[341]. China, No. 2 (1904), No. 6.
[342]. The Times, February 20, 1901, p. 5.
[343]. Ibid. “The Chinese argue,” added Dr. Morrison, “that Russia, having no interests south of the Great Wall, no missionaries, no trade, and no troops, can reasonably expect in return benevolent treatment from China in any agreement proposed outside the Great Wall, especially as Russia is in military occupation.... Russia appears determined to profit by the condition to which China is reduced by the action of the other Powers, just as she profited by obtaining the Primorsk Province after the war of 1860, and Port Arthur and Talien-wan subsequent to the war of 1895.”
[344]. China, No. 2 (1904), No. 14. Cf. ibid., Nos. 25 and 42.
[345]. The Times, February 28, 1901, p. 5.
[346]. See pp. [91]–92, above.
[347]. China, No. 2 (1904), No. 42. Other versions are similar in substance to this one, which was forwarded by Sir Ernest Satow.
[348]. See China, No. 2 (1904), Nos. 16, 17, 32, 35.
[349]. China, No. 2 (1904), No. 30.
[350]. Ibid., No. 18 (March 1).