Mr. Gresham to Mr. Yang Yü.
Washington, November 30, 1894.
Sir: On the 18th of August last you complained to me that the U. S. consul at Shanghai was protecting two Japanese spies, who had been arrested in the French concession in that city, and whose surrender was demanded by the Chinese authorities in order that they might be dealt with in due course. After proper inquiry into the circumstances of the case, the demand of the Chinese authorities was recognized as lawful and the men were given up.
Of this decision the Japanese Government has made no complaint. On the contrary, that Government, as is well known, after its declaration of war, proclaimed that the treaties with China were no longer in force, and that the Chinese in Japan would thereafter be wholly subject to the local tribunals; and I am assured by the Japanese minister at this capital that, in the opinion of his Government, our consul at Shanghai could not, under the circumstances, have held the men against the demand of the authorities.
Nevertheless, when I informed you of the Department’s decision, I requested that the men might not be tried till the return of the minister of the United States to Peking.
While it was not assumed that this Government had a right to exact a condition of this kind, the request was made with a view to prevent any precipitate or aggravated action, and you were so good as to comply with it at once. You subsequently informed me that your Government had acceded to it.
On the 13th day of November I received a dispatch from Mr. Dun, our minister at Tokyo, saying that the men had been beheaded. This information you subsequently confirmed in an interview at this Department, held at my request. You then stated not only that the men when arrested had in their possession maps describing military works in China—a fact which had previously been communicated to the Department—but also that it was found that they had sent military information to their Government by telegraph, and that the evidence that they were spies was so clear and strong that the death penalty was inflicted.
Without assuming to question the lawfulness of this sentence under the laws of war, as recognized in the United States as well as in other countries, I regret to say that there is reason to believe that the men were executed before the return of Colonel Denby to Peking, and, therefore, in derogation of the voluntary promise which you assured me your Government had made. If this belief should prove to be well founded, it is needless to point out to you the unfavorable effect which the action of the Chinese authorities can not fail to produce on public opinion, not only in this country but elsewhere.
Accept, sir, etc.,