No. 68.
Mr. Young
to Mr. Frelinghuysen.
[Extract.]
Legation of
the United States,
Peking, November 28, 1882.
(Received January 15, 1883.)
No. 64.]
Sir: I submit to the Department a series of
inclosures in reference to a question of great interest now in discussion
with the imperial cabinet.
On the 20th of October, the legation received a letter from Messrs. Russell
& Co., of Shanghai, which is herewith inclosed, asking from the imperial
cabinet permission for a company of foreign merchants doing business in
China to lay a submarine cable between Shanghai and the ports of Foo-Chow,
Amoy, and Swatow, terminating at Hong-Kong. The offer of the company was
couched in the most liberal spirit, with a full recognition by the promoters
of the sovereignty of China.
To this I responded that I would submit the proposition to the Department,
but that in the mean time the enterprise commended itself to the judgment of
the legation, as calculated to advance the best interests of the Chinese and
the foreign residents, and that I would be glad to unite with my colleagues
in any representation to the Tsung-li yamên “that would secure the desired
concessions,” feeling assured that my action would meet the approval of the
Department.
Applications of the same nature were made to other legations here by German,
British, and French houses in Shanghai.
On the 23d of October I met my colleagues, Mr. Yon Brandt, the German
minister, Mr. Bourée, the minister of the French Republic, and Mr.
Grosvenor, the chargé d’affaires of the British legation. We discussed the
matter at length, and agreed that the request was one which our respective
legations should support. It was further determined that we should each send
a note identical in terms to the yamên, asking imperial permission to lay
the proposed cable.
In pursuance of this agreement, on the 24th of October I addressed his
imperial highness Prince Kung a note, which is inclosed. In this it was
pointed out that the present submarine-cable service was irregular and
imperfect, to the detriment of business interests, and that the necessity
for another cable had been made apparent by many losses and inconveniences
on the part of our mercantile houses. I assured his imperial highness that
the company proposed to do its work in good faith, and called special
attention to the promise of its projectors to undertake no extension of
their line without the “approval and sanction of the Chinese authorities and
with due regard to the rights and interests of private persons.” I ventured
to dwell also upon the many advantages that would accrue to the Chinese
Government and people from the establishment of an independent line.
To this note his imperial highness, on the 31st of October, responded in a
dispatch, which is inclosed. In this dispatch his imperial highness referred
to the communications made to the cabinet by my predecessor, Mr. Angell,
upon the grant of a telegraph monopoly to a Danish corporation known as the
Great Northern Telegraph Company, by the grand secretary, Li Hung Chang. His
imperial highness regarded that grant as valid, and contended that the grand
secretary, in approving it, was initiating a policy which followed the
precedents of France and Russia, and so informed Mr. Angell.
[Page 143]
After the departure of Mr. Angell, Mr. Holcombe, acting as minister, again
brought the question before the yamên. He was informed, in the words of the
prince, that “whenever an American company desired to lay a telegraphic
cable from Japan to China, satisfactory arrangements would most positively
be made for them to do so.” At the same time the prince said that his
excellency Li, in making his contract with the Great Northern Company, was
“following a mode of procedure adopted by the western powers.” To assent,
therefore, to the present proposition would, in the opinion of his imperial
highness, not only conflict with the grant already made with Li, but would
not be in accord with “the policy hitherto adopted in such matters by
western powers.” The prince further added, in reference to the complaints as
to the irregularity of the present submarine-cable service, that orders
would be sent to Li to insist upon the lines being kept in good working
order.
In this connection I would call your attention to a petition of the Great
Northern Company, a translation from the Chinese text of which I inclose.
This document will show the strange and inexplicable nature of the contract
into which the Chinese Government was induced to enter.
The legation, on the 14th of November, in replying to the note of Prince
Kung, entered at length upon the considerations suggested by this petition.
The dispatch will show the Department the objection to any such concession
as that granted to the Danish company, objections which concern the
sovereignty and independence of China even more than the mere material
interests of foreign capitalists seeking new enterprises as means of gain.
There can be no reasonable doubt but that the Danish company profited by the
inexperience of Chinese officials to lead the Chinese Government into
covenants which no western Government would allow, covenants the nature of
which must in time become apparent to the Chinese themselves, and probably
be regarded to our detriment as another evidence of the unjust and grasping
spirit of the western world in dealing with the Oriental people. If there
were no American interests, therefore, to represent and defend,
consideration for the best interests of China would alone justify the
legation in the arguments so earnestly pressed upon Prince Kung.
