No. 62.
Mr. Fish to Mr. Seward.

No. 95.]

Sir: I have to acknowledge the receipt of your very interesting dispatch, No. 134, dated 3d October last, relating to the agreement entered into on the 13th of September, between the plenipotentiaries of Great Britain and China, in settlement of the Yunnan affair.

It appears that by the terms of the agreement certain questions were to be submitted by the foreign office to the different legations for their consideration. These questions are submitted in the notes from the foreign office to you, and relate to: First, judicial matters; second, the audience question, and, third, the likin taxes.

The views of the Department in relation to judicial matters are substantially in accord with the terms of the Yunnan agreement, as expressed to you by the foreign office, viz, “that if possible a single course of procedure shall be determined on for all international cases,” In the discussion of this subject it would be well to consider the advisability of establishing mixed courts as a means for the accomplishment of the proposed reform. This point is merely suggested for your consideration in connection with other plans that will doubtless be proposed by your colleagues.

It is hoped that the present movement may lead to the adoption of [Page 87] measures, tending to the more effective administration of justice in mixed cases in China.

In relation to the questions of audience and etiquette, it does not appear necessary to add anything to the instructions heretofore given by the Department to the legation in China. The note of the foreign office to you evinces a desire on the part of the Chinese Government to have this question settled. The fact alluded to in the note, that China is about to establish missions and consulates abroad, renders an understanding on these points essential to China.

In relation to the likin taxes, the stipulations of the British treaties of 1842 and 1858, and of the French treaty of 1858, with China, are believed to be explicit in regard to the taxes that may be levied by the Chinese Government on foreign goods, and any additional taxes levied by the Chinese authorities would seem to be in contravention of treaty stipulations. Your course in advising the foreign office that, pending the result of the negotiations on this subject, you could not consent to the abridgment of existing treaty stipulations, is approved.

I confine myself to the general indication of the views of the government in relation to the questions submitted. It is not deemed advisable to hamper you with instructions that may prevent your full and free co-operation with your colleagues.

All the treaty powers are equally interested in the just settlement of those questions, and it is hoped that good feeling and as perfect accord as is possible will characterize the conferences of the representatives of the treaty powers.

You will report from time to time the progress made in the negotiations.

I am, &c.,

HAMILTON FISH.