Permalink : http://hdl.handle.net/2115/88709

本稿は、1924年6月の榊原農場商租料事件に着目し、同事件をめぐって船津辰一郎在奉天総領事の対中国交渉を具体的に分析することにより、在奉天総領事の側から土地商租権問題の特質を探る。また、日中両国の新聞記事を分析し、民間の視点から土地商租権問題の実態を捉える。商租料事件に際して、船津は日中間の紛争を惹起した榊原側の行為を批判しながら、奉天交渉署に厳重に抗議を申し込む一方、その暴行を阻止するために、領事館警察を派遣して自衛手段の行使に踏み切った。既得商租権維持のため、船津は滞納商租料の調達を南満洲鉄道株式会社および東洋拓殖株式会社に求め、平和的手段に力点を置いて対中強硬策までは意図しなかった。これは中国側の武力行動を激しく批判しながら、武力をもって対抗し、積極的行動に出るよう総領事館に求めた日本新聞界とは対照的である。船津は中国側の排日動向を配慮し、実力行使という強硬手段を極力回避し、中国世論を激化させない範囲に満蒙権益の擁護拡大を追求した。だが、事件解決の過程において、船津は次第に奉天交渉署からの信頼を失った。本論では船津は「幣原外交」に従っているだけでなく、中国側利権回収運動の影響を実感し、東三省での張作霖の地位を維持することによって日本の満蒙権益を守るべきだと考え、独自の判断、経験に基づいて具体的な対応策を講じたことを明らかにする。同時に、張作霖政権は商租権禁止の訓令を出して高まった利権回収運動を支えながらも、日本の軍事行動や内政干渉を防ぐために、排日的記事を取締り、露骨な排日運動を控えざるをえないという状況に陥ることを解明し、東北政権の対日認識に再検討を加え、その政策決定を内面的に理解する。
This article analyzes the characteristics of the Land Lease Issue from the Consul general at Mukden perspective by specifically studying the negotiations between Funatsu Consul General and Mukden Government on Sakakibara Farm Rent Incident. Newspaper articles from both China and Japan will be analyzed to examine the characteristic of the Land Lease Issue from a private perspective. Immediately after the incident broke out, Funatsu criticized Sakakibaraʼs conduct and protested to the Office of Commissioner of Foreign Affairs for Mukden seriously, and sent the Consulate Police to stop the Chinese atrocities, but he did not plan to get tough on China. In order to maintain this already acquired the land lease right, Funatsu negotiated with the South Manchuria Railway Company and Oriental Development Company to pay Sakakibaraʼs debt to China on behalf of Sakakibara. In order to resolve the case, Funatsu focused on peaceful means and did not intend to take hard measures against China. Funatsuʼs attitude contrasts sharply with that of the Japanese newspaper community, which has been vehemently critical of the Chinese armed action and demanded that the consulate-general should resolve the incident by force. Funatsu pays close attention to The Anti-Japanese Movement in China, strives to avoid the use of force, he advocates using peaceful means to promote the extension of Japanese power and the expansion of Japanʼs special benefits in Manchuria without provoking the Chinese antipathy. But in the process of solving the case, Funatsu gradually lost the trust of Chinese. On the other hand, Funatsu not only followed “Shidehara Diplomacy” but also realized the influence of Chinaʼs rights recovery movement. Funatsu thought that Japanʼs Manchuria-Mongolia interests should be protected by maintaining Zhang Zuolinʼs position in the Three Northeast Provinces, and took concrete measures based on his own judgment and experience. The Zhang Zuolin regime while supporting the growing rights recovery movement, was forced to control the anti-Japanese articles and refrain from a blatant anti-Japanese movement in order to prevent Japanese military action and interference in domestic affairs.