No. 67.
Mr. Low to Mr. Fish.
Legation of the
United States,
Peking, March 29, 1873.
(Received June 21.)
No. 244.]
Sir: After I had closed my No. 242, in which was
detailed the substance of what occurred at our conference with Prince
Kung on the 21st, we learned through an unofficial
source that the prince did not understand that he had made a definite
promise to lay the matter before the Emperor upon His Majesty’s return from
the tombs.
Under these circumstances the foreign ministers thought it advisable to seek
another interview before the prince left town, with a view of arriving, if
possible, at a clear understanding as to what he would do.
In response to our request for an interview the grand secretary and most of
the ministers of the yamên met us. The prince excused himself from
attendance, on the ground of having another engagement.
We reiterated in substance what we had said to the prince on the 21st instant
as to the importance of having an answer to the collective note within the
time which we had understood the prince to name. The Chinese ministers, on
the other hand, asserted that further time was important and necessary, but
offered no new reasons for delay.
In response we said that we had been ready to meet them and discuss all
points of difference; that we had done so with entire frankness; that there
did not seem to be any prospect of reaching a satisfactory conclusion by
continuing these discussions; it, therefore, did not appear that anything
would be gained on either side by further delay in submitting the question
to His Majesty.
In conclusion, we remarked that, if the prince would address us a note before
the Emperor left the capital, saying that, immediately on the return of His
Majesty, the question shall be taken up and decided, we would rest
content.
The grand secretary replied that he would communicate all we had said to the
prince; he also said that, while it was probable our request would be
complied with, he could not promise it.
On the 28th a note from the prince, embodying substantially what we had
suggested, reached us, translation of which is sent herewith, (inclosure No.
1.)
At the same time we received a semi-official note, inclosing a memorandum; a
translation of the latter accompanies this, (inclosure No. 2.) Its tone is,
you will observe, anything but conciliatory. It clearly intimates that it
would be derogatory to the dignity of the Emperor to receive foreign
ministers in accordance with the usages of western nations, and that, unless
we consent to kneel, audience is impossible. Were this document in the form
of an official communication it might, with propriety, be considered a
distinct refusal of the request for audience; in its present form the
Chinese ministers will not consider themselves or the government as bound by
it in any manner. In proof of
[Page 173]
this, and also to illustrate the devious ways of Chinese diplomacy, I may
mention that Chŭng Hou, one of the ministers of the yamên, when making an
unofficial call upon the French minister, to-day, remarked that the audience
question was in a good way, and that it might be considered practically
settled in accordance with our wishes; and, when, later in the day, the
British minister called on him to inquire what inference was to be drawn
from the language of the memorandum, he replied that it was solely intended
as an answer to the arguments contained in our memorandum submitted to them
on the 21st instant, (see inclosure No. 1 in 242,) and must not be taken as
an announcement of a decision to which the government had come upon the
subject.
I am disposed to regard Chŭng Hou’s declaration to Mr.
Geofroy as a favorable indication, although it
would be quite easy for his associates to repudiate it as entirely
unauthorized; nor is it impossible that he was sent with this assuring
message from no other motive than to keep the foreign ministers quiet during
the Emperor’s mortuary excursion.
I am, however, not without hope of a favorable result.
I have, &c.,
[Inclosure 1.]
Prince Kung to the
foreign ministers.
Prince Kung, chief secretary of state for foreign
affairs, herewith makes a communication in reply:
On the 25th February I had the honor to receive a collective note from
your excellencies requesting an audience of His Majesty to present your
congratulations on the occasion of his assuming the reins of
government.
Again on the 5th March I received a dispatch requesting me to name a time
for a conference. Accordingly at an appointed time an interview was had,
but there still remained necessity for further discussion on the
subject.
The prince would observe that China having been in relations of the most
perfect amity with foreign powers for a long time, the etiquette to be
observed on the occasion of an audience is of the greatest
importance.
At present, in consequence of the projected, visit of the Emperor to the
eastern tombs, there is a great accumulation of business; it will
therefore be necessary to await His Majesty’s return, when the prince
will consult with the ministers of the yamên and prepare a special
memorial for presentation to the throne.
