Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States, Transmitted to Congress with the Annual Message of the President, December 4, 1871
Mr. Low to Mr. Fish.*
Sir: In my No. 52, of February 20, reference was made to a communication I had received from the Foreign Office in relation to the missionary question. I have now the honor to inclose a translation of that document, together with my reply. The memorandum was drawn up by Wantsiang, one of the oldest and by far the ablest of all the Chinese ministers. He has had more to do with, and therefore understands better, the actual relations of China with foreign nations, than any of his colleagues, and is, I feel sure, anxious to prevent disturbances that may lead to international troubles. That he is sincere in his professed anxiety about the future, no one well acquainted with the real condition of affairs here will question; although it is not impossible that his fears are overstated for the effect such declarations may exert upon the foreign legations, and thus tend to bring about some kind of a compromise which will be useful in the future management of the missionary matter. My opinion that these apprehensions of future danger are genuine, and that this paper is not put forth at this time simply to try and protect themselves against further demands that the French government may make in the treaty revision which is soon to take place, is confirmed by the fact that about two years ago, this same Chinese minister addressed a private note of a similar character to the British minister. A copy of that note I have just now obtained, a translation of which I beg to send herewith. The answer of Her Majesty’s minister to the note I am not able to give, as it was made verbally, and not in writing. A careful reading of the memorandum clearly proves that the great, if not only, cause of complaint against the missionaries, comes from the action of the Roman Catholic priests and the native Christians of that faith; although the rules proposed for the government of missionaries apply equally to Protestants and Catholics. What reply to make, in view of the complication of the question, and the circumstances with which it was surrounded, did not seem quite clear. I would have preferred to have taken the President’s instructions before sending an answer, could they have been obtained within any reasonable time. To simply acknowledge the receipt of their note, and say that instructions had been asked for, would involve a delay of four or five months, and this delay would perhaps raise a hope, which could not be otherwise than illusive, that some at least of their propositions would prove acceptable. To reply and admit what I really believe to be true, that the Chinese have some ground of complaint, without being able to suggest a practicable remedy, would [Page 98] only do harm, and render the situation still more insecure; to simply say that, as their complaints are against the Roman Catholics, it is a matter which concerns the French alone, with which other nations have nothing to do, would have the effect to defeat what the other treaty powers have been anxious to bring about, viz, that when the Chinese have difficulties with one foreign nation, which are likely to involve all in trouble, they should frankly state their case, to be judged of by all, and in this way bring the force of an enlightened public opinion to bear upon the action of any government that attempts to oppress or deal unfairly. After carefully considering the whole question in all its bearings, I deemed it my duty to reply, without waiting for specific instructions. This I have done at some length, reviewing somewhat in detail the several points presented, reasserting the intention of the Government of the United States to claim for all its citizens entire exemption from the operation of Chinese law, and disclaiming any intention of screening natives from the obligations which they are under to their own laws and officials, pointing out the impracticability of many of the proposed rules, and suggesting personal discussion of this as well as all other matters of dispute. Had they stated their complaints in brief, without circumlocution, and stripped of all useless verbiage, they would have charged that the Roman Catholic missionaries, when residing away from the open ports, claim to occupy a semi-official position, which places them on an equality with the provincial officer; that they deny the authority of the Chinese officials over native Christians, which practically removes this class from the jurisdiction of their own rulers; that their action in this regard shields the native Christians from the penalties of the law, and thus holds out inducements for the lawless to join the Catholic church, which is largely taken advantage of; that orphan asylums are filled with children, by the use of improper means, against the will of the people; and when parents, guardians, and friends visit these institutions for the purpose of reclaiming children, their requests for examination and restitution are denied; and lastly, that the French government, while it does not claim for its missionaries any rights of this nature by virtue of treaty, its agents and representatives wink at these unlawful acts, and secretly uphold the missionaries. If the opinions of the Chinese officials could be stated in a direct and courageous way, instead of proposing rules for the governance of missionaries, they would demand a revision of the treaties by which the right of exterritoriality would be withdrawn from missionaries when they go beyond the places open to trade where foreign consuls reside. This is really what they mean, although they do not state it specifically.
I do not believe, and therefore I cannot affirm, that all the complaints made against Catholic missionaries are founded in truth, reason, or justice; at the same time, I believe that there is foundation for some of their charges. My opinions, as expressed in former dispatches touching this matter, are confirmed by further investigation. But while I see clearly the difficulties and dangers, candor compels me to say that the remedy seems to lie outside and beyond the scope of affirmative diplomatic action. Neither will sound policy, nor the moral and religious sentiments of Christian nations, sanction any retrogression, although trade and commerce might be promoted thereby; nor will the dictates of humanity permit the renunciation of the right for all foreigners that they shall be governed and punished by their own laws. But while insisting firmly upon these rights, all foreign governments should see to it that no claim be made by their officers, agents, or subjects, for an extension of their laws over the Chinese. They should also see that their treaties are [Page 99] honestly and fairly construed, claiming no rights which come of fraud, and conceding nothing that a just construction will grant. That a strict non-interference between native Christians and their rulers will subject the former to persecutions is possible, and even probable; but whether this course will not in the end subserve the cause the missionaries are laboring to promote better than the opposite one, is the question. I think it will. One has the sanction of treaty and law; the other is in violation of both. The remedy, so far as it lies in the power of foreign governments, is with France alone; and it behooves that power, for the sake of its own interests, as well as for the welfare of all foreign residents, to remove all just causes of complaint of the Chinese. Whether this can reasonably be expected depends upon the form and composition of the new government of France, and also upon the character of the representative which that government may send here.
Trusting that my action, as herein detailed, may meet with the approval of the President,
I have, &c.,
[Inclosures.]
No. 1. Note and memorandum from Wân-tsiang and Shin-kwei-fan to Frederick F. Low, February 13, 1871.
No. 2. Mr. Low’s reply.
No. 3. Note from Wân-tsiang to Sir Rutherford Alcock, late British Minister to China, June 26, 1869.
Wân-tsiang and Shin-kwei-fan to Mr. Low
Sir: In relation to the missionary question, the members of the Foreign Office are apprehensive lest, in their efforts to manage the various points connected with it, they shall interrupt the good relations existing between this and other governments, and have therefore drawn up several rules upon the subject. These are now inclosed, with an explanatory minute, for your examination, and we hope that you will take them into careful consideration.
With compliments, cards of
His Excellency Frederick F. Low, &c., &c., &c.
minute.
