Mr. Denby to Mr.
Blaine.
Legation of
the United States,
Peking, March 21, 1892.
(Received May 5.)
No. 1492.]
Sir: I have the honor to inclose herewith a copy of
an imperial decree which gives an official account of the recent riots and
rebellion in Mongolia. This decree is founded on a report made by Li Hung
Chang and Kweipin, the military governor of Jekol, on the conduct of the
civil and military authorities before and during the disturbances. From this
report it appears that there had been for a long time strained relations
between the Chinese settlers and the native Mongols on the one hand, and
between the Christians and the non-Christians on the other. For a number of
years this condition of animosity became more and more accentuated. The
local officials are very severely criticised for not taking measures to
secure peace, and it is said that “no mercy whatever can be extended to
them.” The rising first took place in Chao-yang-ksien, but attained its
greatest extent in Ping-chuan-chow and Chien-chang-ksien. The Mongol
population suffered most, but a missionary station was burned down and some
native Christians were murdered. These outrages against Christians were
committed by native religious sects. Crowds flocked to the standard of these
sects and the émeute assumed the proportions of a local rebellion against
public authority. It having been stated as an excuse for the outrages
against the Christians that many corpses of children had been found in the
cellars of the mission buildings without eyes or hearts, this matter was
fully investigated. It has been proved that the report of the magistrate to
this effect is absolutely false, and he is severely censured for making such
a misstatement. It will be seen that the inclosed decree follows
substantially the report of the Viceroy Li. The officials through whose
negligence the riots took place have been cashiered and banished. The
rebellion is now extinct. It is said that 20,000 lives have been taken. No
foreigner was injured.
I have, etc.,
[Inclosure in No. 1492.]
Punishment of officials for neglect in connection
with the insurrection in the northwest.
decree.
We are in receipt of a memorial from Li-Hung-chang and K’nei-pin
denouncing, in pursuance of imperial instruction, the district officers
responsible for the capture of Ch’aoyang and other towns. The recent
rising was first set on foot at Ch’aoyang by marauders from Jeho; the
department of P’ingch’üan and the district of Chiench’ang encountered
the brunt of the rebel movement, and the Mongol country suffered very
severely. In addition to all this, the chapels of the Catholics were
burnt and their converts murdered. The magistrates of the two
departments in question were uniformly remiss and careless in the
execution of their duty, with the result that the criminal element in
the community got an opportunity of inflaming the popular feeling and
bringing about a grave catastrophe. Were the letter of the law touching
official responsibility applied to their case, no mercy could be
extended to them. The inquiry which has been instituted into the case of
the Ch’aoyang magistrate, Liao Lunuing, shows that although he did not,
as was alleged, make his escape as soon as he received intelligence of
the rising, he habitually neglected the interests of the people and
spent his time in tippling and verse-making. He had also on frequent [Page 97] occasions contracted loans from
the wealthy people in his district and was deeply embarrassed. So
depraved was he, and so unworthy of public trust that when he was
transferred from Ch’ihfeng to Ch’oayang, the people of the former place
tried to prevent him from leaving in his insolvent condition.
Chang Tsou-k’ai, the magistrate of Chien-ch’ang, did not take the
slightest precaution to avert trouble when the feud first broke out, and
later on he failed to furnish an accurate account of the circumstances
connected with the pillage and massacre which took place at
Sanshihchiatze. His object was to evade responsibility by adopting a
policy based upon craft and deceit. The acting magistrate of
Pi’ng-ch’uan, Wen Pu-nien, is notorious for his trickery and is an adept
at making out a plausible defense when he gets into trouble. The
Catholic premises were in a street in the town, and yet he failed to
make any real effort for their protection. He exaggerated enormously the
number of the rebels and gave hasty credence to false rumors in
connection with the outrage upon the missionary establishment. His
reports were false and his proclamation had a most disquieting effect on
the minds of the people. The three officials above mentioned have, by
their grasping, deceitful, and utterly depraved conduct brought the most
grievous harm upon the district. The memorialists recommend, that Liao
Lun-ming should be cashiered and never again employed in the public
service, and that Chang Tsou-k’ai and Wen Pu-nien should be degraded and
their services dispensed with. This sentence we consider too light, and
we hereby command that all three be cashiered and banished. The other
proposals contained in the memorial are approved.