By this contract the Government grants the Danish company for twenty years a
monopoly of all the submarine cables already landed in China, during which
time the government engages itself not to allow any cable whatever unless
with the consent of the company. During this period the Government will not
permit the construction of any land lines that may be in opposition to the
submarine cables. Thus a concession for a submarine line is so worded as to
put the whole land-telegraph system of this vast Empire at the mercy of a
private corporation. Future telegraphs in China are to be controlled by the
company, to the exclusion not only of the Government’s sovereign rights, but
of all other foreign interests.
This concession, as the legation points out to Prince Kung, is a virtual
surrender on the part of China of an essential element of sovereignty,
namely, the control of its telegraph. If the Government chose to build its
own lines, as in France and England and other countries, making them a part
of the postal system, there could be no objection, and it would be our duty
to recognize this as a step towards that progress in western civilization,
the advancement of which is the aim of all who wish well to China. If
private companies, no matter of what nationality, were to build lines in
competition, we could make no objection, only advising our countrymen to
take their chance with the others,
[Page 144]
knowing that success or failure would follow the laws of business enterprise
and not be affected by diplomacy. If the Government declared it would only
grant permission to build telegraphs to its own subjects, we might advance
objections, but strong reasons could be given in favor of such a policy. The
Government, however, * * * gives absolute control of its telegraph system to
an alien, irresponsible corporation, exacting no guarantees for the
performance of its pledges, and asking no assurance that it will in any way
extend the system so as to confer upon the Empire the benefits of the
telegraph. Practically, the whole question of the future of telegraphs in
China, so important to the welfare and development of the Empire, is
surrendered by the Government for twenty years.
The return for this is a privilege so paltry as to be unworthy of
consideration. My hope is that the arguments thus presented will convince
the Chinese Government of the blunders they have committed blunders which,
as shrewd men, the members of the cabinet concerned for the interests of
their Empire will not fail to see. To that end I repeated my request that
“an American firm be allowed to land a cable at Shanghai, Foo-Chow, Amoy,
and Swatow, or, if from political or military reasons the Chinese Government
should prefer to see a land line established, to grant permission to lay
such a line to the petitioners.”
In making this request the Department will observe that the legation is
acting with the ministers of England, Germany, and France, the company which
Russell & Co. represent having English, French, and German merchants in
its direction. In our conferences upon this subject, and especially as to
the best means of convincing the cabinet of the impropriety of granting
monopolies like that given to the Danish company, there has been the utmost
harmony and a general agreement as to the justice and moderation of our own
demand.
I have, &c.,
[Inclosure 1 in No. 64.]
Messrs. Russell & Co.
to Mr. Young.
Shanghai, October 12,
1882.
Sir: We are requested to ask the favor of your
exerting your influence with the Tsung-li yamên to obtain for an
association of merchants here permission to lay a submarine telegraph
cable between Shanghai and the ports of Amoy, Foo-Chow and Swatow, and
terminating at Hong-Kong.
If this permission be granted it is the intention of those who are
interesting themselves in the project to invite the co-operation of
Chinese merchants and others here, and at the different stations on the
proposed line.
The telegraphic service on the coast of China and between this port and
Hong-Kong has long been unsatisfactory. The one existing cable has been
subject to interruptions in its working for several years past, but
during the last few months these interruptions have been so frequent and
so prolonged that the necessity for a new and independent line forces
itself still more and more upon communities at the ports named.
There is good reason to believe that if permission to land the cable at
those of the open ports on the coast which we have indicated is obtained
from the imperial Government, the capital required will be subscribed
among this, the foreign and Chinese communities.
The undertaking is purely of a commercial character, and originates among
merchants who find great inconvenience and loss arise from the many
interruptions which occur on the present line, and who desire also to
have the advantage of a more extended system of inter-port
communication.
[Page 145]
If permission be granted to land cables at certain points on the coast
near to the ports we have mentioned, the company will, if further
permitted, construct land lines connecting these with their offices. In
doing so every care will be taken to carry out the necessary works with
the approbation of the local officials and with due regard to the rights
of the people.
We beg to mention that letters of a similar tenor to this have been
addressed by Messrs. Alfred Dent & Co. to the British chargé
d’affaires, by Messrs. Siemssen & Co., to the minister for the
German Empire, and by Messrs. Ulysse Pila & Co., to the minister for
France at Peking, and we trust that you maybe able to co-operate with
their excellencies in obtaining the desired permission.
