No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Japan's “Special Trade” in North China, 1935–37
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 23 March 2011
Extract
When considered in retrospect, one of the most interesting phases of the recent Sino-Japanese conflict was a local condition that arose in North China between the years 1935–37, known to the Japanese as the “special trade” in China.
Following the Mukden incident of September 18, 1931, the Kwangtung Army began its inexorable march to the southward. Within two years Manchuria had been conquered, an independent “Manchukuo” had been proclaimed, and Japanese troops stood at the gates of the Great Wall. The story of Japanese penetration beyond that historic barrier is a fascinating study in diplomacy. For four years, the Island Empire sought by every means short of war to establish its position of paramountcy in North China. Intrigue on a vast scale, involving official proclamations, “spontaneous” autonomy movements, organized smuggling, threats of reprisals, and even direct military action was the order of the day.
- Type
- Articles
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Association for Asian Studies, Inc. 1947
References
1 Shih, Hu, “The issues behind the Far Eastern conflict,” in Analyses of the Sino-Japanese conflict (San Francisco: Chinese Consolidated Benevolent Association, March, 1938), pp. 6 ff.Google Scholar
2 Hanson, Haldore, “Smuggler, soldier, and diplomat,” Pacific affairs, 9 (December 1936), 544Google Scholar; also Shuh-si, Hsu, The North China problem (Shanghai: Kelly and Walsh, 1937).Google Scholar
3 Kann, E., “China in 1935: an economic review,” Chinese economic journal and bulletin, 18 (April 1936), 496.Google Scholar
4 Ibid., p. 496; compare China's Ch. $6.22 with U.S.A.'s Ch. $810; Britain's Ch. $2,630; Japan's Ch. $223.
5 For loans outstanding (principal) in 1935, see ibid., p. 493. For loans secured on customs income, see Royal Institute of International Affairs, Information Department Papers No. 21, China and Japan (New York: Oxford University Press, 1938), p. 99. Cited hereafter as China and japan. It should he noted that “no Japanese loans are directly secured on the Chinese Maritime Customs,” see Parliamentary debates, 5th series, vol. 312, House of Commons (London: H.M. Stationery. Office, 1936), p. 1988. Cited hereafter as PD:HC, S5:312.
6 Shih shih hsin pao, June 30, 1934. Quoted in Royal Institute of International Affairs, Summaries of leading articles in the Chinese press, 3 (August 14, 1934), 7. Cited hereafter as Press summaries.
7 Utley, Freda, Japan's gamble in China (London: Seeker and Warburg, 1938), p. 33.Google Scholar “Since July, 1932, the Customs Revenue from Manchurian ports which amounted to 11% of the total in 1931 have not been available for the service of secured loans.” Quoted in China and Japan, p. 99.
8 “Business abroad”, Business week (June 15, 1935), 29.
9 For text, see Chinese yearbook, 1935–36 (Shanghai: Commercial Press, 1937), p. 431.
10 See statement of Ching-wei, Wang in New York times, June 1, 1933Google Scholar; also Willough-by, W. W., Sino-Japanese conflict and the League of Nations (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press, 1935), p. 508.Google Scholar
11 Chen, L. T., “Smuggling in North China”, Finance and commerce, 28 (Shanghai, July 22, 1936), 97 ff.Google Scholar
12 Mah, N. Wing and Chang, C. F., Sino-Japanese relations since the Tangku truce (Shanghai: China Institute of Pacific Relations, 1936), pp. 1 ff.Google Scholar
13 The Chin-Doihara agreement of June 27, 1935 extended the demilitarized zone to include all the territory “east of a line drawn from Changping in Hopei to the Wall in East Hopei via Yenching and Talinpao, and south of another line drawn from a point north of Tushihkou to a point south of Changpei.” See Hsu, , op. cit., p. 21.Google Scholar
14 Bisson, T. A., Japan in China (New York: Macmillan, 1938), p. 48.Google Scholar
15 Hsu, , op. cit., p. 11.Google Scholar The author was at the time adviser to the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs and had access to official sources.
16 See the statement of Foreign Minister Arita, Domei dispatch, May 15, 1936; also the statement of Tada in North China herald, May 13, 1936. Even Chinese authorities agreed the schedule was too high; see Ta kung pao, May 13, 1936 in Press summaries, 4 (June 30, 1936), 3 ff; also Chinese yearbook, 1935–36, p. 487. and ibid., 1936–37, p. 916. For a study of comparative tariff rates see China weekly review, 77 (July 27, 1936), 142. At the time of the smuggling, duties on the principal smuggled goods stood as follows: artificial silk yarn 210%. white sugar 175%, gasoline 110%, kerosene 95%, cotton piece goods 80%, sea products 20%, cigarette paper 15%. See China weekly review, 80 (March 13, 1937), 53 ff.
