Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States, Transmitted to Congress, With the Annual Message of the President, December 1, 1873, Part I, General Correspondence; and Papers Relating to Naturalization and Expatriation, Volume I

No. 77.
Mr. Low to Mr. Fish.

Legation of the United States,
Peking, June 27, 1873. (Received August 20.)

No. 268.]

Sir: In my No. 258 of the 16th ultimo I stated that discussion concerning the audience question was substantially closed, and that a protocol of the recent conferences between the Chinese and foreign ministers had been prepared and would without delay be presented in a memorial by the yamen to the throne. A copy of the protocol accompanied that dispatch.

The following day the foreign ministers received a note from the yamên inclosing the draft of what purported to be a précis of the protocol which the yamên had drawn up, and which they said it was proposed to embody in their memorial to the throne instead of sending the original document, as had been agreed upon.

The reason assigned for this proceeding was that the protocol was too long for the Emperor to read. A copy of the precis is herewith inclosed. (Inclosure 1.)

Instead of the precis being a fairly accurate summary of the contents of the protocol, we found it to be a grossly inaccurate résumé of our recent debates. It contained every suggestion and admission of the foreign ministers that had a bearing favorable to their view of the case, and everything that did not tend to sustain the pretensions put forward by the government was carefully excluded. In addition, they had embodied in it every written and verbal suggestion made at the conferences, before the discussion of the points embodied in the protocol. As an illustration of this, and also to show how these people seize upon the veriest trifles to try and sustain their superior dignity, I may mention that at an interview with the prince in March last, when he was insisting strongly that foreign ministers should kneel when in the presence of the Emperor, asserting that this was a great concession, and complaining that we offered no compromise whatever, we replied that we were ready and willing to conform to Chinese etiquette so far as this could be done without compromising our own self-respect or the dignity of our governments. As an evidence of our disposition we remarked that, while it was usual for a minister to make three reverences when approaching the head of a foreign state at a reception, we would, if so desired, when presented to the Emperor, make five, in token of wishing him the “five happinesses.”

The prince received this suggestion with a smile of derision; he evidently thought it a pleasantry, and the only remark he made in response was that “a hundred reverences were not equal to one kneeling.” The subject never was referred to afterward, nor was any mention made of it in the protocol; hence our surprise when we saw that matter brought forward again.

The two positions the Chinese ministers have labored to maintain in all our discussions are:

• First. That the admission of foreign ministers to a personal audience of the Emperor of China is a courtesy which can with equal propriety be granted or declined, and not a right which foreign governments can claim for their representatives.
• Second. That the present reception (if accorded) shall serve as a precedent for the future. In other words, when a new minister comes he will not be entitled to ask for an audience by himself, but will wait until there are five, (the number that joined in the collective note of 24th February,) when all will be received together.

In our oral discussions with the Chinese ministers, and also in our written memorandums submitted to them, I and my colleagues have firmly maintained that every foreign minister who brings with him a letter from the head of his government, addressed to the Emperor of China, is entitled by the laws and usages of nations to a personal audience of His Majesty within a reasonable time after he shall have notified the foreign office of his arrival at Peking. And in response to their suggestion that a Chinese minister when he goes abroad may with propriety decline a reception tendered him by the head of the state to which he is accredited and still continue to perform the duties of his office, we said the option did not rest with the minister; that by the usage of nations a minister could not enter upon his duties until after he had delivered his letter of credence and been formally recognized by the head of the state, and that should he decline to deliver his letters accrediting him as a diplomatic agent to the chief authority of the state, he would be liable to have his passports returned and ordered to leave the country.

The making of the précis was, under the circumstances, an unworthy effort on the part of the yamên to lay before the Emperor and the high officials an unfair statement of the case, and the submitting of a copy for the inspection of the foreign ministers was an attempt to get an indirect assent to what we had stoutly denied in our discussions on the subject.

On the 19th May, at our request, we met the Chinese ministers, and repeated, in a manner not to be misunderstood, the statements and arguments used on previous occasions touching these two points. We declined to accept the précis as a fair statement of the case, and requested them to submit the full text of the protocol to the Emperor; and, to guard against further misapprehension and trouble, we concluded to address a note to the same effect to the prince. (Inclosure 2.)