We have, &c.,
RUSSELL & CO.
[Inclosure 2 in No. 64.]
Mr. Young to
Messrs. Russell & Co.
Peking, October 21,
1882.
Gentlemen: I have the honor to acknowledge your
letter of the 12th instant, in which you ask the legation to obtain from
the Tsung-li yamên permission for an association of merchants to lay a
submarine telegraph cable between Shanghai and the ports of Foo-Chow,
Amoy, and Swatow, terminating at Hong-Kong. You inform me that it is the
desire of yourselves and your associates to “invite the co operation of
Chinese merchants and others in Shanghai, and at the different stations
on the line.” It is, furthermore, your intention to use every care to
“carry out the necessary works with the approbation of the local
officials, and with due regard to the rights of the people.” You say, in
conclusion, that other mercantile houses in Shanghai have addressed my
French, German, and English colleagues, asking them to make an
application of the same tenor to the Tsung-li yamên, and express the
hope that. I “may be able to co-operate with their excellencies in
obtaining the desired permission.”
I shall submit your proposition to the Department of State. In the mean
time your enterprise meets with my hearty approval, as one that will be
a benefit alike to the Chinese and the foreign residents. I shall be
glad to unite with my colleagues in any representation to the Tsung-li
yamên that may secure the desired concession, feeling assured that my
action will meet the approval of the Government.
I am, &c.,
[Inclosure 3 in No. 64.]
Mr. Young to Prince
Kung.
Peking, October 24,
1892.
The undersigned has the honor to bring to the knowledge of his imperial
highness Prince Kung and their excellencies the ministers of the
Tsung-li yamên that the following request, to be laid before the yamên,
has been addressed to him by an American firm at Shanghai, acting on
behalf of a number of mercantile houses in China.
The telegraphic communication along the Chinese coast and between
Hong-Kong and Shanghai having been irregular for a considerable time, in
consequence of frequent accidents happening to the single cable existing
between these places, great inconveniences and losses have been thus
caused to the mercantile communities in China. During the last few
months the interruptions of the telegraphic service have become so
frequent that the necessity of another independent cable being laid has
made itself more and more felt.
A company formed by merchants of all nationalities is willing and
desirous to undertake the work of laying a cable between Shanghai,
Foo-Chow, Amoy, Swatow, and Hong-Kong, and, the permission of the
imperial Chinese Government once obtained, to invite Chinese merchants
residing at the above-mentioned places to join them in the
undertaking.
The ends which the company have in view being purely commercial ones, it
would aim less at pecuniary advantages than to do away with the existing
disadvantages of the present system and others which are likely to arise
from it in future.
If the company should obtain permission to land the cable in the
neighborhood of the above-named places, it promises that, where it shall
be necessary, to join the cable by a land line to the offices of the
company in those places, such work shall be undertaken only with the
approval and sanction of the Chinese authorities and with due regard to
the rights and the interests of private persons.
[Page 146]
While bringing this request for the permission of laying a cable between
Shanghai, Foo-Chow, Amoy, Swatow and Hong-Kong to the knowledge of the
Tsung-li yamên, and recommending it most warmly to the favorable
consideration of the Chinese Government, the undersigned begs to draw
the attention of his imperial highness Prince Kung, and their
excellencies the ministers of the yamên, to the many advantages which
must result to the Chinese Government and people from the establishment
of an independent telegraphic communication between Shanghai and
Hong-Kong and the intervening ports by a company composed of Chinese
merchants and foreign merchants residing in China, having its seat in
China and offering to the Chinese Government all the political,
financial, and commercial guarantees which these facts must carry with
them.
A request similar to the one now laid before the Tsung-li yamên has been
addressed by mercantile houses of other nationalities to the
representatives of Great Britain, France and Germany, and will be
brought to the knowledge of the yamên at the same time as the one
contained in this note; but all these requests refer to one company
only, and to one cable to be laid.
While hoping for an early favorable reply from his imperial highness and
their excellencies, the undersigned profits, &c.,
[Inclosure 4 in No. 64.]
Prince Kung to Mr.
Young.
Peking, October 31,
1882.
Your Excellency: In June of last year Minister
Angell came to this yamên and stated that the Danish Great Northern
Telegraph Company had secured from the grand secretary, Li, a monopoly
for the laying of sea cables for a period of twenty years. This yamên
maintained that his excellency Li, in initiating this policy and
entering into an agreement for a term of years, was following a
precedent established by the two Governments of Russia and France, and
so replied to Minister Angell. Thereafter he came to this yamên
repeatedly to discuss the question, and more than one communication
passed between us on it.