When the treaties between China and foreign countries were arranged, it was hoped that they would be advantageous to both parties and remain unaltered for a series of years. The stipulations which were then agreed upon by treaty have been since tested in all their bearings; and not only has it been shown that some of them cannot endure the trial, but already are they found to be inadequate to answer the exigencies which have arisen. In commercial matters, no serious causes of strife have ever arisen between this and other countries; but in respect to missionary operations, many and great difficulties have been continually coming up. When these operations were commenced, it was asserted that the object of missions was to exhort men to be good; but the propagation of the Roman Catholic faith in China among the people has been attended with constant troubles. Seing that no satisfactory arrangement of these has been reached, it is now of the first importance to adopt some measures which will bring these causes of dispute into some kind of harmonious and permanent settlement. This question has in reality a close relationship to the maintenance of peace and friend [Page 100] ship between China and foreign countries, and remotely even to the continuance of their commerce. This arises from the fact that it invariably happens among members of the Romish faith, that wherever the missionaries commence their work in the country the former get into quarrels with the people, which year after year come before the courts, and cannot in any way be amicably adjusted so as to maintain the peace. All this has, we think, long been known to your excellency, When the religion of the Lord of Heaven first came into China, it was known as the Si Ju, i. e. [the doctrine of] the Western Literati, and those who joined the sect for the most part quietly maintained their tenets; but those who have embraced it since the adoption of the treaties have been very largely of a disreputable character. This has caused people to regard with contempt the assertion that these doctrines are intended to reform mankind, and they are, consequently, totally disinclined to accept them. On the other hand, those who have joined them are led to trust much to the position and power of the missionaries, and misuse and oppress peaceable people. Such conduct still more embitters men’s minds against them, and prepares the parties for reciprocal dislike, which ere long culminates in open strife. The matter then comes into court, and the local authorities try to adjudicate it. The missionary takes sides, screens and helps his partisans, and this encourages the converts to oppose their rulers, which in turn stirs up the people the more against them all. From this it will surely come to pass that among the multitudes of disaffected men who are ready to foment rebellion in the land, criminals, litigious pettifoggers, and shysters who make strife, many will seek the shelter of the sect to create trouble. The popular indignation is already very deep, and will grow into a settled hatred, and this hatred will ere long break out into open enmity.
The people at large are ignorant of the distinction between the Protestants and the Romanists, but regard all [Christians] as belonging to the latter sect; just as they are unaware of the number and names of foreign countries, but look upon all persons from abroad as simply foreigners. If a riot should break out, therefore, every stranger in China would be exposed to the same peril. It would then extend to other provinces, whose people, though having themselves no cause of strife, would yet cherish suspicions from what they heard. How, under these circumstances, would it be possible to prevent serious disturbances rising into open voilence? It is true that there is a great difference between these sects, and a fact that each foreign nation has its own name; and it is not for want of repeated orders and instructions on the part of government that the people do not know this, but it is impossible to reach every house and hamlet.
During the past ten years, while the Prince and his associates have had the charge of affairs, this subject has been a cause of daily anxiety. The startling outburst at Tien-tsin last summer showed how the thing works. The guilty officials in that affair have been punished, the murderers have been executed, and an indemnity paid to the bereaved families; but all these steps to close it and do justly have by no means dissipated the anxiety which fills our minds lest the people and the Roman Catholics should again come into open conflict. If the course of action at Tien-tsin is to serve as a precedent in future, then greater difficulties will be experienced in repressing such risings, and every successive quarrel will become more and more exasperating and savage. In trying to look at the present aspect of this whole question, one is led to ask, how can the two parties be brought to live at peace? It seems to be plain, judging from the cases arising in the provinces, that the influential cause has really been the irritating conduct of the native Romanists, though it is granted that the people too, on their part, have cherished revenge and wreaked their anger on them. These cases do not seem likely to be settled amicably by the provincial authorities; but if, when they are brought before the native and foreign high officials, (at Peking or elsewhere,) these, knowing the acts of the Romish missionaries and their converts, decide them unjustly and without regard to the feelings of the people, and decline to agree to some rules for preserving peace and preventing evil, then, when there is an outbreak some bright morning, foreigners will only think how that single affair can be most quickly settled. They will not care at all whether the people consent to such proceedings, and only think how they can best put down the disturbance by the strong arm; and this course will influence the local authorities to do their best to settle it some way or other. If no well-understood mode of action can be agreed upon, and only temporary expedients are devised for a present exigency, then no permanent harmony can be thought of. If, while we at this time desire to discuss the causes and difficulties of this subject with foreign governments, in order to agree on some plan which will bring a lasting and advantageous settlement, they firmly refuse to discuss it in an impartial manner, there is no help. In such a conference, if one side desires to bring forward some impracticable rule and force its adoption, or make it a reason for declining to do anything, that course will most plainly show that he has no earnest desire to come to any arrangement at all.
It is the sincere desire of the Prince and his colleagues, in view of this whole question in all its bearings, to maintain peace with all foreign countries, and perpetuate the present friendly status; but, to this end, some discussion as to the mode of arranging [Page 101] it is indispensable. It is our belief that, in all western countries where missionaries live among the people, there must be some reasonable course agreed upon by which they can live together in harmony, and that this is the reason why the teachers and professors of Christianity do not desire to raise causeless trouble. We have heard it stated that in whatever country missionaries reside they obey the laws and customs of that country, and are not permitted to assert their independence of them. Whoever resists the laws of the land, or opposes the rulers; whoever takes upon himself power, or encroaches on the rights of others; whoever causes scandal to the reputation of families or persons; whoever maltreats people, or damages them in any way; or, lastly, whoever excites suspicion in the minds of others, and thereby ill-will and hatred are stirred up through the community; in short, whoever commits any illegal acts of this nature, is forcibly restrained. Therefore, those who build churches and preach Christian doctrines in China should chiefly take pains not to provoke the suspicion and dislike of the native gentry and people, but act so that mutual confidence may be strengthened. If this where done, they could easily arrange matters, and all would go on well; the two classes living side by side in friendly relations, and no attempt made to destroy churches and chapels. If the Romish missionaries will permit what properly comes into their calling to be usually known openly and fully by the people at large, the latter will then have no grounds for maligning and opposing them. Further, if they refuse to do what their converts wish them to do, and do not interfere with the jurisdiction of the local rulers, or trust to their power to carry their own ends against all opposers, a course which can only draw on them the angry hatred of gentry and people, then will the common people live at peace with them, and our officials will protect and defend them. If all the unlawful and irritating acts which have come to the ears of the Prince and his colleagues, as having been committed by Romish missionaries now in China, be true, then it cannot be denied that there is in this empire what amounts to a countless number of independent and uncontrolled hostile states. Can any man imagine that it will be possible long to maintain peace under such a state of things, and prevent both our officials and people from hating them cordially? We candidly say that we know of no way of preventing such a calamity. We fear, wherever the ignorant converts learn how the Tien-tsin affair has been settled; that their spirits will rise to greater excesses, which will stir up greater strife, and their vain boasts will arouse the bitter hatred of the common people to a more deadly degree, till the smothered irritation suddenly bursts out into riots and outrages. The local officials will be unable to manage such a flame; the high provincial authorities will find it too strong for them; and even the Foreign Office will be powerless to restrain and punish. If the Chinese people become of one mind on this point, and rise against these secretaries, then, though the Emperor himself send his high officers with troops to punish the offenders, it will be impossible to exterminate the people. Much less, when the rage of great multitude has been aroused, will they be inclined to quietly allow men to be executed. If at such a crisis the affair could not be restrained, and the two parties led to see that it was possible for them to live in harmony, then things have come to a bad pass; and the high officers to whom pertains the conduct of the relations between this and other countries cannot relieve themselves from great blame. The most vital point in happily conducting any business between two states is to get the good will of the people; for if this be not done, and one tries to coerce them, they will some time or other resist, and the highest powers of the state will find themselves unable to control this popular sentiment. If those in China, to whom the highest affairs of both parties have been intrusted, can now do nothing to restore harmony and prevent disasters, they should surely know that foreigners living among the natives and traders of every nation may ere long be in the midst of great peril. If they together cannot agree upon some mode of regulating this matter, it is clear that henceforth it will be impossible to regulate anything. The desire of the Prince and his colleagues to preserve friendly relations between this and other countries is so earnest that they now present eight rules, which they have drawn up as a means to this end, and inclose them for your excellency’s perusal, as well as to the other foreign ministers, desiring that the same may be fully examined.
