No. 58.
Mr. Low to Mr. Fish.
Peking, February 22, 1873. (Received May 23.)
Sir: An incident having a bearing more or less direct upon certain questions soon to come up for discussion, and I hope settlement, happened a few days since.
On the 18th instant three members of the foreign office wrote to the German minister to say that they proposed to pay him a visit on the following day. The intended visit, they said, was for the purpose of performing a duty with which they had been charged by the prince—delivering into his hands a letter from their sovereign addressed to the Emperor of Germany. They further said that the letter in question was a reply to one which the German minister had handed to Prince Kung when the former returned from Europe last autumn.
Baron Rehfues replied, saying that it would afford him pleasure to receive the visit of the ministers, but it was impossible for him to say beforehand what course it would be proper for him to pursue with reference to the letter: he also said that it was not apparent how a reply could with propriety be made to a letter, a copy of which only had been delivered. He further remarked that the original of his letter of credence was still in his possession where, under his instructions, it must remain until a convenient opportunity should be afforded for delivering it to the Emperor in person.
[Page 149]Later in the day Baron Rehfues consulted his colleagues about the matter, and all agreed that he should avoid in the best manner possible, and in a way least likely to give offense, receiving the letter; for it was apparent that this move could have but one meaning—an attempt to forestall the action of the foreign representatives who would desire to present their letters of credence to the Emperor as soon as he assumed the duties of sovereign de facto.
It should be mentioned in this connection that Baron Rehfues holds three separate letters of credence, (from Prussia, the North German Confederation, and Germany,) copies of which were at different times placed in the hands of Prince Kung within the last ten years. No replies were ever sent or proposed to the first two, and none offered to the last until now, less than a week prior to the Emperor’s coronation.
After the consultation with his colleagues before referred to the German minister sent his interpreter the same evening to the senior of the three ministers before mentioned, to say that it would be more satisfactory if they were to come in the first instance without the letter. If, after hearing what they had to say about the matter it should be considered proper to receive and forward the document, it could be sent or brought to the legation afterward; if it should be decided that he could not receive it, the plan suggested would relieve the ministers from the disagreeable necessity of taking the letter back again to the prince. The interpreter was further directed to say that this suggestion was made after consultation with all his colleagues and that it had their cordial assent.
At the time appointed the three ministers came, but without the letter. The Baron explained to them, in considerable detail, his view of the whole matter, and gave the reasons why he could not consistently receive and forward the letter, chief among which was the fact that the original of the one to which this purported to be a reply was still in his possession, and which he expected to deliver to the Emperor in person very soon. The Chinese minister declined to venture an opinion as to the time when the Emperor will be willing to see the ministers of foreign governments, or to discuss any question except the particular business with which they had been charged, and all attempts to elicit an opinion as to what the Emperor will do when he comes to the throne next week, were fruitless. Their replies were constrained and evasive.
I have, &c.,