After Minister Angell returned to the United States, Mr. Holcombe, then
chargé d’affaires, addressed a dispatch to me inquiring whether the
agreement concluded between his excellency Li and the Great Northern
Telegraph Company had been confirmed by the throne. In response he was
informed that whenever an American company desired to lay a telegraph
cable from Japan to China, satisfactory arrangements would most
positively be made for them to do so, and that the agreement referred to
was a petition prepared by the Great Northern Telegraph Company,
submitting certain propositions to his excellency, Li, which had been
approved by him.
I am now in receipt of a communication from your excellency, setting
forth a request made to you by certain American merchants resident at
Shanghai, acting on behalf of a number of mercantile houses at the
various ports in China. The substance of their request is that the
telegraphic communication along the Chinese coast and between Shanghai
and Hong-Kong having been very irregular in the past because of frequent
accidents to the single existing cable, a company formed by merchants of
all nationalities is willing and desirous to lay a cable between
Shanghai, Foo-Chow, Amoy, Swatow and Hong-Kong. If the permission of the
Chinese Government can be obtained for this scheme, Chinese merchants
residing at the several ports will be invited to join in the
undertaking. Whenever it shall be necessary to join the cable by a land
line to the offices of the company in these places, such work shall be
undertaken only with the approval and sanction of the local authorities,
&c.
Your excellency calls my attention to the many advantages which would
result to China from the construction of such a cable by Chinese and
foreign merchants residing in China, and offering political, financial,
and commercial guarantees. And you express the hope that I will give the
request careful consideration, and favor your excellency with an early
response, &c., &c.
It appears that the public policy of the various western powers in the
construction of railroads, telegraphs, and similar works, has in the
past been determined by each Government for itself. In some the
Government has initiated such enterprises itself. In others they have
been intrusted to public companies. Last year his excellency Li, in the
construction, with the Great Northern Telegraph Company, of a Chinese
telegraph line, simply followed a mode of procedure adopted by the
western powers. And further, the Great Northern Telegraph Company has a
monopoly for thirty years with Russia, and one for twenty-five years
with France. These are all on record. But in this case of the
construction of telegraph lines by China, his excellency Li only granted
to the Great Northern Telegraph Company a monopoly for twenty years.
[Page 147]
And now foreign merchants of various nationalities desire, in addition to
the existing Chinese telegraph line, to lay another cable from Shanghai
via Foo-Chow, Amoy and Swatow to Hong-Kong. This would not only conflict
with the agreement entered: into between his excellency Li and the Great
Northern Telegraph Company, but I fear it would also not be in accord
with the policy hitherto adopted in such matters, by western powers, and
hence I find it difficult to agree to the proposition.
With regard to what is said about the frequent accidents happening to the
Chinese line, &c., such things cannot certainly be allowed.
Instructions must be sent by this yamên to his excellency Li to most
positively direct the Great Northern Telegraph Company to see to it that
the various telegraph lines within the domains of China are constantly
kept in a condition for service; that no interruptions must be allowed,
and that certainly constant increase in the tariff of charges will not
be permitted, as all these result in loss and inconvenience to the
Chinese and foreign public. And I beg, in conclusion, to inform your
excellency that in consequence of the receipt of your note instructions
as above have been sent to his excellency Li.
[Inclosure 5 in No. 64.]
Petition of the Danish Great Northern Telegraph
Company, asking the approval of the six following articles of
agreement in regard to the construction of telegraph lines in
China.
[Approved by his excellency Li Hung Chang, &c., upon
the twelfth day of the moon in the following indorsement: “The plan
proposed in the petition is approved, and will hereafter, by the
necessary instructions, be carried into effect. Of the two foreign
copies, let one be sealed and returned to the petitioners, and the other
placed on record.”]
The petition of the Danish Great Northern Telegraph Company to his
excellency the northern superintendent of foreign trade respectfully
submits that some definite preliminary understanding should be reached
in regard to the interests which affect in common the telegraph lines
constructed by China and those of the above-mentioned company. They
therefore submit six articles for which they pray the approval of His
Imperial Majesty, that they may be carried into operation, to the end
that this company may receive the benefits arising from the protection
granted to it by the Government, and may not be deprived of such
advantages as lie within the sovereignty of China. And this company begs
leave in support of this petition to submit the following statement.
