Mr. Denby to Mr.
Olney.
Legation of the United States,
Pekin, February 25,
1897. (Received April 19.)
No. 2696.]
Sir: In your dispatch No: 1368,1 of November 25 last, you inclose a
draft of a communication relating to antiforeign riots, and embodying
suggestions as to steps to be taken for the prevention of their
recurrence.
This paper was duly presented to the Yamên, and I have now the honor to
inclose a translation of the Yamên’s answer thereto.
As the inauguration of this discussion originated with the Department, I
deem it proper to submit the answer to the draft above mentioned to you
before replying thereto. I beg to observe, however, that the inclosure
bears signs of having been hastily prepared, perhaps owing to the fact
that it was written during the vacation incidental to the Chinese New
Year, when business is mostly suspended.
I observe, also, that the gravity of the subject-matter may be more
strongly enforced by a personal interview than in written
correspondence, and that I contemplate having an oral discussion with
the Yamên before a final result is reached. In the Department’s draft
the first demand is: “Recognition by the issuance of a formal
declaration in an Imperial decree that American missionaries have the
right to reside in the interior of China.”
The Yamên answers that this right is provided for by treaty, and mentions
that various decrees recognizing it have been issued. This is a valuable
admission, as treaties, except the Berthemy convention, are silent on
the question of residence in the interior.
A direct and positive recognition of this right, however, made in
connection with a statement as to the measure to be taken to prevent
riots, would be valuable, and, indeed, necessary for the complete
apprehension of any decree relating to the subject. As to the second
point, the right of American missionaries to buy land in the interior,
the Yamên simply states that “American missionaries should be treated in
this matter the same as the French missionaries.”
Here again the desired purpose is not accomplished. What is wanted is not
a recognition of this right by the Tsung-li Yamên in a communication
addressed to this legation, but an open and notorious publication in an
Imperial decree that the right exists, and the communication thereof
authoritatively to all the local officials all over China.
Such action would probable prevent the ever-recurring troubles which
confront our missionaries in their efforts to secure land for stations
in the interior.
The third suggestion of the Department goes to the responsibility of [Page 61] the higher officials in the
localities in which riots occur for the acts or omissions of their
subordinates. The Yamên does not seem to have apprehended the point of
this specification.
The Yamên concedes that if the local officials “do not take precautionary
measures to prevent trouble * * *” they should be punished 5 but it does
reply to the suggestion, which is the gist of the paragraph, that “the
viceroy or governor of the province in which it (a riot) has occurred,
who is directly responsible to the Throne for the acts and omissions of
every one of his subordinates, although his only fault may be
ignorance,” should be held responsible for the acts or omissions of his
subordinates.
This paragraph embodies the most important suggestion in the Department’s
paper.
The whole discussion leads up to the idea expressed specifically on page
4 of that paper, to the effect that “the main remedy for existing evils
and the surest prevention of riots will be holding of the local
officials to a personal accountability for every outrage against
foreigners that may occur in their jurisdiction.”
What is wanted is an Imperial decree embodying this idea. Paragraph 4 of
the Department’s specifications goes to the proposition that officials
found guilty of negligence or connivance with rioters should be
punished, in addition to suffering degradation or deprivation of
office.
The Yamên does not see its way clear to carry out the Department’s
suggestions. It is conceded that the question of the punishment of
officials, who are practically supreme in their provinces, for
negligence is difficult of solution, but no difficulty is found in
awarding suitable punishment for crimes committed against the Throne,
and, if possible, China must be made to learn that the murder of
foreigners and the destruction of their property are “offenses of a very
grave nature.”
I have, etc.,
[Inclosure in No. 2696.]
The Tsung-li Yamên to
Mr. Denby.
Pekin, February 19,
1897.
No. 5.]
Your Excellency: On the 11th of February
instant the princes and ministers had the honor to receive a
communication from the United States minister, wherein he states
that on the 21st day of September last he had the honor, by
direction of his Government, to address the Yamên a communication to
the effect that his Government was carefully considering the subject
of antiforeign riots in China, with the view to present to the Yamên
thereafter another communication embodying its views on the measures
that it is desired to see adopted in order to prevent the recurrence
of these lamentable outrages on foreign residents in China. Your
excellency further states that the best means to prevent the
recurrence of antiforeign riots in China would be to adopt certain
measures, so that the good relations existing between the two
countries maybe confirmed and strengthened.
