The latter country claims sovereignty over the islands, and the so-called
King of Lew Chew is said to be now in Japan, the guest of the Mikado, whose
superior authority, I am told, he recognizes.
It was to obtain redress for outrages committed on certain Lew Chewans that
Japan invaded Formosa, and the subsequent admission by China that the
alleged motive of this invasion was a proper one was construed by the
Japanese envoy as a virtual recognition of the jurisdiction of his country
over Lew Chew.
In face of all these facts the Lew Chewans continue a custom which they have
followed for about two centuries, of sending annual tribute to China by the
hands of persons who visit Peking for the purpose, and the principals of
whom, whatever may be their rank, are received by the Emperor in much the
same way as the deputations from Corea and Mongolia.
But this tribute, as in the case of Corea, is not what the word would
literally imply, a kind of tax in dutiful acknowledgment of dependence on
the one side and sovereignty on the other; it is only in the nature of a
complimentary gift, in token of intellectual, not political homage. It is
the good-will offering of a small power to a great one; a manifestation of
reverence for the religious hardship of the Emperor of China, such as
Catholic states in Europe at one time accorded to the Pope.
In return for the presents they bring, and for their grateful homage, the Lew
Chewans, like the Coreans, are permitted to fetch into the country, free of
duty, certain articles of barter, on which they make a profit during the
period of their annual pilgrimage; being also permitted to take Chinese
goods home free of export duty; and the deputation while at Peking is
treated as the guest of the government.
On the arrival of the usual deputation this spring, the Japanese chargé
d’affaires thought it his duty to protest against what he evidently regarded
as constructive disloyalty to his sovereign, and for this purpose sought to
communicate with the Lew Chewans.
He was thwarted in this attempt by Chinese officers in charge of the premises
where the islanders are quartered. The circumstances of his appeal to the
Tsung li Yamen, of his rather cavalier treatment by the
[Page 314]
Chinese ministers, and of his final reference
of the matter to his government, are given in the statement inclosed.
(Inclosure 1.)
The ministers of the Yamen asserted that Lew Chew is tributary to China, but
probably without any serious purpose of asserting any sort of sovereignty or
jurisdiction over the islands in opposition to the claim of Japan. Yet by
refusing a frank acknowledgment of the latter, and permitting a report of
their equivocal observations to be made to the Mikado, they have opened the
door for a diplomatic difficulty in which they can hardly fail to come out
second best. They have not been in an amicable mood toward Japan since the
settlement of the Formosa affair, and probably thought they could chaff Mr.
Tei with impunity.
There has been, I am led to suppose, some suspicion on the part of the
Chinese that Japan had designs on Corea. The latter country being
conterminous with China, any scheme looking to its absorption by Japan would
be apt to excite protest, if not resistance, although Corea is practically
independent, as the Tsung li Yamen informed Mr. Low, at the time he was
preparing for his mission to that country.
I am at a loss to account for the strenuous effort made by the French chargé
d’affaires to have Mr. Tei refer this Lew Chew question to the foreign
representatives here.
The Japanese chargé evidently did not desire such a reference, although out
of deference to the Count de Rochechouart, he reluctantly consented to lay
the matter before his colleagues.
The English minister, as dean of the body, circulated a note proposing a
conference. Knowing all the facts I declined to go into a conference, as
also did the ministers of Russia and Germany, and the chargé d’affaires of
Spain; so that none was held, and Mr. Tei is now awaiting instructions from
his government.
The course of the Tsung li Yamen in the matter is likely to excite some
feeling at Yedo, and for that reason I shall forward this dispatch to Mr.
Bingham for his information en route, asking him to
regard it as a confidential communication.
[Inclosure in No. 47.]
Memorandum of statements made to His Excellency
Benjamin P. Avery by His Excellency Mr. Tei, chargé d’affaires of
Japan, regarding discussion between the last named and the Tsung li
Yamen, about the presence in Peking of a tribute-bearing embassy
from Lew Chew
Mr. Avery inquired of Mr. Tei if he was aware of the presence of Lew
Chewans in Peking.
