Source 4c

Extract from a telegram from Lord George Curzon to Lord Arthur James Balfour, 16 June 1919. Catalogue ref: FO 608/210/3

Transcript

Anglo-American Association of Peking which is a body of representative British and American residents of large and varied experience has forwarded to myself and United States Minister copy of a resolution passed to-day at a meeting of its members and has requested us to bring it to the attention of our respective Governments.

 

After expressing keenest disappointment at settlement and deepest sympathy with Chinese people Association record their solemn conviction that decision taken at Paris will inevitably create acuate discord between Chinese people and Japan and raise a most serious hindrance to development of economic resources of China. They add a settlement which perpetuates conditions created by Germany’s aggression in Shantung in 1898 – conditions that led to similar action on the part of other nations that were contributing causes to boxer troubles of 1900 and that made inevitable Russo-Japanese war – cannot make for peace in Far East, for political stability in China itself, nor for development of trade and commerce on terms equally open to all. They urge statesmen taking part in peace conference should devise and carry through a just settlement that will not endanger safety of China and peace of the world.

 

A somewhat similar resolution was recently passed by British and American missionaries Association in Peking.

 

« Return to May Fourth Movement 1919
  • Compare and contrast the three sources using this table.
Who is writing it? What is the main argument/s of the source? What kind of language does the source use?
Source 4a
Source 4b
Source 4c
  • What are the main differences and similarities between the sources? How does these reflect the authors of the sources?
  • Which source do you think would have been most effective in changing the minds of the ‘Great Powers’ at the Paris Peace Conference? Why do you think all the arguments failed?