eight rules, with remarks.
Rule first.
The establishment of asylums for training up children by the Romanists has hitherto not been reported to the authorities; and as these institutions are carefully kept private, this management continually gives rise to suspicion and excites ill-will. The best way to remove this feeling of mistrust among the people would be to close all foreign asylums. But if this cannot be done, let the names of those among the converts who are shown to be unable to rear their own children be reported to the local officials, giving the names of the children, the day they were taken into the asylum, and when they were sent home, or whether any other person had adopted them for their own children. By [Page 102] this means all the facts would be known. The children of natives who have not become Roman Catholics can be cared for by persons selected from among the gentry by the local rulers, under the direction of the provincial authorities. Each class will thus do its own good work in this line, and all suspicion will be allayed.
Note.—It is the rule in China that the conductors of foundling and infant asylums shall report all particulars concerning those who are received or discharged to the local authorities. The relatives can always come and see the children at the asylum afterward; when they have grown up, it is allowable for childless people to adopt them, or for their parents to take them home. Whatever might have been the sect they belonged to, they still adhered to it; for it was considered to be a good work enough to carefully nurture the children in the asylum. We have learned that the rules in other countries respecting such institutions are similar to those in force here. It is only those established in this land by foreigners which are not so regulated. In them, the time when the children are received is not inquired into, nor is any report made to the officials; nobody is allowed to adopt them after they enter, nor can their own parents ever reclaim them, nor even see them afterward. Is it surprising that such things excite suspicions among the people? It is on these grounds that, though it has been fully proved, since the riot at Tien-tsin, that there was in that city no gouging out of eyes, or cutting open hearts, even to this moment people retain their former fears and suspicions. It is indeed possible to stop their mouths, but no one can quiet their apprehensions; and who can assure us that another outbreak will not be caused by their mistrust? If the asylums now under the control of foreigners could be all closed, and they do all this good work in their own countries, then all the children of China needing this care could be reared in native establishments, of which there are many in every province. Why need foreigners trouble themselves about this work? for in showing that they have good desire to relieve the poor, they only arouse suspicion and ill-will. Therefore if each party would attend, in this respect, to their own modes and spheres of actions, it is quite certain that amicable relations would be less likely to be endangered.
Rule second.
Chinese women should not be permitted to enter churches and chapels, nor foreign women to propagate the doctrines in China; in order to exhibit the reserve and strict propriety of the tenets of Christianity, and prevent all reproach among the people.
Note.—Among the Chinese, the unsullied reputation and modest demeanor of females is very highly esteemed. The rules for separating the sexes are very strict, both in regard to their personal intercourse and the seclusion of their apartments. Since these requirements have been relaxed by the Romanists, women and girls go into their churches, which surprises all who hear of it; in these missionary-halls men and women, are not separated, and when they remain there a long time, the people are led to despise them, and suspect that everything there is not altogether as proper as purity requires.
Rule third.
Missionaries residing in China ought to conform to the laws and usages of the empire. They ought not to be permitted to set up an independent style and authority, nor should they resist the laws of the land, and oppose the orders of its magistrates; they should, not assume power, nor encroach on the rights of others, injuring their reputation and causing scandal in communities. They should not misuse or oppress the people, acts which lead men to suspect their designs, and provoke the indignant hatred of all classes; nor, lastly, should they malign the holy doctrines of the Chinese sages, and thus arouse public resentment. Every missionary ought to come under the authority of the local magistrates, therefore, in all these respects. Native Roman Catholics should be placed in the same position under the laws as other Chinese; and except in the contributions to theatrical plays and idolatrous processions and festivals, from which they are exempt, they are bound to perform their quota of public labor and calls for corvee and other services from the local magistrates. Still more are they required to pay their part of public taxes in money and kind, and their faith cannot be in the least degree pleaded as a reason for not paying their rents and assessments. In all these things, foreign missionaries are not to protect them or abet their resistance. Cases at law arising between the people and the converts are to be examined equitably, and then decided entirely by the local magistrates. No missionary can be permitted to take sides in them as a partisan, nor shall be conceal a plaintiff or defendant, when they are converts, and prevent their appearance in court, in order to embarrass the matter, and prevent it settlement. If he overpass his station, and interfere in this manner in legal affairs, the officials can send his letters or reports of his personal application to the high provincial authorities for transmission to the Foreign Office, and if the thing is proved the missionary shall be deported. In all cases connected with marriages, tenements, and lands, coming into court from among the Roman Catholics, if they endeavor [Page 103] to make their cases succeed against the people by the representations of the missionaries on their behalf, they shall be liable for doing this to heavier penalties from their own rulers.