Mr. Tei replied that he was, and on being further asked whether he had
seen any of them, proceeded to make the following statement:
“Upon learning, much to my surprise, nearly a month ago, of the presence
of a tribute-bearing deputation of Lew Chewans in this city, I at once
prepared a note and sent it to them by one of the messengers of my
legation, inquiring for what purpose they were in Peking, and requesting
their headmen to come to the legation, in order that I might ask them a
few questions. Upon reaching the gate of the compound in which the
deputation from Lew Chew is quartered, my messenger was stopped by two
or three Chinese who seemed to be on duty there, and to whom he
delivered the letter. They at once saw from the appearance of the
envelope that the communication was from a foreign legation, and when
they learned by inquiry of the messenger that it came from
[Page 315]
the Japanese chargé they at
once refused to receive or deliver the note, stating that they were
placed there in charge of the Lew Chew deputation by the hoard of rites
and the office of the imperial household, and that foreigners were not
allowed to see or have intercourse of any sort with them.
“On failing to communicate with them, I wrote a note to Prince Kung and
the Tsung li Yamen, reciting how I had been thwarted in my attempt to
get access to the Lew-Chew deputation by men who represented themselves
as acting under orders from the hoard of rites and the office of the
imperial houshold, and asking for an interview, in order that some
understanding might be reached in the case.
“In the interview that occurred a day or two subsequently, I again
recounted these circumstances, and added that Lew Chew was tributary to
Japan, of which fact the deputation from that island now in Peking could
not be ignerant, and I requested that the Yamen would see that the heads
of the deputation were sent to my legation, that I might have
conversation with them.
“Prince Kung replied that these people had come to Peking to prostrate
themselves before the Emperor of China and to bring him tribute, as had
been the custom of the people of Lew Chew for more than two hundred
years, during which time Lew Chew had been tributary to China; that
their business, had no connection with Japan, and there was no reason
why the Japanese charge should wish to see them; and further, that the
Lew Chewans now in Peking were, as had been stated, under the directing
care of men appointed for that purpose by the board of rites and the
office of the imperial household, and the Tsung li Yamen did not control
those two officers, and could not either order the men sent to the
Japanese legation or interfere in the matter in any way whatever.
“To this I replied by saying that I could not avoid the consideration of
this question, as it was one directly affecting the jurisdiction and
sovereignty of my master, the Emperor of Japan, to whom the Lew Chew
Islands were tributary; that I understood that the Tsung li Yamen had
the control of all questions touching the relations of the Chinese
empire with foreign powers, and I asked whether the prince was willing
that I should report to my government that the Chinese foreign office
disclaimed all power to move in the matter.
“Prince Kung replied, ‘O, yes; send that report if you wish.’
“I again asserted the jurisdiction of Japan over Lew Chew, and asked that
the Yamen would direct the board of rites and the office of the imperial
household to send the headmen of the Lew Chewan deputation to my
legation. To which the prince replied, ‘O, Lew Chew is tributary to
Japan, is it? Well, you send to Lew Chew and prevent the people of those
islands from sending tribute-bearing deputations to China, and then we
will believe that they are tributary to Japan. They haven’t said that
they were subject to your government.’
“Shen Chung Tang then took up the conversation and said, ‘We have heard
about Lew Chew being tributary to Japan, but it was to the Prince of
Satsuma, and not to the Mikado; hence this is not a matter in which you
can interfere, as you are chargé appointed by the Mikado and not by the
prince.’
“I answered, assuring Shen Chung Tang that he was quite mistaken, and
explained that the entire territory of Japan, as well as all outlying
islands, including Lew Chew, was directly subject to the Emperor, who,
in person, ruled the whole; that the old feudal rights of the princes
had been done away, and every part of the empire, and every subject, was
responsible directly to the Emperor.
“I further stated that in the case of the Lew Chew Islands, although they
were some distance away from Japan, separated from that country by a
strip of the sea, yet my master) the Mikado, took a strong personal
interest in the welfare of the islanders; that the King of Lew Chew was
granted a palace, a title, and a large retinue in Yedo, and that the
Mikado had sent persons to Lew Chew to instruct the islanders, the men
in agriculture and mechanical industries, and the women in silk-weaving,
and that great progress was being made by the people, which was a source
of great pleasure to the Emperor.
