The Canton Incident of June 23rd, The Truth

Front matter

THE CANTON INCIDENT

OF JUNE 23rd.

THE TRUTH.

Photograph of Shameen and Shakee Street

Photograph of Shameen and Shakee Street.

⤑ West.

This photograph was taken from Shakee Street. B is the British (West) Bridge, where the Consul-General was standing. W is Watson's shop. V is the Victoria Hotel. The Creek, about 150 feet wide, separates the buildings from Shakee Street, which is about 30 yards wide. The Chinese troops extended along the iront of the British Concession, as indicated by the arrow, when they began the attack on Shameen.

June Twenty-Third, The Truth

JUNE-TWENTY-THIRD

THE TRUTH.

A violent riot by operatives in a Japanese-owned cotton mill at Shanghai, in May, 1925, resulted in the death of a Chinese workman who was killed by a Japanese overseer. The incident was fraught with misfortune. The events that followed were tinged with a bitterness out of all proportion to any real injury suffered. The occasion was seized for proclaiming as a shibboleth the new sentiment of patriotism or nationalism, which is being rigorously exploited by Russian Bolsheviks who, outwardly, are more blatant Chinese patriots than the Chinese themselves.

At Tsingtao, on the 29th May, 1925, the Japanese mills were attacked, and the Chinese gendarmerie at that place were unable to disperse the rioters without the effective use of firearms, two rioters being killed and several wounded. On May 30th occurred at Shanghai the regrettable incidents which put a match to elements already in a state of combustion. It almost seemed that the strange concatenation of events was brought about with the curious irrelevance of things prepared by an unkind Fate. At Louza Police Station, which was assaulted and burnt by a mob in 1905, was violently born a new order, spreading abroad a contagion of semi-hysterical excitement and hatred.

The news of that evil day, considerably exaggerated and distorted, spread rapidly up the Yangtze valley and down the southern mainland, and small, scattered, foreign communities were subjected to insult and outrage. At Hankow, on June 11th, a large crowd of Chinese stoned the police of the British Concession, tore up seats on the Bund, destroyed Japanese shops and attacked the shopkeepers, and attempted to rush the Volunteer armoury, in defence of which fire had to be opened on the rioters, after the Fire Brigade had played their hoses on the mob for twenty minutes. Mob outrages also occurred in quick succession at Amoy, Chefoo, Chenkiang, Chiukiang, Hainan, Hoihow, Kiukiang, Nanking, Ningpo, Peking, Shanghai, Swatow, and Wuchow. In some of these cases the British forces did not resist; and in all cases they refrained from action until the very last minute.

There is indisputable evidence that Bolsheviks have taken an active part in these disturbances. In 1919 Bolshevism was little more than a legend in any part of China: in 1925 it had become a creed in the South. Yourin Pogodin, Bourrier, Karakhan and Borodin did their work well. The Soviet has attained considerable political success by disturbing the minds of the younger and more vocal classes of China, the students, who rush their way through college in an atmosphere of strikes and revolutions, and nourish their chauvinism on ill-digested ideas of civic rights and liberties. Persons have taken the place of principles.

Borodin has laboured so successfully in Canton that it might almost be described as a replica of Soviet Moscow. The British now find themselves in an astonishing position, not through the boycott, but because certain sinister influences, while pretending to strive for "right" and "justice," are directing a campaign of calumny and vindictiveness. Neither right nor justice spring from a doctrine of hate, which only tends to reduce life to an embittering experience. The boycott is the oldest war China has ever waged against the foreigner, and the boats must ride at anchor, swinging idly with the tides, until the ban is raised. But the small foreign community in the Crown Colony of Hongkong has become the object of a subtle hostility that vents itself in ways that are eminently crude and unfair. The pamphlet entitled June Twenty-Third is one of several examples.

This pamphlet contains the report of the Commission appointed by the Canton Government to investigate the Shameen massacre." Copies of the pamphlet can be had for the asking from the Secretary of the Y. M. C. A., Canton. It may be remarked in passing that the activities of the Y.M.C.A. in China are entirely different from Association activities in other countries. Ever since the foreign secretaries began to make over control to Chinese committees, the latter have become more and more concerned with political education and propaganda. In the Commissioners' Report the following definite assertions are made:-

To strengthen the Chinese evidence, a set of resolutions passed by the American staff of the Canton Christian College and a letter of sympathy from the German merchants residing in Tungshan are are also printed in the pamphlet. It was a grave oversight on the part of the Commissioners to have included in their report two documents which were completely discredited immediately they were published.