To this the prince replied on the 27th May. (See inclosure 3.)

On the 28th we sent Mr. Bismarck (our general interpreter) to the yamên to say on our behalf that the prince’s note had been received, and that we had nothing, in addition to what had already been said to his imperial highness and the ministers of the yamên, to say in reply, and that we hoped for a definite answer to our request for audience without further delay.

After that no communications passed between the foreign ministers and the Chinese government until the 15th June, when a note was received from the prince inclosing copy of a decree according the audience, and a letter from the ministers of the yamên asking us to meet them on the 16th instant to discuss with a view of settling the question of ceremonial to be observed.

I should observe in this connection that the decree of the Emperor, before referred to, was published in the Official Gazette of the 15th instant.

The programme of the ceremonies submitted at the interview on the 16th was in many respects objectionable. Had they been allowed to carry it out it would have gone far to nullify the good effects of the audience, so far as the masses of the people are concerned. The discussion that ensued was by far the warmest of any that has occurred; it continued for five hours, and we separated without having reached any conclusion whatever.

On the 18th instant Chunghow, late embassador to France, and now one of the ministers of the yamên, visited M. Geofroy to ascertain whether a settlement of the difficulty was possible, and through them arrangements were made for a renewal of the negotiations.

On the 23d a general conference was held, at which all the points of difference were discussed, and an agreement come to on all except two. Since then these have been satisfactorily arranged, and the 29th instant has been named for the reception.

In a future dispatch a detailed description of the reception will be given.

If it should appear that I have been unnecessarily minute in relating the history of those proceedings, the reason will be found in the fact that as this reception will be quoted as a precedent by the Chinese, it is desirable that a full and complete history of the affair shall go upon the records of the legation and the Department for future reference. And besides, this is a question in the discussion of which the representatives of five nations have taken part, and, as each will make a separate report to his own government, too much care cannot be taken in laying all the essential particulars before the Department for its information, in case it should become necessary to open a correspondence with other governments about the matter.

I have, &c.,

FREDERICK F. LOW.

[Inclosure 1.]

Memorandum prepared by the ministers of the yamên in accordance with the notice given by them at a conference on the audience question, held on the 15th May.

Part I.

1. As to forms in an audience:

The sovereign in any state may receive a foreign minister seated or standing. Should he ask the minister to drink tea or wine, or show him other civilities, such acts are but acts of graciousness on the part of the sovereign, and are not to be insisted on by the minister.

2. The foreign minister, when presented, will commonly address the sovereign certain words of compliment or congratulation, but will not initiate a conversation on business. The sovereign visited can, if he pleases, discuss affairs with a foreign minister; but he is perfectly free to decline any such discussion, should the minister commence it, or even desire to continue it.

3. In the present case it is most likely that the doyen alone will speak on behalf of his colleagues, and, this ended, it will rest with his majesty whether any more is said.

4. Foreign ministers would without doubt do all that in them lay to make the necessary departures from Chinese etiquette as little offensive as possible to the prejudices of the Chinese.

Part II.

• Art. 1. The etiquette of China differing from the etiquette of foreign governments, nothing is to be insisted on derogatory to the dignity of either side.
• The foreign, ministers observed that in their countries ministers having audience either of their own or of foreign sovereigns, neither prostrate themselves nor go down on their knees, but they make three reverences. In the audience they were now requesting of the Emperor, in token of special respect, they would instead make five reverences.
• The Chinese ministers replied that as it was contrary to Chinese etiquette to omit the genuflexion, it must be left to His Majesty the Emperor to signify his pleasure on this subject.
• Art. 2. The ministers of foreign states holding an effective appointment as such being provided with letters of credence from their own sovereigns, on coming to China to reside for the first time, will have audience of the Emperor, in order to present their letters. No others are entitled to request audience.
• Art. 3. The ceremonial to be observed and the language to be used must be rehearsed beforehand according to written programme.
• Art. 4. It will rest with His Majesty the Emperor to name the place, moon, day, and hour at which ministers are to have audience.
• Art. 5. When agreement shall have been arrived at regarding the propositions now under discussion, foreign ministers, no matter sent by what power or belonging to what grade, when coming to China for the first time, provided with a letter of credence, will act in strict accordance with the etiquette observed in the present instance by the ministers of the five powers, and will in no particular deviate from it.
• Art. 6. The ceremony of the audience is one of such importance that it would be wrong to have it performed without serious occasion. For the future ministers coming to China for the first time, their mission being “in permanence,” they will be bound to abide by the rules set forth in this memorandum, under which five ministers are received at the same time, and will respectfully wait until His Majesty shall be pleased to declare at what time they are to be received. They cannot ask one by one for an audience. Thus the gravity of the ceremony will be duly appreciated.
• Art. 7. The Chinese government having at present no mission abroad, must not on this account be reproached with failure to reciprocate.
• Should the Chinese government hereafter send ministers abroad provided with letters of credence, it will be optional with the power to which they are sent whether they have audience or not. If, because of difference in etiquette, or for any other reason, the Chinese minister objects to be received, he shall have his option in the matter, and shall conduct the business of his mission as usual, whether received or not, the important point, in the opinion of the Chinese government, being not audience, but friendly relations.