“I added that of these things, namely, the tribute claimed of Lew Chew by
Japan, the residence of the Lew Chewan king in Yedo, and the presence of
instructors from Japan in Lew Chew, the deputation from the latter
country now in Peking could by no means be ignorant; and I repeated my
request that the Yamen would afford me an interview with them.
“Chung Hon then said, ‘You are trying to deal with Lew Chew as England
has dealt with India. But the last named is greater than Lew Chew, which
is small, and of not the least importance. Japan, too, is not so
powerful as England. So you must not expect to imitate the example of
Great Britain with her Indian tributary.’
“I replied that I was quite aware of the comparatively small size of Lew
Chew, but I was also aware that serious complications sometimes sprang
from what appeared to be slight causes, and I was not at all certain
what construction might be put upon this matter, and the Yamen’s mode of
dealing with it, by my master, the Emperor of Japan, to whom I must
report the whole.
[Page 316]
“Then Shen Chung Tang asked if the Lew Chewans could understand Japanese,
and if there was any possibility of verbal communication between them
and Japan. I told him that the Lew Chewans could understand Japanese,
and not only this, but the ancient Japanese was better understood among
the inhabitants of Lew Chew than in Japan itself.
“Prince Kung then said again, ‘Well, you send to Lew Chew and forbid and
prevent them from sending tribute to China, and then we will believe
that they are tributary to your government.’
“He added, ‘There is no use in any further discussion of this subject
between us. Write us a dispatch and we will answer.’
“To this I replied, that after the manner in which the question had been
dealt with, I fully realized the futility of any further discussion, and
that I would address them a communication upon the subject, adding that
I should probably send a report of the conversation just held to my
government.
“Prince Kung replied, ‘All right! send it along.’
“The interview then ended.
“The next day I sent a dispatch to the Yamen, reciting the facts in the
case, stating that the Lew Chew Islands were held to be a part of the
territory of the Emperor of Japan, and asking the foreign office to send
the head-men of the deputation to my legation. I have received in reply
a dispatch filled with false statements, and saying, in conclusion:
‘Send to Lew Chew and stop their coming to China, and then we will
consider the matter.’
“I thereupon made a careful copy, in duplicate, of the conversation held
at the Yamen, and inclosed it in a note to the prince, stating that I
sent the duplicate copy that day to my government.”
Mr. Avery asked Mr. Tei if the Japanese had officials regularly appointed
to reside in and exercise authority over Lew Chew?
Mr. Tei replied that there were such officials, and had been for a number
of years.
Mr. Tei also stated that he had been waited upon by the interpreter of
the French legation, sent by the chargé, M. Rochechouart, to inquire
whether he was aware of the presence of Lew Chewans in Peking as
tribute-bearers, and what action he proprosed in the case. Mr. Tei
showed the interpreter the copy of the conversation recited above, and
allowed Mr. Chergier to take it to M. Rochechouart. On its perusal, the
French chargé advised the Japanese chargé to bring the matter to the
notice of his colleagues in Peking, and ask them to take action. Mr. Tei
was unwilling to do this, as he had already referred the matter to his
government, and could see no advantage to be gained by a conference
pending the receipt of instructions from Japan.
The chargé of France, however, pressed the matter, and at last, seeing
that Mr. Tei was unwilling to bring it to the notice of the
representatives of other powers, informed Mr. Tei that he had already
had a French version of the paper shown him prepared, and that in case
he (Mr. Tei) was unwilling to submit it to his colleague, he (M.
Rochechouart) would do it for him.
Consequently the chargé for Japan, being unwilling to make the
representation himself, and far more unwilling to have it done for him,
yielded to the pressure brought upon him by the French chargé, and sent
a brief statement of the case to Mr. Wade, who consulted with his
colleagues.
The result of this consultation was to the effect that there was no
occasion to bring the matter before the colleagues of the Japanese
chargé at present.
At an interview at the American legation, Mr. Tei informed Mr. Avery that
subsequent to the facts recited by him March 31, (and given in the
foregoing,) he had received a dispatch from the Tsungli Yamen, asking
him to submit a plan for the adjustment of the question as to the right
of jurisdiction over Lew Chew.
He also stated that he proposed in reply to say to the Yamen that, having
referred the whole question to his government, asking instructions, he
could not further discuss the subject until he shall have received
advices from Japan.