Note.—In China every person belonging to the literary class, or who takes up the profession of a Buddhist, or Tauist priest, or even the Lamas, which do not belong to any strictly Chinese sect, all, without exception, obey the laws of the empire. Each member of these sects submits to the decision of the magistrates in all matters of right and wrong in which he may be interested. We are informed that in other countries, missionaries, living among the people, everywhere conform to the laws and usages of the land. They are not permitted to set up an independant style and authority, resisting the laws of the land, and opposing the orders of the magistrates. They do not there assume unauthorized power, nor encroach on the rights of others, injuring their good name and causing scandal; nor do they oppress and insult people, leading men to suspect their designs, and provoking the indignation and hatred of all classes. It is, therefore, but right that missionaries who come to China to practice their profession should, in these respects, be amenable to the authority of the magistrates. Is it not altogether out of their proper position for them to exhibit such hauteur and pride, and dispute precedence with the officials, as they do? Those natives who profess this creed, having always been Chinese subjects, are still more bound to observe their proper duties, seeing that they noways differ from other people. They ought, most assuredly, to live in friendly relations with their countrymen, whether in town or country, and cultivate that spirit of neighborly regard which is seemly; and whenever an occasion arises demanding united effort to accomplish some public work, or it is necessary for the whole village to join its men and means to effect an object, then, for them to cast about how they can avoid doing their share, and escape their obligations because of their faith, is to prejudge for themselves their own rights. Can they be surprised if others sharply judge their claims too? In all cases where they resist the payment of taxes, refuse to do government work, interfere with the orders of magistrates, or insult and oppress the people, the foreign missionary has no right to make himself a party to the case. Some of the converts are perverse and lawless men; and to secrete such fellows so that they shall not be delivered to the authorities for just punishment is really a most heinous offense. Everyman who joins the Romish Church desires to be protected: and in the provinces the missionaries take up all cases of complaint in which converts are implicated, and go into court to protest and interfere before the officials. There was a case in Szchuen, in which some women belonging to the church deceitfully refused to give up the crops of their land for rent, according to contract; and when the landlords asked it, they rose against the people and killed and wounded several. The French bishop presumed to issue his decision in the matter, and to this day none of these women have been examined or expiated their crime, which has, ever since the occurrence, greatly irritated the people of that province.
In Kweiehau Province the Romanists always designate themselves as belonging to the Roman Catholic Church, in every paper which they present in court in cases wherein they are parties, expecting thereby to get some help to succeed. Everybody can see how such a course only adds to the bitterness and trouble. Furthermore, in all parts of the land, whenever a betrothal has been arranged between two families, if one of them subsequently joins the church, but the other does not, then the former compels the latter to break the engagement and cancel the marriage. Sometimes, in a family, the father or elder brother joins, while the son or younger brother does not; whereupon, the father reports his son to the officers as disobedient, and the elder brother denounces his younger brother as insolent; and the missionary takes part in such affairs and helps his people. The irritation which a variety of such cases as those now adduced has produced among the people is intense.
Rule fourth.
The laws which govern foreigners and natives living together ought to be calculated to promote mutual peace and bear equally on each. For instance, in cases of a serious nature involving life, the law should require life to be forfeited; each side to punish its own criminals according to its own laws, that the feelings of justice in men may be satisfied. Whether it be the native or foreign official who judges the case, let him simply decide its criminality as it comes before him; and after that has been done, let there be no further examination as to the amount of compensation or indemnity to be paid. Still more, let it be settled that each case is to be confined to its participants, and no one is to be allowed to demand that the gentry or traders, who had nothing to do with it, pay an indemnity. When an official tries a case wherein Romish converts and natives are involved, whichever of these two parties are proven to have been the aggressor in wronging the other, let the same law apply to all, and the same sentence be meted out to each, so that no partiality be exhibited. Whenever a Romanist is arrested for any misdemeanor that involves a breach of the laws, whatever the offense may be, he shall be examined by the local authorities. If he be accused by others before the courts, he [Page 104] shall, as the law provides, he seized and tried; and in neither ease shall a missionary he permitted to protect converts from just sentence, or hinder their appearance before the authorities. In all cases where it can he shown that the missionary has screened persons in this way, or tried to thwart the orders of the officials, not only shall the real criminals he punished as the law directs, but the missionary himself shall suffer the same punishment for having resisted the course of law; or, if this cannot be, he shall be deported.
Note.—The missionary Mabileau was killed in a riot in Szchuen in the year 1867. The authorities had arrested a man named Yen, who, being proven to be guilty, was executed for the crime. But the missionary M. Mihière persistently declared that the gentry had stirred up the quarrel, and forced them to pay an indemnity of 80,000 taels. The fact is, that the row was caused by some ignorant poor men, who suddenly broke out into these violent acts; but to turn around and compel quiet scholars of respectability and wealth to pay so much money has, with other high-handed acts, provoked deep indignation.
Again, when the missionary M. Rigaud was killed in a riot in the province of Szchuen in 1869, there is not the least doubt that it was caused by the acts of the converts in compelling certain persons to annul a marriage contract. The governor general, Li Hung-chang, and the Manchu commander-in-chief, Chung, jointly examined into the affair, and they have long since condemned and executed Ho Tsai by decapitation, and Lin Fuh by strangling, proven to have murdered the missionary and converts. But [while the government did this] the converts who killed their countrymen, two men named Wang Hiah-ting and Chang Tien-hing, who, for several years, had been carrying on such a system of extortion, ravishing, plundering, burning, and killing, that they were long known as head rascals, have never yet been brought into court, although their crimes have been proved. In another instance the native priest, Tan Pu-chin, who headed a mob that killed Chao Yung-lin and over two hundred others in a hamlet, where they were surrounded, has, we are now informed by the missionary, M. Mihière, gone beyond sea, and there is no clew by which he could be traced. These things have still more aroused the hatred of the people of Szhuen.
Rule fifth.
Whenever a French missionary goes to any province to preach, the passport given to him should state the names of the province and prefecture to which he is going with great explicitness. If it mentions that his mission work is in a certain province, he should not be allowed to avail himself of the passport to secretly go elsewhere; and if it plainly describes the name and other particulars of the holder, he should not be permitted to turn it over to another man when he pleases. When he passes the barriers and customs-stations, such a passport should not enable him to take dutiable goods through to the loss and detriment of the revenue. On reaching his place of destination, he ought to present the passport to the local officers for verification. If they find that the name and the place, as given in the passport, do not tally with the bearer, or that it has been passed over to a Chinese convert to enable him to act as a missionary, in either case the passport shall be defaced and canceled. If it be further ascertained that money has been unlawfully paid for the transfer of the passport, or any other illegality has been connected with it, the pretended missionary shall be severely punished, and the foreign missionary sent out of the country. The name and surname of the missionary who holds a passport shall be written in Chinese characters, and these alone shall be regarded as evidence, so that he may be readily recognized wherever he goes. If the holder returns home or dies, or if he changes his calling and no longer preaches, then the passport should be returned to the Chinese to be canceled. In whatever province or place insurrection exists, it is forbidden to issue passports to foreigners to go to those regions, and therefore, hereafter, when a missionary shall request a passport for a province in which military operations are carried on, its delivery shall be suspended, in order that the real purpose of a passport (i. e., a paper to protect one) may be manifested.