17 Bisson, , op. cit., p. 52.Google Scholar
18 Ibid., p. 53.
19 China yearbook, 1931 (Shanghai: Kelly and Walsh, 1932), p. 262.
20 Report of the Preventive Secretary of the Maritime Customs, June, 1935, quoted in China yearbook, 1936, p. 140. During the years from 1931 to 1935 the Bank of China estimated the value of smuggled goods arriving in Kwangtung and Fukien at Ch. $150,000,000 annually; see Hanson, , op. cit., p. 547.Google Scholar
21 For some excellent studies of this prohlem see Japan's narcotic policy in China (Hankow: China Information Committee, 1938); Mervine, Marcus, Japanese concession in Tientsin and the narcotic trade, Information bulletin, vol. 3, no. 4, February 11, 1937 (Nanking: Council of International Relations, 1937)Google Scholar; Bisson, , op. cit., pp. 129Google Scholar, 383 ff; League of Nations, advisory committee on traffic in opium and other dangerous drugs, Report to the council on the 22nd session (May 24-June 12, 1937), vol. 11, no. 4, 1937, pp. 6 ff.
22 This act undoubtedly inspired the unrivaled silver smuggling of 1935. However, the new currency proclaimed throughout China in November, 1934 probably had its effect (Mah, op. cit., p. 14).
23 Largely through the efforts of the Japanese consular police. See Shih, Chao-ying, Smuggling in North China, Information bulletin, vol. 1, no. 1, May 21, 1936 (Nanking: Council of Inter national Affairs, 1936), p. 15.Google Scholar
24 These statistics on silver smuggling may be somewhat exaggerated. See Green, O. M., “Smuggling in North China,” Great Britain and the east, 46 (May 21, 1936), 676 ff.Google Scholar; ibid., (May 28, 1936), 443; China weekly review, 77 (August 22, 1936), 443. In the two most important months of the smuggling, April and May, 1935, only Ch. $117,000 were seized by authorities.
25 It should be emphasized that responsibility for the silver smuggling did not rest with the Japanese. The North China herald of December 18, 1935 aptly referred to it as an “international” scandal.
26 For a concise study of the silver smuggling, see Lewis, A. B., “Silver and Chinese economic problems,” Pacific affairs, 8 (March 1935), 48 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
27 China weekly review, 77 (August 22,1936), 443.
28 Central news (Shanghai), May 12, 1936. Japan invoked the Tangku Truce to give a spurious legality to the demand. It was, of course, without foundation; see the China yearbook, 1936, p. 140.
29 Shih, , op. cit., p. 10.Google Scholar
30 Central news, May 12, 1936.
31 Shih, , op. cit., p. 12.Google Scholar
32 Ibid., p. 12.
33 China, Inspectorate General of Customs, Trade of China, 1935 (Shanghai: Kelly and Walsh), p. 10. This and other volumes in the series are hereafter cited as Trade of China (with appropriate date).
34 Bisson, , op. cit., p. 130.Google Scholar
35 Not before the Ministry of Foreign Affairs had lodged an official protest with the Japanese Ambassador, however (Central news, May 12, 1936).
36 North China herald, May 20, 1936.
37 Trade of China, 1935, p. 10.
38 Shih, , op. cit., p. 14.Google Scholar
39 Hsu, , op. cit., p. 389.Google Scholar
40 MacMurray, John V. A., Treaties and agreements with and concerning China (New York: Oxford University Press, 1921), p. 69.Google Scholar
41 The Chinese Government invoked this in May, 1936.
42 MacMurray, , op. cit., p. 72.Google Scholar
43 Chen, , op. cit., p. 96.Google Scholar
44 Central news, May 12, 1936.
45 Trade of China, 1935, p. 44.
46 Toynbee, A. J., Survey of international affairs, 1935 (London: Oxford University Press, 1936), vol. 1, pp. 310 ff.Google Scholar
47 Trade of China, 1935, p. 44. See also Chen, P. T., North China smuggling situation, (Shanghai: Central Bank of China, 1936), pp. 913 ff.Google Scholar
48 Trade of China, 1935, pp. 44–45.
49 Trade of China, 1934, p. 39.
50 Trade of China, 1935, p. 10. See also ibid., p. 11. The Kailan Mining Company was a Sino-British concern operating coal mines near Chinwangtao.
