts. I wonder whether you have read it. My previous
telegraphic requests and the arguments of Mr. Chien
Neng-Hsun’s telegram can be easily put before the public who
is to be the judge of right or wrong. This is not a time for
us to indulge in lengthy argumentation. I am afraid,
however, that the man at the helm cannot simply try to gloss
over remissness of the responsible parties nor will the
people of the nation allow themselves to be gagged and look
on silently at the commission of these treasonable acts.
Those responsible will have to bear the blame, there being
no escape. I suggest this for your serious
consideration.
Tong Shao-yi