The prince makes this reply for their excellencies’ examination, 28th
March, 1873.
To their excellencies, &c., ministers of Russia, Germany, the United
States, Great Britain, France.
[Inclosure 2.]
Memorandum forwarded by Prince
Kung and the ministers of the yamên to the
ministers of Russia, Germany, the United States, England, and
France, March 28, 1873.
[March 28,
1873]
The memorandum received from the minister* on 21st March refers again to
the passage in the 4th article of the British treaty regarding the
privileges to be accorded to the British minister.
It has already been explained by the prince that in respect of privileges
the Chinese government can only treat foreign ministers with the forms
heretofore in vogue in China; it cannot adopt new forms.
Foreign ministers have on different occasions in past times argued this
question, and the yamên has as often contended that, owing to the
difference between the forms and customs of China and foreign nations,
the subject would require mature deliberation before a satisfactory
arrangement could be looked for.
[Page 174]
In the various discussions that have taken place since the receipt of the
collective note it has never been asserted that the proposition had
taken the yamên by surprise. We only argued the necessity of
deliberation, the reasons for which have again and again been
stated.
That the ceremony proposed by the yamên* is proper between equal nations, and that in
exacting it China does not by this indicate that she regards the treaty
powers as dependent states, has been so fully explained in the reply to
the first memorandum presented by the ministers that it is unnecessary
to repeat what has been said upon this point.
As to the mission of Mr. Burlingame and the
ministers Chih and Sun, Mr.
Burlingame was informed by a dispatch from the
yamên, when going away, that inasmuch as the ceremonials of China and
foreign nations differ, and as China could not consent to make changes
which might be considered as affecting her dignity, even if exceptional
privileges were accorded the mission abroad, the Chinese government
would not be able to make such proceedings a precedent for her action.
In the different countries visited by the mission its reception, in
whatever form it may have been accorded, was the spontaneous act of the
governments visited; and each government knew at the time that in China
the customs and ceremonies were different. The Chinese government put no
constraint upon them, and when the foreign ministers argue that the
imperial government, having sent missions to the treaty powers, must now
be acquainted with the rules of intercourse prevailing between western
nations, the yamên might with propriety reply that the foreign
ministers, having been in China many years, must be even better
acquainted with the etiquette prevailing here by which intercourse
between China and equal nations has been regulated hitherto.
In view of the fact that Mr. Burlingame and
Chih and Sun conformed to
the customs of the countries they visited, it naturally follows that
foreign ministers in China should conform to the ceremonial of the
Chinese government. Audience of the sovereign, as it is justly stated in
Mr. Wade’s memorandum, is an evidence of friendly
relations. But assuming that friendly relations would be improved by
granting the request of the foreign ministers for audience of the
Emperor, and conceding that it would be offensive to the dignity of
foreign governments were their ministers to make the kotow, (prostration,) it should, on the other hand, be stated
that, as audience of the Emperor without kneeling would be offensive to
the dignity of China, it follows that this ceremony cannot be dispensed
with. When the minister styles that which is offensive to the dignity of
the Chinese government an evidence of friendly relations, is not this a
delusion? Even more unfair is it when speaking of a measure which it is
well known is impracticable, because it is, in the opinion of every
Chinese, derogatory to the dignity of his government to allude to this
popular feeling as “the attitude of the yamên.”
In a word, in whatever concerns the dignity of the state, each side must
take care that it does no injustice to the other. In this way only can a
satisfactory settlement of the question under discussion be looked for.
The yamên regards this as a matter of the highest importance, and would
regret to see negotiations looking to its proper adjustment end in
failure.
The foreign ministers well understand China. If they will look at both
sides of the question, will put themselves in place of the Chinese, will
consider the position of the prince and ministers of the yamên in this
discussion, they will appreciate the anxiety which this matter has
occasioned the yamên and deal with it reasonably.
The prince and ministers had no desire to enter upon this discussion;
they have, however, felt it their duty to reply to the second memorandum
presented by the minister.
The imperial decree of 12th October, 1867, (quoted memorandum of 21st,)
has never been received by this yamên, and they will be obliged by
information as to the quarter from which the foreign ministers obtained
it.†