51 Trade of China, 1933, p. 45.
52 Ibid.
54 See supra, note 20; also Toynbee, , op. cit., 1935, vol. 1, p. 311Google Scholar; and Ozaki, Hotsumi, Recent developments in Sino-Japanese relations (Tokyo; Japanese Council of the Institute of Pacific Relations, 1936), p. 15.Google Scholar
55 Trade of China, 1936, p. 7; Toynbee, , op. cit., 1935, vol. 1, p. 330.Google Scholar
56 Tada, Hayao, “The basic conception of China as viewed by the Japanese army,” China weekly review, 74 (November 2, 1935), 306 ff.Google Scholar
57 Lu, Albert T., Bogus East Hopei regime, Information bulletin, vol. 3, no. 8, March 21, 1937 (Nanking: Council of International Affairs, 1937), p. 160Google Scholar, Hsu, , op. cit., pp. 30 ff.Google Scholar
58 China weekly review, 76 (March 28, 1936), 126.
59 Toynbee, , op. cit., 1935, vol. 1, p. 330.Google ScholarBisson, , op. cit., p. 109.Google Scholar
60 Of this figure, Ch. $1,200,000 came from the Peiping-Mukden Railway and Ch. $1,000,000 came from the Kailan Mining Administration.
61 Shepherd, C. R., Case against Japan (New York: D. Ryerson, 1938), p. 133.Google Scholar
62 Interview quoted in the North China herald, April 8, 1936.
63 Lu, Albert T., Unabated smuggling situation in North China, Information bulletin, vol. 1, no. 11, August 21, 1936 (Nanking: Council of International Relations, 1936), p. 3.Google Scholar
64 Shih, , op. cit., pp. 16 ff.Google Scholar
65 Bisson, , op. cit., p. 49.Google Scholar
66 Trade of China, 1936, p. 12; Hanson, , op. cit., p. 552.Google Scholar
67 North China daily news, May 5, 1936. For list of goods so included see China yearbook, 1936, p. 145.
68 Trade of China, 1936, p. 7.
69 North China herald, May 13,1936.
70 North China daily news, May 5, 1936.
71 Bisson, , op. cit., p. 130.Google Scholar
72 Quoted from the Customs Preventive Service by Shih, op. cit., p. 8.
73 North China herald, May 20, 1936.
74 New York times, May 24,1936.
75 North China herald, May 13,1936.
76 “Homeless smuggler,” Time, 27 (May 11, 1936), 26.
77 “The Japanese empire,” Fortune, 14 (September 1936), 116.
78 North China daily news, May 5,1936.
79 China yearbook, 1936, pp. 141 ff. For monthly figures see Shih, , op. cit., p. 6.Google Scholar Sundries include 12,692 cases of kerosene and 999 cases of gasoline.
80 “Smuggling conquest,” Business week (May 30, 1936), 35.
81 China weekly review, 76 (April 4,1936), 162.
82 Hanson, , op. cit., p. 553Google Scholar and China weekly review, 77 (August 22, 1936), 443.
83 North China herald, May 20,1936.
84 North China daily news, May 5,1936.
85 Hanson, , op. cit., p. 552.Google Scholar
86 For a complete list of all goods smuggled into Tientsin between October I, 1936 and December 31, 1936, see China weekly review, 80 (March 13, 1937), 54 ff.