Note.—In the record of cases connected with missions in Kweichau Province, there appears the name of the missionary Chao, but in the Foreign Office there is no record of a passport having been issued to a missionary of that name to go to Kweichau. In his note respecting it M. Devéria, the interpreter, [at the French legation,] says: “I have examined the old records, and find that there was a priest named Chao who died from the effects of his wounds; but the man here meant is a man named Jui-lo-sz, who obtained a passport on the 16th of August, 1865, and was therein wrongly named Chao.” It appears that on that day passport No. 325 was issued to a man named Jui-lo-sz to go to Szchuen, but in the list for Kweichau there are no persons named either Chao or Jui-lo-sz to be found. If, therefore, the names and surnames of missionaries and their destinations be mixed and changed in this manner, how can any trust be reposed in the passport as a surety for protecting its holder? In another case a missionary, M. Spilngaert, [he Who killed a Russian,] after acting in that capacity [Page 105] became a servant in the Prussian legation, but the passport granted at first was never afterward returned to this office. If passports can be thus inconsiderately transferred to other persons, or carelessly left to fall into other people’s hands, not only shall we have many troubles arising from persons assuming false names and characters, but if they get into the hands of brigands or thieves, the injury done to the reputation of His Majesty will be very serious; and where, then, will be the good name of the church?
Rule sixth.
The object of a missionary being to exhort men to reform and become good, he ought, before receiving a man into his church, to carefully inquire into his character, and learn whether he has been convicted of crime or any evil deed, and then accept or reject him, according to the facts. If he be accepted, then it should be so stated in the tithing-list of the place where he resides, just as is done with the members of monasteries and temples, so that evidence may exist upon the point. The number which each man can receive into the church should be limited, and he ought to report distinctly to the local magistrates on what day, month, and year he received each member, what had been his previous occupation, and that he had been convicted of no crime, nor taken an alias. In this way it would be easy to trace each person. If the member died or went away, this should likewise be reported. If no heinous misdemeanors can be alleged against a man when he is received, yet supposing he commits crimes after that date, he ought immediately to be excommunicated, and the same reported. Every month, or every quarter, the record of all these things should be made known to the local authorities for their inspection, just as is done by them with nunneries, temples, and houses of Budhists and Tauists. By this monthly or quarterly examination the reputation of the Roman Catholic sect will receive no injury, but its members will, on the contrary, be able to live at peace with all.
Note.—In 1866 the governor of Kweichau reported that in the district of Kwei-ting several brigands, headed by one Yen Shih-pao, bad combined with two Roman Catholic converts named Yuen Yuh-siang and Hia Ching-hing, and under the guise of that sect had led a party of fellows, which attacked and killed Wang Kiang-pao and Tso Yenshau, severely wounded three others, plundered the houses of their contents, and carried off all the cattle and horses. In 1869 the same dignitary reported that the district magistrate of Tsun-i had sent him a public statement in which the writers declared that four men, named Sung, Tang, Tan, and Kien, who had formerly been rebels and pretended generals, bad been received among the Roman Catholics. The injury inflicted upon the towns and villages since from these men was quite incalculable. There were also other restless disturbers of the peace in the neighborhood of Tsun-i, named Yang, Lin, Ching, Hioh, and Chao, who all joined themselves to the Romanists and managed everything connected with the church. They insulted and oppressed the orphans and the helpless, extorted money from the ignorant villagers, went in and out of the public courts, taking the oversight of such cases as related to their co-religionists, as if it was their business. If the magistrate tried to examine a case in which a Romanist was involved, and found that his case was groundless, then Yang and his comrades, at the head of a crowd of converts, would violently rush into the hall of justice and compel the magistrate to reverse his sentence. At other times, when these sectaries were detained under the surveillance of the police, these men would present the missionary’s card and demand that the prisoners be instantly released. The eases, in short, are very numerous in which they have wrongfully possessed themselves of people’s property, claimed their wives or daughters, or even destroyed their lives.
Rule seventh.
Missionaries living in China should conform to its usages and regulations, and carefully refrain from encroaching on the position of others, or overstepping their own proper functions. They should not presume to use official seals to stamp their letters, or write formal dispatches to officials of any rank. If they have any matters of their own to bring before the magistrates, not cases which involve others, or litigations of other people, let them do so in the same manner that native literary men adopt in addressing those in office, and state their affair clearly in the form of a petition, when it will be attended to and decided. If they wish to have a personal interview with the high authorities, they should adopt the ceremonies of the country and follow the practice of its literary men. Also, when they request an audience of the local magistrates, they should observe proper etiquette, and not rudely march into the public courts, to the great disturbance of official business.
Note.—In 1867 the Manchu commander-in-chief at Chingfu, in Szchnen, reported that the French Bishop Sinchon addressed the official board of consultation of that province in dispatches which he stamped with an official seal cast for the purpose. In 1868 Bishop Taury in Kweichau presumed to send an official communication on terms of equality to the Foreign Office, by the government post, in which he took upon himself [Page 106] to commend and ratify the acts of Towan, a former intendant there, and other officers and requesting that promotion and reward might he conferred on them. In Shantung a Romish missionary had the boldness to style himself a siun-fu, or governor. In the provinces of Szchuen and Kweichau the missionaries have gone to the length of asking that certain magistrates he degraded from office, because of their management of missionary cases—acts which not only encroach on and diminish the power of the rulers, but, still more than that, usurp the dignity of His Majesty. How can such unjustifiable and impertinent proceedings as those here mentioned do otherwise than cause general indignation?
Rule eighth.
In order to bring about mutual good feeling, it is proposed that hereafter no Roman Catholic missionary shall of his own motion demand that a place shall be given up to him because it was once a church. When land is to be bought for the purpose of erecting a church upon it, or a building is to be rented for a hall, by the Romanists, it is necessary to go in company with the real owner of the property to the local authorities of the place, in order to ascertain beforehand that there is no difficulty arising from fung-shui. If the magistrates consent, and the people offer no counter-representations, and do not dislike the proceedings, then the proposition can be carried out in accordance with the rule agreed upon in 1865. If the place is bought, it must be mentioned in the deed of sale, plainly and explicitly, that the property belongs to the congregation of Chinese Roman Catholics; it is forbidden to falsify names, and make the purchase and get hold of it by using other names. It is also disallowed to employ crafty natives to deceive in these transactions, and by their help to secretly get the property transferred, [without notifying the magistrates.]
