Mr. Olney to Mr. Denby.

[No. 1172.]

Sir: The last Chinese mail brings your several dispatches in relation to the participation of representatives of this Government in the investigation of the Kutien massacre and reports the situation down to the 37th of August last.

I note particularly your dispatch No. 2325, of August 27, reporting the observations made to you by the Yamên in regard to grade of representation of the members on behalf of the United States. The opposition shown to the appointment of a naval commander to represent that arm of the service is not understood and appears to have rested on no good grounds. Instructions telegraphed to you regarding the organization of the commission will have shown you the importance here attached to having thereon representatives of adequate grade in order that no conspicuous disparity might appear. While this had express reference to the rank of the Chinese members, it is equally applicable to the rank of the American members.

[Page 158]

When the Department’s telegram of August 12 was sent to you the naval officer to be designated for the Kutien commission had not been selected, and in that telegram you were simply informed that a naval officer would be appointed upon the detail of the admiral, with whom you were directed to confer. Upon consultation here with the Acting Secretary of the Navy, it was deemed advisable that the naval representative should be of as high a rank as was conveniently practicable without conflicting with the relative rank of the United States consul, who was naturally to be the head of the American representation. By the regulations of the two services a captain and a consul are of equal rank and receive equal honors it was therefore decided that the Navy Department should advise the admiral to detail an officer of the next lowest grade, viz, a commander, and the admiral was so advised, without, however, designating the particular commander to be chosen. The choice was then understood, however, to be the commanding officer of the Detroit, a selection which was most gratifying to this Department.

Inasmuch as the detail of that officer necessarily rested with the admiral commanding the squadron, and as the direction to you to request such detail was merely intended to give the officer a representative footing upon the commission by reason of your diplomatic notice to the Yamên that he had been appointed, it is unfortunate that your telegram of the 26th instant to Admiral Carpenter should have appeared to assume that the detail of the naval member might be dependent upon your discretion, and that you should have seemed to regard the rank of an ensign as satisfying the exigencies of the case. You therein said: “If sending commander to Kutien depends upon my request, must say I see no necessity for sending another officer.” It was at no time contemplated to have two naval representatives. The only question was as to the grade of the single officer to be sent.

In the interviews had here with the Chinese minister it became evident that the policy of his Government was to belittle the occurrences at Kutien as well as at Chengtu; and the remonstrances addressed to you by the Yamên appeared to have been in the same direction. The policy so disclosed evidently explains the reluctance of the Chinese Government to see a naval representative of high grade appointed on the commission, even though his relative rank might still be inferior to that of the presiding consul. On the other hand, the aim of this Government throughout has been to give to the United States commission all the prestige that rank and authority can impart in order to insure the participation of Chinese officers of equally conspicuous grade and to give to the whole proceeding all possible impressiveness.

I am etc.,

Richard Olney
.