It has been mentioned that after May 30th serious anti-foreign disturbances occurred at several places. There were sure indications that the hostility was augmented in the south. And Bolshevism had found abode in Canton. The late Dr. Sun Yat Sen made friendly overtures to Soviet Russia, which were accepted with alacrity. But it was not until after his death that Bolshevism became a power in the land. Then Foreign Communism and Chinese Nationalism-the symbol of China's undefined status--became joined; and maybe they will be condemned, like the guilty lovers in Dante's Inferno, to journey to the end together. From June 6th there was civil war in Canton between the Red army officered by Russians-the locally famous Whampoa Cadets-and the Yunnanese army, who were mercenaries brought in by Dr. Sun Yat Sen to uphold his régime. By the middle of June anti-foreignism was rampant, sponsored by students who were guided here, as here, as elsewhere, by Russian Bolsheviks. A universal strike was decreed to starve Hongkong into blessay ignominious surrender: exactly for what was not clear, but presumably it was because Hongkong, being a British colony, should be held responsible for the actions of the International Police at Shanghai. It was natural, then, in view of the general atmosphere of distrust and dislike-to say nothing of the domination of the Bolsheviks in Canton-that precautions should be taken against mob violence, for human nature is ever a product of circumstances, education and opportunity. As subsequent events proved, it was a wise precaution.

A preliminary outrage occurred on June 20th, when two Japanese crossing the East (French) bridge into Canton city were shot, one being killed and the other wounded. The circumstances of the attack made it impossible to accept the alleged motive of robbery, although the unfortunate men had with them a large sum of money. To have deprived them of the money a few yards further on, in the city itself, would have been a safe undertaking. By the 22nd June Shameen was entirely deserted by Chinese and foreigners were practically cut off from communication with the city. On that day it was known, even, in Hongkong, that a demonstration would be held on the 23rd, and that the strikers were determined to enter Shameen and create an incident. We may reasonably suppose that it was at Bolshevik suggestion, for it was admittedly a part of Zinoviev's foreign policy (vide Appendix A). The British Consul-General immediately wrote to the Secretary for Foreign Affairs, Canton Government, stating what he had heard and warning the Government that the Shameen forces would resist with arms any attack on the Concession (vide Appendix B).

It was also observed, on the 22nd, that machine-guns had been placed in several Chinese buildings opposite Shameen, on the other side of the creek.

On the following day the demonstration took place. It was a parade of defiance. The demonstrators deliberately walked half-way round Shameen, supported by fully-armed troops in great numbers. The student demonstrators made it clear by their actions and vociferations that they were imbued with a spirit of hostility. What actually happened was this:

