JAPAN AND MANCHURIA
[To the Editor of the SPECTATOR.] Sin,—If Mr. 'Wilkinson had said that the agricultural develop- ment of Manchuria was due to Japanese enterprise and Chinese labour he would have been nearer the truth. Ile states that Russia opened Dairen as a commercial port, but omits to mention that it was not until 1907 that it was declared a free port, and that was by Japan. Since then its facilities for transport have been increased enormously, with the result that Manchurian trade leaped up. In twenty years the increase reached 600,000,000 tacit per annum, and Manchuria accounted for 21 per cent, of the entire trade of China. Japan is entitled to the credit for this.
Mr. Wilkinson's analysis of Japanese investments is far from accurate, and his reference to the Fushun colliery is mis- leading. I'hen that undertaking was transferred in 1907, the daily output of coal was 300 tons. In 1929 production had reached 26,000 tons per day. Whether the profits more than cover the amount expended is beside the point. What matters is that it was left to the Japanese to develop thi,, valuable property and they did it.
I wonder if Mr. Wilkinson has ever heard of such firms as Mitsui, Mitsubishi, and Okura, and if he is aware that the Japanese, through them and other similar concerns, are successfully manufacturing in Manchuria, cotton, silk, linen, woollens, oil, sugar, ceramics, safety matches, paper, paint, machinery, including ships, fertilisers, flour, soap, cement, Jec. They admit failure, for the present, in their working of the iron ore at Anshan, but they are not abandoning the enter- prise. The value of British goods entering Manchuria in 1907 was 2,693,000 taels. In 1927 the value had increased to 17,734,000 taels. The "open door" !—I am, Sir, &e., Braelicad, Lochwinnoch, Renfrewshire. J. linitinn.
Previous page