Note.—Roman Catholic missionaries have long resided in China, and we wish that they and the people may confide in each other, and not so act as to excite the anger or settled dislike of those around them; for then all parties can live together without suspicion. But now many things are done by the Roman Catholics which greatly irritate the people and lead to strife; as, for instance, those proceedings connected with the restoration of church property. In late years, whenever they have demanded that houses and churches should be restored, they have never given a thought as to whether it annoyed the people of the place, but they have peremptorily demanded that the places be restored to them. They would even designate fine and elegant houses occupied by the gentry, and insist on their rendition, saying that anciently a church stood there, and thus compel the occupants to give them up. In some cases, these spots greatly interfered with the public service or dignity, or there was a clubhouse or hall of some kind, a temple, or other building which the whole community held in the highest veneration and carefully kept. These would be unscrupulously demanded and forcibly taken for the use of the church. Moreover, there are many buildings, which in former years really were churches, but in subsequent days were used for other purposes, or which were sold by members of the sect, and in process of time have since been sold by the people again and again, and now do not all belong to one person, or places which have been repaired and improved at a large expense, made like new houses; all these are known to have been forcibly demanded and obtained by the missionaries without paying aught for them. In cases where the buildings had become ruinous and dilapidated, they would demand that they be made habitable at the public expense. These doings have exasperated the people at large, and the two parties look at each other with bitterness. If they come to be actual enemies, how can they be expected to live together without coining to open rupture?
The points which have been discussed in this paper only relate to a part of the whole subject; but they go to prove clearly the improper conduct of the Roman Catholic missionaries, and that the converts cannot live amicably with their countrymen. Everybody knows that severe diseases require quick remedies, and if it is expected that these two parties are to get along well with each other, [something should be done,] and not permit things to go on until the acts of the missionaries seriously impair the amicable relations now existing between China and foreign countries. The other causes of complaint from various provinces are quite numerous, but we have not time to-detail them in full. Good and bad people are found in the world, and when the one have been extirpated, then it encourages and soothes the other. For instance, if villanous traders are severely dealt with, you protect and honor the upright merchants by such action. So with the missionaries. If they do not take the trouble to inquire into the character of people, then every miscreant will seek admission into their church, and take advantage of his position to involve or ruin the honest and good. Such men will seek to oppose the officers and rouse the gentry, which will exasperate the people at large still more, till all over the empire they will come to hate foreigners as the inhabitants of Tien-tsin do. In such a posture of affairs, the commands of the Emperor himself would be disregarded, and the danger to everybody would be most imminent. In proposing these [eight] rules the government still designs to exert itself to protect [Page 107] these men, and at all times will try to maintain just treatment toward all. If the missionaries will honestly adhere to them, no difficulty is likely to arise, and all parties can be at peace; but if they will not accord with them, nor even act as required by the rules of their own sect, they can no longer propagate their doctrines in China. His Majesty’s government desire to treat all Roman Catholics the same as they treat their other subjects, and make no difference between them. This decision is not come to because they wish to prohibit mission work in China, but simply because the missionaries do not attend to their proper place and functions. The way the Romanists now stir up and befool people will surely result in some serious disasters on the part of the latter; and if these burst out in many places in open violence, it is not unlikely that the government will be altogether unable to protect anybody. There is, therefore, no better way than for us to clearly state the case, as we have now done, before anything happens.
[Inclosure No. 2.—Dispatch No. 56.]
Gentlemen: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your note of the 13th ultimo, to which was appended a memorandum setting forth somewhat in detail the causes of discontent among the people, and their ill-will toward the missionaries, and appealing to the representatives of all the treaty powers to take the subject into consideration, with a view of devising measures which will have a tendency to remove the difficulties and assure a continuance of peace between China and foreign nations. To accomplish this, eight rules are proposed by you for the better regulation of missionary enterprises. These rules have been drawn up by you in consultation with all the members of the Foreign Office, and will, if accepted and adopted by the western nations, in your opinion, remedy the evils complained of. By way of illustrating your position, showing that foreign missionaries are responsible for much of the ill-will of the Chinese, and proving that additional safeguards are necessary to preserve peace, instances are cited of illegal and unwise action on the part of missionaries.
I have read with attention all the papers you sent, and have given to their contents the most careful consideration.
It is a noticeable fact that, among all the cases cited, there does not appear to be one in which Protestant missionaries are charged with violating treaty, law, or custom. So far as I can ascertain, your complaints are chiefly against the action and attitude of the missionaries of the Roman Catholic faith, and as these are under the exclusive protection and control of the government of France, I might with great propriety decline to discuss a matter with which the Government of the United States has no direct interest or concern, for the reason that none of its citizens are charged with violating treaty or local law, and thus causing trouble. But fully appreciating the force and gravity of your observations when you affirm that involved in this question are the interests of all foreign residents in China, and upon its proper management and solution depend, in a greater or less degree, the safety and well-being of all, whether merchants or missionaries, without regard to nationality or religion, I feel justified in complying with your expressed desire, that all the representatives of the treaty powers will consult upon these grave questions. I shall, therefore, with entire frankness, give you my opinions upon the several points raised by you.
I cordially reciprocate the sentiment when you say that it is the earnest desire of the Prince and his associates to maintain peace between China and all foreign nations, and entirely concur in the opinion that when apprehensions of trouble arise, which may, if not averted, impair friendly relations, it is the part of wisdom and prudence to state frankly the disturbing causes, and together with the foreign representatives discuss, with a view to adoption, suitable measures for remedying the evils. Such discussions can do no harm and may lead to the best results.
Of the truth or justice of the complaints made to you by the provincial officers against the Roman Catholic bishops and priests, the undersigned cannot presume to judge. It is, however, not impossible or hardly improbable that the local officials, who think that their authority has been improperly resisted, and themselves insulted, may have overstated the discontent of the people, and have reported isolated cases of misconduct as the rule of missionary action.
It is also a noteworthy fact that substantially all the instances mentioned, where trouble has occurred through the alleged evil practices of the priests and Christians, are confined to the provinces of Szchuen and Kweichau—provinces far remote from the residence of consuls, merchants, and foreigners generally—which renders it difficult to obtain evidence as to the actual facts, except from the principals and their adherents on either side.
In this view, it is unfortunate that merchants are not allowed to reside there also, [Page 108] and that these places are not open to the residence of foreign consuls, who could look after and arrange such difficulties as they arise; and I would suggest that you take into careful consideration what has so often been urged upon the attention of the government, and see whether the opening of these disturbed districts to trade and the residence of foreign consuls would not be the best means you could adopt to prevent missionary troubles.
But, conceding that the charges you make are substantially correct, and the troubles as great as you represent, the remedy, it appears to me, is quite simple, requiring no extraordinary rules or regulations. You say that the trouble arises chiefly from the illegal acts of the native Christians, and the attempt on the part of the missionaries to shield these people from the just punishments for their crimes. In reply, I have to say that the Government of the United States, while it claims to exercise, under and by virtue of the stipulations of treaty, the exclusive right of judging of the wrongful acts of its citizens resident in China, and of punishing them when found guilty according to its own laws, does not assume to claim or exercise any authority or control over the natives of China. This rule applies equally to merchants and missionaries, and so far as I know all foreign governments having treaties with China adhere strictly to this rule. In case, however, missionaries see that native Christians are being persecuted by the local officials on account of their religious opinions, in violation of the letter and spirit of the XXIXth article of the treaty between the United States and China, it would be proper, and entirely in accordance with the principles of humanity and the teachings of their religion, to make respectful representation of the facts in such cases to the local authorities direct, or through their diplomatic representative to the Foreign Office; for it cannot be presumed that the imperial government would sanction any violation of treaty engagement, or that the local officials would allow persecutions for opinion’s sake, when once the facts are made known to them. In doing this the missionaries should conform to Chinese custom and etiquette, so far as it can be done without assuming an attitude that would be humiliating and degrading to themselves.