Last year this company, at the orders of the foreign office and the
northern and southern superintendents of trade, transmitted over the
lines to Russia a sum total of about 10,000 words, and to other points
about 6,000 words, making a total of 16,000 words sent. Messages were
received amounting to about 8,000 words, making a total received and
sent of, say, 24,000 words. The cost of transmission for this number of
words amounted to $52,800. If the arrangement proposed in the fourth
article had been in operation last year, China in her telegraphic
correspondence with Russia would have expended only $7,500, and with
other parts only $12,000, being a sum total of only $19,500. The expense
of transmission on the lines of this company would have been remitted,
and the Government would have saved a total of $33,300.
From this statement it is evident that, under the arrangement proposed of
mutual concession, both parties to it will secure great advantages; and
if the request of this company be granted the utmost care will in future
be taken in all sincerity to protect the interests of China.
proposed articles.
- I.
- The Chinese Government guarantees to the Great Northern Telegraph
Company an exclusive monopoly for their sea-cables already landed
within Chinese territory. Should the company desire to land other
cables in China, the consent of the Government of China must first
be had.
- For a period of twenty years, reckoned from the date of the
ratification of this agreement, the Chinese Government will not
permit other Governments or other companies to lay telegraph cables
within its territory, nor, within the above-mentioned term of years,
to land telegraph cables within the foreign concessions or
Formosa.
- II.
- Within the same period of twenty years the Chinese Government will
not construct telegraph cables or land lines which will conflict
with any of the lines of the Great Northern Telegraph Company.
Between points where there will be no conflict with the lines of the
Great Northern Telegraph Company the Chinese Government will build
lines at its pleasure.
- III.
- If, hereafter, the Chinese Government should establish additional
telegraph lines the Great Northern Telegraph Company will be
employed by the Government to construct them, provided their terms
are lower than those of other parties.
- IV.
- Messages of the Chinese foreign office, northern and southern
superintendents of foreign trade, Chinese diplomatic agents and
consuls-general abroad shall be sent free of charge by the Great
Northern Telegraph Company over its lines in China, Japan and
Europe, for a term of twenty years. Whenever such messages are
intended for points not reached by the lines of the company they
will be forwarded to their destination over the lines of other
companies, and the Chinese Government will pay the charges levied by
such other companies. But the Great Northern Telegraph Company will
remit the charges on such messages only of the class specified as
bear the official seal of the sender in evidence of their being
genuine.
- V.
- The Great Northern Telegraph Company’s line connecting at
Hong-Kong with European lines is called the “southern line.” That
via Japan, connecting with the Russian system, is called the
“northern line.” After the completion of the Chinese telegraph line
all messages sent by Chinese and foreign residents in China to
foreign parts and delivered by the Chinese telegraph line to the
Great Northern Telegraph Company for transmission, unless such
messages are indorsed to be forwarded by the “southern line,” will
be sent by the “northern line” as being more speedy.
- VI.
- Hereafter in cases of dispute the Chinese text of this version
shall be accepted as authoritative.
June,
1881.
Kuang sü, seventh year, fifth
moon.
Signed by
—— Henningsen
,
for the Great Northern Telegraph Company.
[Inclosure 6 in No.
64.—Informal.]
Mr. Young to Prince
Kung.
Your Imperial Highness: I have the honor to
acknowledge the receipt of your imperial highness’s letter of the 31st
ultimo, being an answer to my letter of the 24th of the same month, in
which I laid before your imperial highness the request of an American
firm at Shanghai, acting on behalf of a number of mercantile houses in
China, to be allowed to lay a telegraph cable from Shanghai via
Foo-Chow, Amoy and Swatow to Hong-Kong.
Your imperial highness refers in the preamble of your letter to certain
conversations and correspondence which Minister Angell and Chargé
d’Affaires Holcombe had with your imperial highness last year on the
subject of a rumored grant of a monopoly to the Great Northern Telegraph
Company, and you remind me that in that correspondence you informed this
legation that his excellency Li, in initiating this policy and entering
into an agreement for a term of years, was following a precedent
established by Russia and France.
Your imperial highness further points out that this legation was informed
that whenever an American company desired to lay a cable from Japan to
China satisfactory arrangements would be made for them to do so, and
that the agreement referred to was a petition prepared by the Great
Northern Telegraph Company, submitting certain propositions to his
excellency Li, which had been approved by him. But your imperial
highness omits to add that you informed this legation that these
propositions had not been submitted to His Imperial Majesty, and
consequently had not been approved by him. From this declaration Mr.