On the morning of the 23rd, between 20,000 and 30,000 demonstrators assembled on the East Parade Ground, and, after listening to various speeches, formed procession. workmen's guilds came first, then followed the schools, boys, and girls. Next came students of the Canton Christian College and some boy scouts. The military section, which brought up the rear, consisted of from 2,000 to 3,000 Red troops under the command of Russian officers. All were fully armed, and many marched with fixed bayonets. At 11 a. m. two motor-cars passed along the front of Shameen (Shakee Street) distributing leaflets of a violently inflammatory character. These leaflets urged the public to rise up and eject the foreigner. By about 2.30 p.m. the long procession had reached the vicinity of the East (French) bridge. The only persons near the West (British) bridge were the British Consul-General, the Senior Naval Officer, the Superintendent of Shameen Police and some Naval Officers and Chinese Police. The first part of the procession, about three-quarters of it, marched along in an orderly manner. In fact there were no signs of disturbance until the arrival of the armed contingent, which was separated from the procession by a gap of probably 100 yards. The students and boy scouts were very enthusiastic, all waving flags and banners and shouting at the few spectators in Shameen. The soldiers, who were led by mounted officers, halted at a point about 50 yards on the east side of the British bridge; the procession proper had reached and passed the bridge and was out of the angle of subsequent fire. Immediately the soldiers assumed open formation the procession began to scatter with considerable confusion, and there was a mixture of soldiers and civilians, including for a few minutes some girl students. Suddenly a shot was fired on the Chinese side. This was followed by two other shots, and instantly a heavy volley of rifle fire was directed on to Shameen. At the same time Chinese machine gunners and snipers, who had been placed beforehand in houses along Shakee Street, joined in the shooting. The fire was not returned at once by Shameen, for the Volunteers were not loaded and the Regulars had not received orders to fire. As a matter of fact, no order to fire was ever given. But when the post of regulars nearest the Consul-General and Senior Naval Officer saw that the party was under fire, they replied, and the other posts took up the challenge. There were in all four Lewis gun posts in the British Concession. The fire, as long as it lasted, was directed entirely at the attacking party. The civilians who were hit were too bewildered to realise what was happening and get away. The firing was stopped by the Senior Naval Officer immediately he reached the first post, and at the other posts as soon as he could get his orders to them. Indeed, it was in carrying these orders that Petty Officer Chalmers of the Royal Navy was wounded in both hands. A French gunboat anchored off the French Bund fired a few rounds of blank ammunition. It was obvious that shells were not used: the effect of a shell in crowded Canton city would afford more tangible evidence for the Commissioners to work upon than all the unconvincing depositions they have been able to collect and print. The Chinese snipers on the mainland were very persistent for an hour or more after Shameen had ceased. In corroboration of this account, see the statements, most of them of eyewitnesses, printed as Appendices C. to L.

The Commissioners say nothing about the casualties in Shameen. There were nine. Monsieur Pasquier was killed almost immediately the Chinese began to fire, by a machine gun bullet which hit him in the head and passed downwards. It must, therefore, have been fired from one of the buildings on Shakee Street, which were slightly above his level. As he fell eight other bullets struck him in the side. Mons. Pasquier was killed, and a Japanese in Victoria Hotel was wounded, before Shameen opened fire. Subsequently, Mr. Edwards, the Commissioner of Customs, Mr. Murell, belonging to one of the foreign firms, and Petty Officer Chalmers of the Royal Navy were wounded, and also two Frenchmen and two Japanese.

It is necessary to examine briefly the evidence put forward by the Commissioners for their statement that Shameen fired first. Most of the testimony comes from students who, according to their own showing, had already passed the West (British) bridge and were therefore well ahead of the soldiers. The soldiers halted opposite Victoria Hotel, 50 yards or more from the British bridge, when they began the attack, and extended eastwards towards the French bridge. Hence it was only the tail end of the student section that might have seen, and then imperfectly, something of what happened. Most of the testimony is to the effect that after the testifier had passed the West bridge "shooting suddenly began" or was heard." Without any valid reason at least none has been recorded in the proceedings of the Commission-the Shameen defenders were accused of being the offenders. One man, Li Shiet Hwa, heard a shot after he had passed the West bridge, and was "sure it came from Shameen-sure, because at that time I was not much frightened." The impressions of these witnesses were formed during a period of tense excitement and not unnaturally took on some of the colouring of the day. And there were those who made it their business to see that the passing of time did not soften the tones. Li Shiet Hwa's statement is a fair sample of the indefinite declarations generally made before the Commission. Yet all this evidence, founded on lies and built up on rumour, is taken as fact; and the China Christian Union for National Salvation, who acknowledge the existence of "conflicting reports," base their indictment of the British in Shameen on this presumptive evidence and feel that it is their duty to make known these facts to our missionary friends in China and through them to the Christian people all over the world."

There is one point on which agreement is reached between both sides. One shot followed quickly by two others was the signal for the firing to commence. The Chinese attribute the first shot to a foreigner in Victoria Hotel. Sham Sung, Chief Inspector of the 9th Police Station, describes the culprit as "a long-headed and short-haired foreigner in civilian dress." Chau Check Chi, a student, observed that this foreigner was dressed in a white coat and yellow trousers and had " a fierce look." He fired one shot at the procession and then Chau heard "two more shots from the east side of Shameen." That was where the Chinese troops were. This tallies with the British version. It is an interesting fact that a few months ago a Lettish soldier bearing the Russian name of Ivanhoff, acknowledged to another Lett, a civilian, in Sincere's Restaurant at Canton, that he and a comrade had been bribed by Borodin to fire the preliminary shots, and that he had actually fired the first of the three. He was piqued because he had to wait some time for his money. Now, Ivanhoff certainly was not in the Victoria Hotel or any other part of Shameen.