87 North China daily news, May 5, 1936.
88 Ibid..
89 Hanson, , op. cit., p. 553.Google Scholar
90 China weekly review, 80 (March 13, 1937), 54 and North China herald, January 27, 1937.
91 North China daily news, May 5, 1936.
92 Trade of China, 1936, p. 270; Shih, op. cit., p. 5.
93 North China herald, May 19,1936.
94 China yearbook, 1936, p. 142.
95 Text, Chinese yearbook, 1936–37, p. 429; also Chen, L. T., op. cit., p. 96.Google Scholar
96 Chinese yearbook, 1936–37, pp. 940 ff.
97 North China herald, May 20, 1936 quotes the texts. See also Hanson, , op. cit., p. 544.Google Scholar
98 China yearbook, 1938, p. 60.
99 Bisson, , op. cit., p. 132.Google Scholar
100 Toynbee, , op. cit., 1937, p. 178Google Scholar and Chen, L. T., op. cit., p. 97.Google Scholar
101 Lu, , The unabated smuggling situation, pp. 15 ff.Google Scholar
102 Hanson, , op. cit., p. 550.Google Scholar
103 Trade of China, 1936, pp. 7–8; Hanson, op. cit., p. 551.
104 China weekly review, 76 (April 4. 1936). 162.
105 Trade of China, 1937, p. 9, and 1936, p. 8; Bisson, , op. cit., p. 133.Google Scholar
106 China weekly review, 77 (August 22, 1936), 443.
107 Chinese yearbook, 1936–37, p. 933 and as revised by the Executive Yüan in North China herald, June 10, 1936.
108 China weekly review, 80 (March 13, 1937), 53.
109 PD:HC, S5:312, p. 1610.
110 Supra, p. 00.
111 See the statement of Captain Euan Wallace, Secretary of the Overseas Trade Department in PD:HC, S5:313, p. 614. Also China weekly review, 80 (March 13, 1937), 53.
112 This “defense”, however, was never a consistent one and lapsed early. By the spring of 1937, the American Chamber of Commerce in Tientsin could report that “Japan's 'special trade' is not directed against American goods. They want to drive down the Chinese customs tariffs… On the whole, American business has been good during the past year” (China weekly review, 80 [March 13, 1937], 53).
113 North China herald, May 13, 1936; Lu, , The unabated smuggling situation, p. 1Google Scholar; Shih, , op. cit., p. 1.Google Scholar
114 Chen, P. T., op. cit., p. 929Google Scholar and supplement p. 5.
115 “The smuggling crisis and import tariffs,” Finance and commerce, 27 (May 13, 1936), 530.
116 North China daily news, May 29, 1936.
117 PD:HC, S5:312, pp. 5–6, 1172–73, 1608–11, 1986–88, and vol. 313, pp. 32–33, 191–92, 614.
118 Speech of May 25, 1936, see PD:HC, S5:312, p. 1610.
119 Times, May 18, 1936.
120 Reuters dispatch from London, May 13, 1936.
121 North China herald, June 3, 1936. A similarly worded telegram was dispatched to the British Foreign Office hy R. Calder Marshall, chairman of the British Chamber of Commerce in Shanghai.
122 Chinese yearbook, 1936–37, p. 932.
123 Fortune (Sept. 1936), 116.
124 This is questionable. See infra p. 00.
125 Sun, May 27, 1936.
126 Chen, P. T., op. cit., p. 892.Google Scholar
127 A Reuters dispatch from London on June indicated as much. However, France and Germany would have no part of it, Germany having just previously signed a trade agreement with Manchukuo. See North China herald, June 10, 1936.
128 Toynbee, , op. cit., 1937, p. 178.Google Scholar
129 China weekly review, 76 (April 4, 1936), 162.
130 Ibid., p. 162.
131 Quoted in the North China herald, August 5, 1936.
132 Hanson, , op. cit., p. 550.Google Scholar
133 Ibid., p. 551.
134 Ibid., p. 553.
135 North China herald, September 2,1936, and China yearbook, 1939, p. 70.
136 Hanson, , op. cit., p. 545.Google Scholar
137 At one time there was fear that a new smuggling threat might develop, and there was a rumor that a new Ch. $1,000,000 smuggling concern was being organized to operate in South China (North China herald, Jan. 27 and March 10, 1937).
138 China yearbook, 1939, p. 70.
139 Toynbee, , op. cit., 1937, p. 178.Google Scholar For China's answer to the Japanese protest over this incident see also ibid., 1936, p. 913.
140 China yearbook, 1939, p. 609.
141 Trade of China, 1937, p. 10.
142 China yearbook, 1939, p. 70.
143 Trade of China, 1936, p. 8. sec China and japan, p. 100.
144 Trade of China, 1936, p. 8.
145 Toynbee, , op. cit., 1936, p. 913.Google Scholar
146 Hanson, , op. cit., p. 547.Google Scholar
147 Trade of China, 1935, p. 80. It should he noted that the latter part of 1936 showed an amazingly rapid rise in import duties (ibid., 1936, p. 51).
148 Ibid., 1936, p. 50.
149 ibid., p. 51. See also Chen, P. T., op. cit., p. 1Google Scholar, supplement.
150 Trade of China, 1936, p. 51.
151 Ibid., pp. 9 ff. This total loss amounts to approximately Ch. $21,000,000 and does not include miscellaneous items.