With reference to Rule 1, as proposed, the undersigned is not prepared to speak. The American missionaries have no establishments of the kind alluded to, and he cannot assent to or dissent from a proposition which has for its object the regulation and government of asylums of a distinct religious sect, under the special protection of another nation. He would, however, observe in this connection, that there are Roman Catholic orphan asylums in all parts of the United States, over which the Government exercises no surveillance or control; and, instead of arousing suspicion and hatred, these charities are so well and favorably known that they merit praise and commendation, and receive contributions for their support from both government and people, irrespective of religious creed, wherever they are located. It would, I think, be well for the government of China to expend its energies in the more weighty concerns of administration, and allow charities of all kinds, which have for their object the amelioration of the condition of children or adults, the largest freedom compatible with the safety and well-being of the people.
Rule 2 is without apparent reason, and unjust. Among all western nations females attend churches in common with the males, and their religious teachings conduce to the highest good. Their attending church in company with parents, husbands, and friends should in no manner give rise to suspicions. On the contrary, their presence in such places is a guarantee against illegal combination or plots against the state or individuals. In western lands it is considered of the highest importance that females be educated in literature and religion, so that they may be fitted to rear families who will become useful and honest members of society. So fixed his this principle become in all Christian countries that a proposition of this character will be regarded as an unfriendly interference to prevent the carrying into effect, in its proper sense, Article XXIX of the treaty before alluded to. I deeply regret that such a rule should have been proposed. Instead of being accepted by the treaty powers, the mere mention of it will, I fear, cause some to doubt the good faith of the government and people of China in their profession of a desire to observe all treaty stipulations.
Rules 3 and 4 appear to me entirely unnecessary. Missionaries have no right under the treaties to do the things complained of; hence any additional regulations to prevent such acts are superfluous.
When native Christians offend they are subject to, and under the control of, the laws and officials of their own country; nor do I see how it is possible for the missionaries to oppress the people in any way. In the United States every person is allowed the largest liberty in the discussion of all subjects pertaining to government or religion. In this way the people hear all sides, and are the better able to judge between the true and the false. If the Buddhist, Taoish, Confucian, and Christian faiths could all be explained without hinderance, the people will judge of the merits of each and adhere to the one that seems to be the most reasonable and true. Each sect will find adherents and followers, but there need not on this account arise ill-will, jealousy, or hatred between the followers of these sects. It would be well, I think, for the government to make further inquiries into the customs of foreign nations, and see whether it would [Page 109] not promote a better understanding between natives and foreigners, without weakening the government or lessening the respect of the people for their rulers, if greater freedom were allowed in the worship of all religions, and the adherence to any sect the people choose without interference on the part of the government.
If native Christians are exempted from the payment of contributions for theatrical plays and processions it shows a spirit of justice on the part of their rulers, and should in no way cause them to evade the payment of their proportion of other proper taxes and assessments; nor should missionaries uphold them in such acts. But foreign missionaries, while it is their duty to refrain from any interference between natives and the officials, except to explain cases when explanations will be of service to enable justice to be done, and which the officials will, without doubt, always be glad to have if they are honest, cannot be held subject to Chinese law except in the way of arrest and delivery to the consular officers of their own country, according to the rule laid down in the treaties. In the cases cited which occurred in Szehuen, where it is charged that the Christian culprit ran away and evaded justice, the proper officers are, it seems do me, alone responsible for all this. The missionaries had no right to shield, screen, or secrete these people, nor should they be censured if they refuse to act the part of police officers in the arrest of Christians. This all belongs to the local officials to do. If the men were guilty, I fail to see any good reason why they were not arrested and punished the same as Ho Tsai and Liuh Fuh, if the officers had done their duty.
Rule 5 seems to me proper enough, except that portion authorizing a refusal of passports for provinces where rebellion may exist. If consented to, this might practically nullify the whole passport system provided for in the treaties. Missionaries will hardly take the risk of going into districts where rebellion is rife; and if they do, on them will fall the penalty of such rash acts. In the last ten years, during which passports have been granted, no cases have been reported in which the holders have gone among rebels to aid them in any way.
Rule 6. I fail to see what practical good would come from a registry of the members of each church, were it assented to. It is not to be supposed that all enrolled as members of the Buddhist, Taoish, Confucian, or Christian sects are pure and honest men; nor should the fact of their being so enrolled exempt them from arrest and punishment in case they commit offenses against the laws.
In the cases mentioned that happened in Kweichau in 1866 and 1869, instead of making these a ground of general complaint to the Foreign Office, why did not the governor cause the arrest and punishment of the brigands? Their profession of Christianity certainly did not exempt them from the just consequences of their evil deeds. It would seem that the officers, instead of attending to their own proper duties in the administration and due execution of the laws, chose to allow these people to escape for the purpose of reporting these cases, and on them founding a general charge against Christianity and the missionaries. If lawless people, whether Christians or non-Christians, are allowed to oppress the orphans and the helpless, deceive and exact from the villagers, and assume improper positions in the counts, instead of listening to such complaints from those whose duty it is to prevent and punish such outrages, the officials should, it seems to me, he summarily deprived of their rank and severely punished for allowing these things to go on.
Rules 7 and 8. If the missionaries assume to exercise powers unauthorized by treaty and regulations, use seals, or adopt a style in addressing the officials in any way unbecoming, the representative of the government to which they belong, upon a proper statement of the facts, would issue such orders as would prevent a repetition of such improprieties. In case of any gross breach of etiquette by an American missionary, I should, upon the fact being made known to me, take steps to prevent such occurrences in the future. It is the custom of the American missionaries to use caution when they go to a new place to rent rooms or houses, and they endeavor by all means to so manage as to gain the good will of the people.