The Commissioners' official report gives full particulars of 52 persons killed and 117 wounded. Of the 52 killed, one (a boy scout) was trampled to death and the cause of death in 7 cases is not known. The balance of 44 is made up by 22 soldiers, 4 students, 8 merchants, 3 labourers, 1 apprentice, 7 pedlars and 5 unidentified bodies. In the list of 117 wounded, in 13 cases the cause of death is not stated, and 39 (including 3 soldiers, 17 students, 2 women, as postman, a fortune-teller, etc.) were hurt through contact with the crowd. The other 65 were wounded by bullets.nqOf the 65 so wounded, 408 were soldiers, 5 were students, 3 were labourers, 3 were pedlars, 5 were unidentified, and there was an oilman, a seaman, a postman and a policeman. All together, 1922 soldiers and 4 4 students were killed and 50 soldiers and 5 students were wounded by bullets from Shameen. The percentage of soldiers to the total killed is 50; the percentage of students is 9. Fifty-four per cent. of the wounded were soldiers, and seven per cent. were students. The number of soldiers killed and wounded represents 56.8% of the total casualties from gun-fire, while the percentage of students to the total is 8.2.

This analysis of the official record is a certificate that the fire from Shameen was concentrated on the soldiers, who were between the British and French bridges, and not on a defenceless crowd. The rest of the procession had passed westward out of the zone of fire, and most of the civilian casualties were due to stray bullets and ricochets. The majority of these accident cases were spectators and passersby, and people on business or plying their trade in the vicinity, who were in a state of panic. Yet Mr. C. C. Wu, the Secretary for Foreign Affairs, in his distorted version of the incident forwarded to Karakhan, the Soviet Ambassador at Peking, stated that "fire was opened from Shameen on the demonstrators, particularly the students." Was Mr. Wu merely repeating the wild stories circulated by those who took part in the procession but who, on account of its length, had thin not the slightest opportunity of seeing what really happened? His statements are amply discredited from every point of view: and one is forced to the conclusion that he is either wilfully untruthful or woefully ignorant, for he misstates the facts when he does not omit them altogether.

The Commissioners urge that if the attack from Shameen had not been sudden, "the wounded would have escaped or at least the wounds would have been in the back instead of the left side." The relevancy of the remark is not apparent. It was not so long ago that an outcry was raised in Shanghai because a few people had been hit in the back. The fact was charged up to the British as a heinous crime. However, the parade in Canton moved forward from the east, keeping Shameen on the left, the canal between. Shakee Street is wide, but not so wide that when it carries a large procession Pilla it still leaves room for unfettered locomotion. Moreover, the exits from Shakee Street are into very narrow lanes which soon become congested. And soldiers standing their ground would naturally add to the restrictions on the movements of non-combatants. Nevertheless, the fact that 56 per cent. of the casualties from bullets were soldiers indicates that many civilians did succeed in retreating unscathed. The few who were wounded before they escaped from the melée would naturally be hit in the left side, or in the right side if they were running in the opposite direction.

The report further states, on the authority of Dr. Kwok, Physician of the Whampoa Academy (The Red Military School), that the Shameen authorities used Dum-dum or soft-nosed bullets. Dr. Kwok's evidence is not given, but the evidence of Dr. J. D. Thomson, Surgeon to the Canton Hospital, is reproduced, and this tends to substantiate the opposite conclusion. He says: "The entrance wounds were for the most part either in the front or side of the body…Some of the wounds were obviously caused by ricochet and spent bullets. The missiles which caused several larger wounds were not determined." The manufacture of Dum-dum bullets was stopped long ago and soft-nosed bullets are not used in machine guns, which require full-coated ammunition. The tremendously high velocity with which a modern bullet leaves the muzzle of a rifle or machine-gun accentuates, during the initial stages of its flight, the motion imparted by the grooving of the barrel. The bullet does not attain a stable spin before it has travelled about 400 feet and a wound inflicted at shorter range is liable to be large owing to the undulating corkscrew motion of the missile. The distance between Shameen and Shakee is under 60 yards: at that distance bullets striking stone and masonry buildings would detach large junks which, themselves, would inflict jagged wounds.

