国立情報学研究所 - ディジタル・シルクロード・プロジェクト
『東洋文庫所蔵』貴重書デジタルアーカイブ

> > > >
カラー New!IIIFカラー高解像度 白黒高解像度 PDF   日本語 English
0421 India and Tibet : vol.1
インドとチベット : vol.1
India and Tibet : vol.1 / 421 ページ(カラー画像)

New!引用情報

doi: 10.20676/00000295
引用形式選択: Chicago | APA | Harvard | IEEE

OCR読み取り結果

 

BREACHES OF TREATY   347

Peking had been inspiring a policy in Tibetan affairs

which was hostile to the Treaty and to British interests.

In any case, whether the cause lay in Peking, or with

Mr. Chang, or with the Tibetans, the fact was clear that

the Treaty had not been carried out ; and the Government

of India thought it necessary to bring the matter formally

to the notice of the Secretary of State in a despatch dated

July 18, 1907. Considering what had taken place at

Gyantse, it was impossible to admit, they said, that the

Gyantse trade-mart had been effectively open during the

last few months. Our Agent had been cut off from inter-

course with the Tibetan authorities, and no adequate pro-

vision had been made for British traders having resort to

the mart. The agents whom the Lhasa Government had

nominated for the marts had not been allowed freedom of

communication with the British Trade Agent. And various

minor difficulties had arisen in connection with the open-

ing of the Gartok trade-mart. The Government of India,

therefore, suggested that the Chinese and Tibetan Govern-

ments should be formally reminded of these various

breaches of the Convention which had occurred, and

more particularly of the failure to open the marts, which

was a matter which struck at the root of the whole

Convention.

Mr. Morley thought* the situation at Gyantse con-

stituted undoubtedly a serious cause of complaint, but, in

view of the reply of the Chinese Government to the

representations recently made to them, he doubted the

expediency of making any further reference to the subject

at the moment. If when the negotiations with Mr. Chang

regarding the Trade Regulations commenced, the attitude

of the Chinese and Tibetan representative should prove

obstructive, the question would arise whether the British

representative should not be authorized to warn them that

our evacuation of the Chumbi Valley depended on a

satisfactory settlement of the matters connected with the

trade-marts being arrived at, the Chinese and Tibetan

Governments being simultaneously warned to the same

effect.

* Blue-book, IV., p. 126.