I inclose a copy of my answer, as dean, to that communication. It will be
seen that the foreign representatives found themselves unable to agree
to the proposed plan, I thoroughly concur in the conclusion arrived
at.
[Inclosure in No. 1764.]
Mr. Denby to
the Tsung-li-Yamên.
Your Highness and Your Excellencies: On the
10th of November the minister of the United States had the honor to
receive from your highness and your excellencies a communication
which set forth a communication from the governor-general of
Hu-kuang to the Tsung-li-Yamên and one from the taotai of Ching
Chow, Ichang, and Shihnan to the governor-general.
The purport of these papers was that foreigners traveling in China
should be required, when applying for passports, either at Peking or
in the provinces, to report their intended movements, and while
traveling should report in person to the subprefects or magistrates
found en route, their arrival as well as their intended
movements.
After setting forth these two communications, your highness and your
excellencies conclude by requesting the minister of the United
States “to communicate with his colleagues, consider the question
presented, and try to adopt, as quickly as practicable, a feasible
plan of action, and inform the prince and ministers thereof, so that
they may instruct the high authorities of the provinces to act
accordingly.” And your highness and your excellencies further say,
“The Yamên is, in this matter, actuated by a sincere desire to give
protection to foreigners traveling under passports.”
The minister of the United States duly transmitted to his colleagues
the original and an English translation of this important
communication. Two meetings have been held by the foreign
representatives to consider its contents, and after mature
deliberation, they have instructed the minister of the United States
to transmit to the prince and ministers the following answer
thereto:
The foreign representatives appreciate the honorable and praiseworthy
motive that produced the paper under consideration, it being, as
stated by the prince and ministers, to insure the protection of
foreigners when traveling. They find themselves, however, unable to
assent to the proposition that all foreigners, when traveling in
China, shall report in person to the magistrates through whose
jurisdiction they happen to pass. To do so would be impracticable. A
heavy burden would be laid upon foreigners by such a rule, and the
penalty suggested by the taotai for failure to comply with it, to
wit, the forfeiture of protection, is by no means admissible.
A more serious objection, and one which is, to the minds of the
foreign representatives, insuperable, is that the proposed rule
would materially change the purport of the treaties. To make this
apparent, the minister of the United States calls attention to the
provisions of the British treaty with China, signed at Tientsin,
26th June, 1858, which have been, in substance, incorporated in
every treaty that has been made with China since that date.
[Page 154]
Article IX of that treaty reads as follows:
British subjects are hereby authorized to travel, for their
pleasure or for purposes of trade, to all parts of the
interior under passports which will be issued by their
consuls and countersigned by the local authorities. These
passports, if demanded, must be
produced for examination in the localities passed through.
If the passport be not irregular the bearer will be allowed
to proceed. * * *
Article XVIII of the same treaty contains this language:
The Chinese authorities shall, at all times, afford the
fullest protection to the persons and property of British
subjects. * * *
It will be seen from the first article quoted that travelers are not
required to report to officials en route, but are only required to
exhibit their passports when a demand to do so is made. Such, the
minister of the United States believes, is the rule existing in all
countries where the system of passports prevails.
The prince and ministers will readily admit that it is not in the
power of any foreign representative to add to or take from a treaty
any material clause, and that their request can not, therefore, be
complied with.
It is questionable, also, whether the proposed rule would accomplish
any good purpose. The presence of foreigners in any locality in the
interior is immediately known to all the population, the officials
included, and travelers perfectly understand that, in case of
trouble, they have the right to apply to the officials for
protection and that it is the duty of the local authorities to
protect him.
The minister of the United States takes this occasion to renew,
etc.,