On receiving your excellency’s communication of the 21st of September
the Yamên replied that it is only necessary that both Chinese and
foreigners should be commanded to observe the treaties, and if the
plan decided upon is not in contravention to treaty stipulations,
China will certainly come to a suitable decision.
[Page 62]
From the tenor of your excellency’s communication the local officials
should be held responsible when outrages against foreigners occur in
their jurisdiction.
Your excellency proposes the following measures:
First. Recognition by the issuance of a formal declaration in an
Imperial decree that American missionaries have the right to reside
in the interior of China. It may be observed that this right is
provided for by treaty. Imperial decrees have already been issued
commanding that due protection should be given to United States
citizens residing in China.
It is the duty of China to adopt every means to give proper
protection to Americans living in China, as pointed out by your
excellency. It is therefore not necessary to dwell at length on that
point.
Second. Your excellency states that the declaration in such decree
should be that American missionaries have the right to buy land in
the interior of China; that they have all the privileges of the
Berthemy convention, and that deeds taken by them shall be in the
name of the missionary society or church which buys the land, as
that convention provides.”
The princes and ministers beg to state that while the treaties
between the United States and China do not provide for this, still
the American missionaries should be treated in this matter the same
as the French missionaries.
Third. The determination of and formal declaration by China by
Imperial decree to’ hold responsible and properly punish not only
all individuals or minor officials directly or remotely involved
upon the occurrence of any riot whereby peaceable American citizens
have been affected in person or property or injured in their
established rights, but also the viceroy or governor of the province
in which it has occurred, etc.
It may be observed that all cases of outrages against missionaries
and their property are the acts of bad characters. Take, for
instance, the riots in Szechuan and Kutien. These were caused by
outlaws, a fact duly supported by evidence. The local authorities
are charged with the duties of looking after the people and seeing
that tranquillity prevails within their jurisdiction. If they do not
take precautionary measures to prevent trouble, or after trouble has
arisen if they fail to act properly, they are guilty of an offense
and should be punished.
The viceroys and governors are responsible for the provinces, and if
the local authorities fail to do their duty they can not repudiate
the charge intrusted to them.
Fourth. That the punishment of officials found guilty of negligence
in case of a riot, or of connivance with rioters, shall not simply
be degradation from or deprivation of office, but that they shall
be, in addition, rendered forever incapable of holding office, and
shall also be punished by death, imprisonment, confiscation of
property, banishment, or in some other manner under the laws of
China in proportion to the enormity of their offense.
To this the princes and ministers would observe that as to the
punishment inflicted on delinquent officials—those who fail to meet
their liabilities to the Government—have their property confiscated
by order of the Emperor. Other offenses, such as officials taking
bribes or violating the statutes, are merely punished by deprivation
of office.
The punishment of “forever holding office again” is inflicted only
for offenses of a very grave nature. The punishment by death,
banishment, or imprisonment for the above offenses is not provided
for by the penal code. If such severe punishment were to be
inflicted on officials [Page 63] who
have failed to deal properly with, missionary cases, it is feared
that the people would treat them with contempt; besides, outlaws who
entertain a grudge against local officials might some day say that
the officials who have punished us are now in turn being punished
themselves. Should this feeling of contempt increase serious
complications might arise. The princes and ministers, therefore, do
not see their way clear to carry out the above suggestions.
Fifth. Your excellency suggests that the Imperial decree embodying
the above provision shall be prominently put up and displayed in
every Yamên in China.
To this the princes and ministers would state that during the past
few years the Yamên has frequently instructed the high officials in
the provinces to act as already decreed by the Emperor, and it does
not seem necessary to discuss this point.
In a word: Whenever missionary cases have occurred of recent years
the Yamên has always taken action in good earnest. Everything has
been done in cases that have not interfered with the internal
administration of China, or have not been in violation of treaty
stipulations.
The friendly relations existing between the United States and China
have always been staunch and firm. The princes and ministers believe
that the minister of the United States will be considerate in this
matter, and hope he will send a copy of this communication for the
information of the honorable Secretary of State.