Holcombe, then in charge of this legation, drew the natural and, indeed,
necessary inference that the proposed monopoly was void and of no
effect, and hence he did not lay before your imperial highness further
and more positive declarations as to the light in which my Government
would view the granting of the proposed monopoly which he was instructed
to place before you, and which it may become my duty to submit to your
imperial highness.
As the foreign office has but recently again informed this legation, in a
verbal communication with Mr. Holcombe, that the petition of the Great
Northern Telegraph Company has still not been laid before the throne nor
approved by it, I feel bound to express the earnest hope that your
imperial highness will find no difficulty in recommending to His
Imperial Majesty that the petition of the company should be put aside,
and the injurious effects removed which an approval or upholding of it
would have upon the interests of China herself and her relations with
other powers.
The request which I thus address to your imperial highness is not based
upon any wish to injure the legitimate ends and interests of the Great
Northern Company, to which I wish every success which it may be able to
obtain in fair competition with other companies or individuals, but is
dictated solely by the necessity of frustrating the unwarrantable
attempt of the company to obtain a monopoly which is contrary
[Page 149]
to the spirit of the
international engagements entered into by the Chinese Government and the
often repeated assurances of your imperial highness that all foreigners
were to be treated alike in China, as well as injurious to the
political, military and commercial interests of China herself.
That such is really the case and that the arrangement proposed by the
Great Northern Company in its petition is in no way the same as similar
arrangements concluded, by other powers, but that it is an unscrupulous
attempt of the company to profit by the inexperience of the Chinese
officials and obtain from or through them such advantages as would never
be granted by any other Government, I shall now proceed to prove by
taking, point for point, the arguments put forward in your imperial
highness’s letter of October 31, and which I believe may fairly be
considered to represent the arguments of the advocates of the
arrangement proposed by the company.
These points are:
- 1.
- That, according to the public law of Europe, the right to
regulate the railway and telegraphic intercourse belonged to the
Government of each country.
- 2.
- That the arrangement proposed by the company to his excellency
Li was the same as the arrangements usually made under similar
circumstances by European Governments, and even less favorable
to the company than those concluded by them with France and
Russia.
- 3.
- That it was at a moment when telegraphic communication had to
be established for China that his excellency Li approved of a
monopoly to the company, but only for twenty years.
With regard to the first point, the right of the Chinese Government to
regulate its own policy in railway and telegraphic questions, it seems
to me that the fact that I transmitted the petition of an American firm
to your imperial highness indicates clearly enough that I recognize this
right of the Chinese Government. Your imperial highness will, however,
have to bear in mind that even the most indisputable right must be
exercised with a certain caution and with due regard to the rights and
interests of other parties.
The Chinese Government has the undoubted right to shape its own course in
the question of telegraphic intercourse, but the grant of a monopoly for
the whole Empire to a single company and the exclusion of all other
companies and individuals from this line of industrial enterprise is
certainly an unfriendly act, and will be viewed in that light by all
foreign Governments whose subjects and interests suffer under the
exclusion pronounced against them by the Chinese Government.
Your imperial highness states further that the arrangement proposed by
the Great Northern Company to his excellency Li is the same as those
concluded by the Great Northern Company with other Governments. This I
must contradict most positively.
The arrangement between Russia and the company was entered into by the
Russian Government because it wanted to obtain telegraphic communication
between its possessions on the Pacific and China and Japan. Not wishing
to disburse the heavy outlay which the construction of such a line would
necessitate, the Russian Government accepted the offer of the Great
Northern Company to construct it at their own expense and risk, and in
order to compensate them for this work, which was of the utmost
importance to the Russian possessions on the Pacific, the Russian
Government granted to the company for thirty years the exclusive right
of landing a cable on the shore of its possessions on the Pacific coast,
a nearly uninhabited country, with a few towns, with hardly 10,000
inhabitants, and possessing neither industry nor commerce. The value of
this concession for the company lies, it is true, in the fact that they
can join their cable to the Russian land line from the Pacific coast
through Siberia to Europe, but the Russian Government profited itself
largely by the fact that this part of the telegraphic communication
between Europe and Eastern Asia was gained for the Russian line. With
the single exception of the Pacific coast, however, that is to say, of a
small part of the Russian dominions, no concession to the exclusion of
others was granted to the company. Can this be compared with the action
of China, which excludes all competition and enterprise from its whole
seashore, teeming with towns counting their inhabitants by millions, as
well as from the interior of the Empire, and all for no advantage
whatever save a doubtful economy of a few thousand dollars!
