Papers Relating to Foreign Affairs, Accompanying the Annual Message of the President to the First Session Thirty-eighth Congress, Part II
Mr. Burlingame to Mr. Seward
Sir: I have the honor to send you, marked A and B, the continuation of my correspondence with the Chinese government, touching the merchant consul question. How long it may continue it is impossible for me to say. I send you also a letter, marked C, addressed to Commander McDougal on his arrival, if upon the China station. I shall send Nos. 29, 30, and 31 by way of Russia. Be so kind as to note the time of their arrival. I have just received the news of the glorious victories in Maryland, and, strange to say, I have the news of them by California, the overland route, and by Russia, to exactly the same date.
I have the honor to be, your obedient servant,
Hon. William H. Seward, Secretary of State.
A.
Prince Kung, chief secretary for foreign affairs, herewith makes a communication.
On a former occasion, I made a communication to your excellency, with reference to the American consul in New Chwang being still engaged in business, desiring that you would put a stop to such a proceeding. Whereupon you communicated a reply, to the effect that there was nothing said in the treaty as to merchants not being allowed to act as consuls, and that the late minister, Mr. Reed, in his communication on this subject, had only reference to the five ports; furthermore, that this question should be waived until the American government shall have sent out a regularly appointed consul, when you would communicate on the subject again, &c. Now, examining into the matter, I find that the treaty with your country was concluded in the 5th moon of the 8th year of the reign of Hien Fung, (June, 1858,) and that Mr. Reed’s communication was made in the 10th moon of the same year, (November, 1858.) How, then, can it be said Mr. Reed had reference only to the five ports? The fact is, while he was engaged in settling the point in the supplement to the treaty, Commissioner Kweiliang, finding that no distinct stipulation had been made in the treaty, that no consul should engage in mercantile transactions, made a communication on the subject to Mr. Reed, whereupon the latter communicated his reply. Now the Chinese government has inserted this reply of Mr. Reed into the supplement of the treaty, and it is therefore regarded as forming a part of the treaty itself, so that it can no longer be fairly asserted that the treaty is not explicit on this subject, and is therefore to be regarded as an open question. But if your excellency insists upon the letter of the treaty [Page 919] itself, then I beg to remind you, that it is equally silent as to American citizens being allowed to establish themselves in New Chwang. Now, no distinction has been made between them and the English and the French. They have established themselves there, equally with the latter. And since, in the treaties with the English and the French, it is distinctly stipulated that no merchant shall be allowed to act as consul, hence it is reasonable that your government should also act according to this regulation. If, therefore, your government resolves to adhere strictly to the express stipulations of the treaty, and prevent American merchants from resorting to New Chwang, then of course nothing more is to be said on the subject; but if your citizens are to settle in the latter place, then there ought to be a conformity to the regulations of the other governments, and no merchant be allowed to perform the duties of a consul, so that there might be a uniformity of practice. Now, amicable relations subsisting between our two governments, if, on the one hand, it be insisted that Mr. Knight should be removed at once, it would look like an unfriendly proceeding; and if, on the other, no remonstrance be made against his acting as consul, some difficulties might arise. This communication is therefore made with the expectation that your excellency would without delay write to your government, to the effect that a regularly appointed consul be sent out at once to New Chwang, and thus avoid the necessity of much longer having a merchant act as such. Yours is a great country; it is certainly not supposable that it is deficient in such as could be employed as officers. Henceforth, then, it is hoped that in whatever port your citizens may establish themselves, consuls will be appointed according to the statement herewith made, and no more have recourse to merchants acting as such, and thus further discussions might thereby be avoided. It is hoped that your excellency will settle this point without delay, and make a reply to this communication.
His Excellency Hon. Anson Burlingame, Minister Plenipotentiary of the United States of America, in China.
B.
The undersigned, envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary of the United States to China, has the honor to reply to the communication of his Imperial Highness Prince Kung, chief secretary, &c., of October 31, that he has re-examined the treaty, and must again say that he can find nothing in it to prevent the United States from appointing men who are engaged in trade, consuls.
As to the casual remark of Mr. Reed in his letter to Kweiliang, made long after the treaty had been signed, and constituting no part of it, nor of the supplementary treaty, that it was the law of his country that no man engaged in trade could be consul, the undersigned has to say that Mr. Reed was in error, for his country had such consuls in every part of the world, and even Mr. Reed himself appointed Mr. Nye at Macao, who was, and still is, a merchant. Mr. Reed did not intend to deceive, but probably was thinking of salaried consuls, and had, doubtless, for the moment forgotten the practice of his country.
The undersigned is sure your highness does not object to men who trade, with a view to cast any reflection upon them, because you must be aware that in the United States there is no distinction between citizens, but that every one of good character may be appointed to office.
The right to go to New Chwang is derived from the favored-nation clause as expressed in Article 30 of the treaty, and from Article XI of the British treaty opening New Chwang to trade. As to the suggestion of your highness, that, deriving our right under the favored-nation clause, we must take it with the conditions of the nation from whose treaty we derive our right, the undesigned [Page 920] has the honor to reply that he denies it, and expresses his surprise that your highness should have made the assertion that by express provisions in the English and French treaties, merchants are not permitted to act as consuls, when there are no such provisions in those treaties. It is the policy of those countries in China, as it will probably be of the United States, not to appoint merchants as consuls, save provisionally, but there is nothing in the treaties to prevent it. The undersigned, therefore, maintains the right of his country to appoint merchant consuls; but while the right is claimed, he, with your highness, can see reasons why, in China, it should not be exercised, except provisionally, and accordingly he has written to his government, earnestly requesting it to appoint salaried consuls in those few ports where, as yet, they have not been appointed. In the mean time, however, he has to request that those good men who have been appointed in those ports, while they hold the seals of office and flag of their country, shall be respected accordingly, and to inform your highness that any failure on the part of the local officers so to do will be resented as a violation of treaty rights and spirit—that of amity which now exists, and he trusts always will exist, between the two countries.
The undersigned reciprocates most cordially the sentiments of friendship for his country as indicated in the communication of your highness, and renews the assurances of his high consideration, &c.
Prince Kung, Chief Secretary, &c.
C.
Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letters dated September 27 and 30, respectively, informing me of your arrival on the coast of China, and of the nature of your original and late instructions.
I congratulate our countrymen in China that they are to have so efficient an officer as yourself to watch over their interests. I shall confer frankly and frequently with you, to the end that we may co-operate harmoniously in securing our treaty rights, and in maintaining our treaty obligations. I can well appreciate your feelings, as a gallant officer, in being so far from the great struggle at home; but still you are under the orders of your government, and have been assigned to the most important naval station there is. I shall go to Shanghai to meet the consuls some time next spring, where I hope to meet you. I hope then you may find it in agreement with your instructions to accompany me to the north, and to pay me a visit at Peking, where our flag is permanently placed. I thank you for your kindness in bringing my things from Macao. They arrived safely and promptly.
I have the honor to be, your obedient servant,
Commander D. McDougal, United States Steamer Wyoming.