Little need be said about the resolutions passed by the American staff of the Canton Christian College (Appendix N), and the letter purporting to be from some German merchants (Appendix V). The resolutions were not so much of a surprise as they might have been, for some of the signatories had already taken a stand publicly as expositors to the American nation of China's sufferings (vide Appendix M). Much stress is placed in that document on the word Justice. We concede the scope for interpretation, remembering that Plato wrote ten books in an attempt to define "Justice" and in the end came to no final conclusion. These now-famous resolutions, based as they are on the reports of excited and misled people, none of whom saw all that happened and most of whom were repeating only what they had heard on the way, are a gratuitous aspersion on all the nations represented by their nationals in Shameen. It has since transpired that the document was not signed either by the President or Vice-President of the college, who were both away at the time.

There are complications in the case. Dr. Henry, the President, assures us that although the signatories state that "a Chinese patriotic parade marching along the Bund and Shakee, Canton, was fired upon by Shameen troops" and "that we are of opinion that the blame and the responsibility for the merciless and unjustified assault rests upon those who directed the firing from Shameen, no one had any idea of suggesting which side fired first. And, further, that although the men who signed the document were determined to cooperate with the Chinese in the presentation of their case," and to make their position known" directly to the American Government and to the American people," the resolutions must be regarded as expressions of personal opinion only. At midnight on 23rd June Dr. Henry and Mr. Baxter, the President and Vice-President of the college, with abounding faith signed another document, which was written for them in Chinese by Chinese and loosely interpreted to them in haste. According to Mr. Baxter, this was a statement representing the College. Dr. Henry says nothing about it, and piloot apparently it was not published. A reference to Appendices N to U will explain the position.

The German Merchants' letter says nothing that amounts to anything, but means a good deal from a particular point of view. It has been completely refuted (vide Appendices V to X).

The accusations made by the Canton Government are typical of the manner in which facts are distorted by responsible officials to create impressions in their favour. And Chinese journalism seems to require of its journalists misrepresentation and malice when foreigners clash with them. Examples might be multiplied indefinitely, but two are sufficient. At Nanking, on July 31st, the coolies of the International Export Company came into conflict with the Chinese police, and the police fired on them, killing one and wounding several. All the injuries were inflicted by Chinese: not a single shot was fired by the British: yet reports were telegraphed all over the country that British Marines in Nanking had fired upon and killed defenceless Chinese work-men. Again, shortly after the Shanghai riots, Mr. Mackenzie, a British subject, was brutally murdered in his motor-car on one of the outer roads of Shanghai. There was the circumstantial evidence of the lady who was with him and drove the car some distance, with both arms wounded, until help was obtained. And the facts of the assassination were established beyond any doubt. Nevertheless, the vernacular Press was insistent that the victim died of heart failure from driving his car at high speed in the d and that to strengthen the evidence against the strikers the British Consul-General ordered the foreign by police to drill holes resembling bullet wounds in the dead man's body!

The xenophobia of June last speedily contracted into anglophobia; but it is foolish to attempt to invert the issues of grave events by these means. Outrage and murder are not protean pastimes with the British in China, or anywhere else.

A. G. M.

Appendix A

APPENDIX A.

Extract from an article by Zinoviev in the Pravda, published in April, 1925.

After outlining a list of imaginary "crimes" by the Powers, including the "seizure" of Hongkong by the British, the writer goes on to say that after all these "preparatory doings" there was little left for Soviet leaders to do.

"We had only," he says, "to advise a few individual Chinese to commit suicide as a protest against imperialistic violence, to cut off their own fingers and with their blood to write short but strong maledictions, to advise hundreds of thousands of workers to demonstrate and strike and to convince reactionary generals-and Chang Tso-lin among them to contribute big sums of money to support the anti-imperialistic movement."

Appendix B

APPENDIX B.

H. B. M. Consulate-General, Canton.

22nd June, 1925.

Sir,

I learn from sources which I have every reason to believe to be trustworthy that, in the course of a patriotic demonstration arranged for to-morrow, the student element intend to make martyrs of themselves by attacking the bridges leading on to Shameen. I am informed that they went to the length of drawing lots as to which association should have the honour of sacrificing itself first in its country's cause, and that the winning number was drawn by the University of Kwangtung.