And again, the contract between France and the company.
Telegraphic communications between France on the one side and Denmark,
Sweden and Russia on the other, had existed for a long time, but they
all led through neighboring countries, and, in case of political
difficulties, were likely to be interrupted, and so to cause serious
embarrassments to the Government as well as to private individuals.
Under these circumstances it was quite natural that the French
Government should seek to establish new lines of communication with the
northern countries, and so save herself from the danger of being cut off
from them. To obtain this end, a concession was granted to the Great
Northern Company for the construction of a single line from either
Calais or Dunkerque to Denmark, Sweden and Russia. But no monopoly was
granted to the company for the remainder of the French coasts or
dominions, nor for her communications with other countries.
[Page 150]
But, says your imperial highnesses letter, the concession to the company
was granted when telegraphic communication had to he established for the
Chinese Government.
To this statement I beg to demur most emphatically.
The contract between the China Telegraph Company, acting under the
auspices and the orders of his excellency Li Hung Chang, and the Great
Northern Company, referring to the construction of a telegraph line from
Tien-Tsin to Shanghai, was signed on December 22, 1880. By it the Great
Northern Company engaged itself to furnish a certain quantity of
material and a certain number of engineers for the China Telegraph
Company at certain prices and salaries and within and for a certain
given time. The material had to be delivered in China by May 15, 1881,
and for the work entailed thus upon the Great Northern Company a
commission of 10 per cent. on the total value of the material, i. e., 3,932 taels, was given to it. The
engineers to be employed in the construction of the line were to be paid
certain salaries fixed in the agreement. There was so little thought
then of a concession to be granted to the Great Northern Company, in
order to induce it to accept these proposals, that, on the contrary,
Article 4 of the agreement contains the following stipulation:
“For the maintenance of friendship, the China Telegraph Company hereby
promises that should a separate sea cable be established at Shanghai,
they will give their business to the Great Northern Telegraph Company,
providing their rates be the same as those of the other company.”
The so-called arrangement between his excellency Li Hung Chang and the
Great Northern Telegraph Company was concluded on the 8th of June, 1881;
that is to say, six months after the conclusion of the contract before
mentioned, and after it had been executed already; it is therefore
impossible to say that the Chinese Government was bound to make the
concessions contained in the latter arrangement in order to secure the
conclusion of the former. Even the petition of the Great Northern
Company contains no argument to this effect.
Now, what are the concessions made to the Great Northern Company?
- 1.
- The Chinese Government grants the company exclusive monopoly for
the submarine cables already landed on Chinese territory.
- 2.
- Within a period of twenty years the Chinese Government will not
allow any other company or person to land cables in the entire
Empire, including all foreign settlements and Formosa.
- 3.
- Within twenty years the Chinese Government will not construct or
permit others to construct cables or land lines in opposition to any
of the company’s cables.
- 4.
- Preference in the construction of new telegraph lines by the
Chinese Government will be given to the company.
- 5.
- All telegrams for foreign countries emanating from Chinese lines
shall, unless directed otherwise by the sender, be forwarded over
the company’s cables to the Russian possessions on the Pacific coast
and thence over the Russian land line.
And what are the obligations of the Great Northern Company in the face of
these immense and unheard of concessions by which the Chinese
Government, if they were ratified, would deprive itself of the right to
extend its own telegraphic system and offend all friendly powers by
excluding their subjects from a fair competition in an industrial
enterprise?
“The Chinese foreign office and the two superintendents of trade for the
southern and northern ports shall be entitled to exchange telegrams with
the Chinese ministers and consuls-general residing abroad free of
charges on the Great Northern Company’s cables in China, Japan and
Europe.”
It is, therefore, as I had the honor to remark before, for the doubtful
gain of a paltry sum of a few thousand dollars (the agent of the Great
Northern Company in this petition fixed the pecuniary gain which the
Chinese Government might have made in a year of unprecedented political
activity at $33,300) that the Chinese Government, if it ratifies the
arrangement with the Great Northern Telegraph Company, will barter away
its own sovereign rights and the protection of its political, military
and commercial interests.
But, might somebody remark, it was in order to gain the advantages
accruing to China from the cable between Shanghai and Hong-Kong that the
agreement was entered into with the Great Northern Company.
This view again could not be sustained by the fact.