Instances have occurred where they have been prevented from renting or buying property for no other reason, apparently, than a disposition to embarrass and hinder them in their preaching. Many cases of this kind have occurred which would have formed just grounds for complaint to the Foreign Office. I have, however, refrained from making complaints of this character, as I felt sure that as soon as the real purposes of the missionaries became better understood there would be less and less opposition to them on the part of the people. With reference to the restoration of property which was confiscated many years ago, and, of the use of which its proper owners have been deprived, that is a matter which concerns the missionaries of the Roman Catholic faith alone, and must be arranged with the representative of France. It is, perhaps, but natural that disputes and difficulties should occur in the settlement of such a question. No fixed rule is possible which will apply in all cases of this nature. Nothing but mutual forbearance, and a desire to settle amicably, in a spirit of justice, these questions, will be likely to accomplish a satisfactory result, The experience gained in the solution of these questions will, undoubtedly, prove a useful [Page 110] lesson to both officials and people. It will clearly demonstrate that unjust and unlawful persecutions and confiscations will require reparation sooner or later, and prove that the best way to avoid the difficulties that have caused so much anxiety and trouble during the past ten years is to act justly toward all people and all religious sects; then foreign nations will have no claims of this nature to urge.
To assure peace in the future, the people must be better informed of the purposes of foreigners. They must be taught that merchants are engaged in trade which cannot but be beneficial to both native and foreigner, and that missionaries seek only the welfare of the people, and are engaged in no political plots or intrigues against the government. Whenever cases occur in which the missionaries overstep the bounds of decorum, or interfere in matters with which they have no proper concern, let each case be reported promptly to the minister of the country to which it belongs. Such isolated instances should not produce prejudice or engender hatred against those who observe their obligations, nor should sweeping complaints be made against all on this account. Those from the United States sincerely desire the reformation of those whom they teach, and to do this they urge the examination of the Holy Scriptures, wherein the great doctrines of the present and a future state, and also the resurrection of the soul, are set forth, with the obligation of repentance, belief in the Savior, and the duties of man to himself and others. It is owing, in a great degree, to the prevalence of a belief in the truth of the scriptures that western nations have attained their power and prosperity. To enlighten the people is a duty which the officials owe to the people, to foreigners, and themselves; for if, in consequence of ignorance, the people grow discontented and insurrection and riots occur, and the lives and property of foreigners are destroyed or imperiled, the government cannot escape its responsibility for these unlawful acts.
If the danger is as great as the contents of your Communication would appear to indicate, and that, owing to the ignorance of the common people, all will be likely to suffer, irrespective of nationality or religious belief, then it certainly is a matter of great concern to all foreign governments, which should lead them to consult and seek means to prevent, if possible, such a catastrophe, and also adopt measures for defending their rights under the several treaties.
If I have failed to comprehend fully the difficulties and dangers which surround the situation which you have endeavored to point out, or if I have omitted noticing any point of importance, I am quite ready and willing to meet you and the other members of the Foreign Office, and discuss these as well as other questions of difference between your country and foreign nations, in a spirit of forbearance, with an earnest desire to so arrange and settle all questions that peace and mutual confidence may long continue.
With renewed assurances of regard and consideration, I have the honor to remain your excellencies’ obedient servant,
Their Excellencies Wân-tsiang.
Shin-Kwei-fan.
[Inclosure No. 3.—Dispatch No. 56.]
Copy of a confidential note addressed by the Chinese minister Wân-tsiang to Sir Rutherford Alcock, late British minister at Peking.
The writer again addresses. [Sir R. Alcock.]
The object of foreigners who enter the interior to propagate their doctrines is the exhortation of men to virtue. But among their converts there are evil-disposed and well-disposed. [The latter,] relying on their creed as a sort of magic spell which shall protect them, by their conduct bring the preaching of Christianity into such discredit that [the people] are unwilling to allow the missionary to remain in any place that he goes to. Add to this that the missionary only thinks of the number of converts he can make; he makes no inquiry into private character, but receives and enrols all [who come.] Having entered the [Christian] society, the good are bent, no doubt, on being good; but on the other hand, the evil make [their religion] a pretext for defrauding and oppressing unoffending people, till, by degrees, indignation and rage reach a point at which the relations of the two parties become as those of fire and water. At the present time, as the British minister must doubtless be well aware, case after case of murder has occurred, the consequence of feuds between Christians and non-Christians. Although the creeds of the various foreign countries differ in their origin and development from each other, the natives of China are unable to see the distinction between them. In their eyes all [teachers of religion] are “missionaries from the west,” and [Page 111] directly they hear a lying story [about any of these missionaries,] without making further and minute inquiry [into its truth] they rise in a body to molest him.
The Yang-chow affair is plain evidence or this. Now, if no preventive measures be taken, some great catastrophe will inevitably arise.
Regulations ought, therefore, to be drawn up with such care as shall enable them to protect native Christians from making their religion a pretext for extorting money from honest people, or the non-Christians from taking advantage of their numerical superiority to defraud and oppress the Christians, which shall, besides, bring missionaries, even as the priests of the Buddhist and Taoist sects, under the jurisdiction of the local authorities.
Seeing that missionaries wish to reside in China, and that their doctrines may gradually be propagated far and wide, they cannot wish the Chinese to look upon them as differing from themselves. They ought, therefore, to put themselves on the same footing as Chinese subjects. Buddhism is also a creed of western origin, but the reason why its followers have so long been at peace with the Chinese, each party adhering to his own religion, is this: that although there is a difference of religion, the propagators of this creed are, as well as the others, under the control of the local authorities; and so in Confucianism, the system most esteemed in China, when such men as Chin-Shih and Hau-lin, (those who have taken the highest degrees,) after having filled official positions, return home or become the heads of schools, they become subordinate, as they were before [they took office,] to the local authorities. This is always the rule. At the present time foreign missionaries as a general rule adopt the Chinese dress, but they do not [at the same time] submit to Chinese law. They thus begin by holding themselves as outside, [the pale of the law,] and show to others that they are not to be treated as ordinary people; and the native Christians go further. They defraud and oppress ordinary subjects of the country, or withstand and disobey the authorities. [Such being the case,] it is not to be wondered at that men become indignant, and that surprise is everywhere manifested.
But let only this change be made, viz, that [missionaries] be placed under the control of the local authorities, (who must not be allowed to be vexatious in their treatment of them,) and the result will be that Christians and non-Christians will be placed on a just level vis-à-vis each other, and no trouble will arise from unexpected sources.
The missionary question moreover gravely affects the whole question of commercial relations. Such measures must, therefore, be devised in time that shall insure the maintenance of everlasting and sincere friendship.
The writer hopes for a reply.
-
This correspondence has been transmitted to the ministers of the United States in London, Paris, Berlin, St. Petersburg, Vienna, and Rome, with similar instructions in each case. The instructions to General Schenck were as follows:
“Department of State, “Washington, October 30, 1871.
“General: I transmit herewith for your information, and for the information of the British government, the copies of a correspondence between Mr. Low, the minister of the United States at Peking, and this Department. You will transmit one of these copies to Lord Granville.
“I am, sir, &c.,
“HAMILTON FISH.
“General Robert C. Schenck.”
↩