The foregoing are the propositions that have been discussed in conference.

[Inclosure No. 2.]

Foreign ministers to the yamên.

Peking, May 20, 1873.

The undersigned, ministers of Russia, the United States of America, Great Britain, and France, have perused a paper communicated to them by their excellencies the ministers of the tsung li yamên on the 19th instant, as a summary of the protocol signed upon the 15th instant.

Looking to the possible insertion of this document in a memorial to be laid before the Emperor, it is the duty of the undersigned to state to Prince Kung that it does not, in their opinion, reproduce with sufficient fidelity the substance of the protocol, and that it is the latter paper alone that they recognize as faithfully expressing what has passed on either side in the conferences on the audience question.

The undersigned request his imperial highness to cause this their declaration to be appended to any report on the subject that shall be presented to His Majesty.

The undersigned renew, &c., &c.

• VLANGALY.
• LOW.
• WADE.
• DE GEOFEOY.

[Inclosure No. 3.]

Prince Kung to the foreign ministers.

Prince Kung, chief secretary of state for foreign affairs, herewith makes a communication.

The prince has had the honor to receive upon the 20th May, 1873, a communication from their excellencies the foreign ministers of the same date.

The prince would observe that the matter in the form of articles at the beginning of the summary of the protocol consists of selections from the memoranda handed in in March, the wording of which has not been added to or changed.

The passage regarding five reverences, which has been added to Article 1, also represents a statement made by the foreign representatives at one of the conferences held during the month of March. The rest consists of selections from the protocol signed at the last conference, and is identical in meaning with that document.

The foreign representatives object to the proposition contained in the following words: “Should the Chinese government send ministers abroad, it will be optional with the government to which they are sent, and also with the Chinese ministers themselves, whether audience be had.”

This has reference to a possibility of a difference existing between the etiquette of China and that of foreign nations, or to the possibility of other obstacles, and it was, therefore, a matter of duty to make this statement beforehand.

It is now proposed, instead of the words, “optional with the Chinese minister,” to substitute “on the other part no constraint shall be put upon the Chinese minister the text then proceeding, “but he shall conduct the business of his mission the same as though audience had been had;” the text being the same as before. This slight addition has been made because of a statement of the foreign ministers that, unless the Chinese minister had audience of the head of the government to which he was accredited, he could not transact business. This rendered an explanation in advance necessary. It has really nothing to do with the audience now being discussed.

With regard to the words “for the future ministers coining to China for the first time * * * * * are bound to abide by the rules set forth in the protocol under which five ministers are received at the same time, and are to wait His Majesty’s pleasure as to the time of their audience,” this condition has been discussed at the conferences, and it was agreed that any minister requesting audience would wait respectfully the declaration of His Majesty’s pleasure. This passage is identical with the meaning of the protocol. Their excellencies the foreign ministers having written to say that the summary does not sufficiently represent the sense of the protocol, the prince thus in this communication emphatically reiterates the verbal explanations given by the ministers of the yamên at the interview on the 19th instant, in order to avoid further misconception on the part of the foreign ministers and further delays resulting therefrom.

May 27, 1873.

To their excellencies, ministers, &c., from Russia, the United States, Great Britain, France.