It is by Articles 1 and 10 of the agreement concluded in October 11,
1869, between Russia on the one side and the Great Northern Company on
the other, that the company bound themselves to lay a cable from the
Russian possessions on the Pacific to Nagasaki, in Japan, and from there
to Shanghai, Foo-Chow, and Hong-Kong. It was, therefore, not to serve
the interests of China that the cable along its shores was laid, and no
concession from China was necessary to maintain it there, as the company
was bound to that course already by its engagements with Russia.
On the contrary, for many years the Chinese authorities objected most
strongly to the landing of the cable of the company, and its being
carried from the landing-place to the company’s offices in the
settlements; and even so late as the autumn of 1877, the
[Page 151]
superintendent of the southern ports sent
instructions to the local authorities at Shanghai to have the land line
of the company between Wusung and Shanghai destroyed.
Your imperial highness having referred in your letter more than once to
the usages and laws of Europe with regard to telegraphic conventions,
and having compared the one attempted to be imposed by the Great
Northern Telegraph Company on China with those in existence with other
powers, I have seen myself obliged to enter into the above details with
regard to the arrangement under discussion, and I can assure your
imperial highness, as I believe you will have convinced yourself from
the foregoing remarks, that no concession similar to the one claimed by
the Great Northern Company has ever been conceded by any foreign
Government, and that none similar would ever be conceded by any one.
It is not from a desire or the intention to meddle directly or indirectly
with the internal administration of China that I address your imperial
highness again on the subject, but from the firm conviction that it is
in the interests of the Chinese Government themselves, as well as of the
Chinese and foreign mercantile community, that the telegraphic
communication between China and the outer world should not be intrusted
to a single company. Where the erection of a land line or sea line
through a company can be obtained only by the grant of a concession, the
Chinese Government will be fully entitled to take such a course with
regard to that line; but generally speaking, where more than one company
are willing to run the risk of establishing lines at their own expense
and without claiming any special advantages, it will be in the interests
of every one to grant such request, as competition is certain to insure
cheaper rates and better work, while it does away with the apprehension
for the Government to see their linear of communication endangered by
political complications or conflicts.
I have therefore the honor to place again before your imperial highness
the request of an American firm at Shanghai to be allowed to land a
cable at Shanghai, Foo-Chow, Amoy and Swatow, or if from political or
military reasons the Chinese Government should prefer to see a land line
established, to grant the permission to lay such a line to the
petitioners, who, I have no doubt, will in either case be willing to
give to the Chinese Government the same privileges on their land lines
or sea lines which foreign Governments claim under similar
circumstances, or which the Great Northern Company offers to the Chinese
Government, viz, free passage over their lines for messages exchanged by
the Tsung-li yamên and the two superintendents of the northern and
southern ports with the Chinese minister and consuls-general residing
abroad.
I have, &c.,
[Inclosure 7 in No. 64.]
Mr. Young to
Messrs. Russell & Co.
Peking, November 25,
1882.
Gentlemen: On October 21, I acknowledged your
letter to the legation, dated October 18, proposing the formation of a
new submarine cable company in conjunction with other foreign houses,
and asking me to obtain the necessary permission so to do from the
imperial authorities. I had a conference with the representatives of
Germany, France and England, and we united in a dispatch to the yamên
asking that your request be granted, which was presented on the 24th of
October.
On the 31st of October Prince Kung replied, declining the required
permission on the ground that a monopoly had been granted by the viceroy
Li Hung Chang to the Great Northern Telegraph Company for the period of
twenty years. His highness claimed that in doing so the Chinese cabinet
had followed the example of western powers, notably Russia and
France.
On the 14th of November the legation again addressed the yamên in a long
dispatch, claiming that under our treaties such a monopoly was void, and
also showing that the terms of the concession to the Great Northern
Company were in the highest degree injurious to the best interests of
China, and that no western Government would allow any private company a
franchise so comprehensive, irresponsible and vast. We claimed that
under the treaties the monopoly was void.
To this dispatch no answer has been received. My impression is that the
subject has been referred to the viceroy at Tien-Tsin.
I write this to acquaint you with the state of the business intrusted to
our care. I can express no opinion as to our success, although I am
quite hopeful. The temper of high Chinese officials in some recent
dealings with foreigners does not encourage us in hoping for much
sympathy with western interests. But the discussions between
[Page 152]
the yamên and the foreign
legations cannot end without a recognition of our rights so complete and
absolute that merchants like yourselves, in the legitimate pursuit of
commerce and industry, and under the protection of treaties, will
hereafter have no trouble.
I am, &c.,