This story may, of course, be the figment of a fertile imagination, but if, on the other hand, it have any solid foundation in fact and should action of the kind be contemplated and take place, I have the honour solemnly to warn the Government of Kwangtung, through you as their Foreign Secretary, that any attempt to penetrate on to the British Concession on Shameen will be resisted by force of arms, and that for the consequences the Government will be held individually and collectively responsible. As I had the honour to inform you yesterday, I do not, nor have I the right to, protest against any demonstrations which Chinese citizens in Canton may choose to organize, and if there be such I have warned all my nationals to be very careful not to mix themselves up therewith, and in general strictly to refrain from provocative action of any kind in order that the present situation be not exacerbated. Due precautions are, however, being taken to guard against acts of mob violence, such as have occurred at Chinkiang, Kiukiang and Hankow; and should unfortunately they occur here, the blood of those who call upon crowd psychology to commit deeds of violence will be upon their own heads.

I write in this serious strain so that it may not be said hereafter that brutal Imperialist rifles wantonly massacred unoffending Chinese youth. (A copy of this dispatch is being sent to quarters where it will remain on record.)

I would in this connection call your attention to the urgent matter of clearing the Shakee creek, with regard to which representations are being made to the Chief of Police, and would ask you to be good enough to support them in so far as you may be able to do so.

I have the honour to be,

Sir,

Your Obedient Servant,

(Sd.) JAMES JAMIESON, Consul-General.

Chao Chu Wu, Esquire, etc., etc., etc., Bureau of Foreign Affairs, Canton.

Appendix C

APPENDIX C.

U. S. S. Asheville, Canton, China, 23rd June, 1925.

Statement of Four (4) Eye-Witnesses of the Attack on Shameen, Canton, China, this date.

At about 3.15 p.m. to-day we were watching the demonstration procession from two different positions; this procession was composed of various guild organisations. Included in which were members from the mechanics, the servants' (male and female) and the seamen's guild; school girls and boys, boy scouts and a body of uniformed but unarmed cadets, these cadets are reported to be from Whampoa Military Academy. These cadets were followed by several companies of soldiers, some of whom had bayonets fixed.

When the first company of soldiers were about opposite the Victoria Hotel the procession stopped and the shouting on the part of the cadets increased; at a moment later there seemed to be disorder among the soldiers, who went out of close order formation and several assumed a position on one knee with rifles pointed toward Shameen.

A shot was fired by the Chinese from Shakee and was immediately followed by two other shots. This appeared to us to be the preconcerted signal and was instantly followed by a heavy volley of rifle fire from the Chinese. This heavy firing continued for the space of about one minute, when machine-guns were heard firing from the direction of the French Concession. About this time a few rounds of artillery fire was heard from some ship off the French Bund.

JOHN T. THORNTON, 1st Lieut., U. S. Marine Corps.

H. F. BAUER (Int. Bank, U. S. citizen). T. G. STOKES (Dairy Farm: Australian). F. W. BENDER (Int. Bank: U. S. citizen).

Appendix D

APPENDIX D.

Dispatch from Sir James Jamieson, British Consul-General at Canton, addressed to the Civil Governor of Canton, in reply to a dispatch from the latter in which it was stated that the firing was commenced by foreign troops in Shameen.

H.B.M. Consulate-General,

Canton, June 24th, 1925.

To His Excellency the Civil Governor of Kwangtung.

Sir, I have the honour to acknowledge receipt of the communication which you have been good enough to address to me on the subject of the shooting which took place in the Shakee Street yesterday afternoon.

I would in the first place point out that in this unfortunate affair the Portuguese gunboat took no part whatsoever: it was the defence forces of the British and French Concessions alone who replied to the attack made on them by Chinese troops or military students on the other side. I can, from the evidence of my own eyes, make a statement on oath that the firing was first started by the Chinese. As it was, the British Senior Naval Officer and myself, who were standing unarmed by the bridge for the special purpose of guarding against any precipitate or nervous action on the part of the defenders, only escaped with our lives out of the hail of bullets which was directed at us. It was only then that in self-defence fire was opened from this side, and by the French forces, which were similarly attacked. Firing from this side ceased even before sniping from the tops of the houses opposite by Chinese soldiers was discontinued.