The subject-matter is of growing importance. American travelers, and
especially missionaries, are traversing China in every direction. There
can not be the least objection on our part to their doing so provided
that in their journeying they exercise common prudence, and do not
recklessly or ostentatiously rush into localities such as the Mantsz
country, which are almost savage, and are scarcely under the firm
control of the Chinese Government.
I have deemed it to be my duty to issue a word of warning on this
subject, and submit what I have written for your approval.
[Inclosure in No. 2717.]
Mr. Denby to
Mr. Smithers.
Legation of the United States,
Pekin
,
March 19, 1897
.
No. 12.]
Sir: I have received your dispatch No. 4,
of February 11 wherein, you bring to my attention a letter sent by
the foreign office at Chengtu to Rev. Mr. Cady.
This letter states that “there is at hand from the Kien Chang taotai
an official letter saying that Ta Shu Pao is on the great road and
missionaries of every country constantly pass along that way. At
present in going to Yueh She they will not go by Chin Che, but go
around by Whang Muh Chang, all the way a by-road. This is under the
Pien official and is full of Mantsz, a wild, mountainous road
distant from Pao five or six day’s journey, and it is not convenient
to send an escort and there is no place to change the escort. Also
from Chin Che to Kien Chang they will not go by the great road, but
according to their own will go by Ta Tien Pah, which is a nest of
Mantsz and there is no one to receive and relieve the escort.”
It is further stated that “Yueh Shi Ting is all Mantsz land and has
not intercourse with Kien Chang, and all the small roads are through
Mantsz country, and for the most part destitute of constables to
control the people.”
The purport of the whole letter is that missionaries traveling in
Kien Chang should go by the great road and should show their
passports to the local officials, and then an escort will be sent,
and they are on no account “to go by the small roads or enter the
Mantsz country or disturbed districts and bring upon themselves
trouble.”
In commenting on this letter Mr. Cady in a letter to you says:
First, let me say that I know of no American who has been
traveling in the district of Kien Chang. The letter assumes
that the treaty obliges travelers to go by the main roads
and inform the officials of the proposed journey and obtain
from them an escort. Of course you know that the treaties
contain no such provision. * * *
[Page 99]
As to the exhibition of passports Mr. Cady is correct. This question
is governed by Article IX of the British (Tientsin) treaty of 1858,
which provides:
The passports must he produced for examination in the
localities passed through.
The foreign representatives have construed that clause to mean that
on proper demand by a proper official passports must be exhibited,
but the traveler need not voluntarily show his passport, nor go out
of the way to hunt up an official for the purpose of showing his
passport.
As to the routes to be followed in traversing districts occupied by
the Mantsz, or any other disturbed districts, much must be left to
your discretion. If you consider any district to be dangerous, you
should inform the American citizen who proposes to travel therein of
his danger, and you should advise him not to venture in such
locality, and you should at all times furnish whatever information
you possess as to the safety of roads or routes.
It is not within your power to control the movements of your
fellow-citizens, but I am sure that our Government will not sanction
the needless incurring of risk of great danger by its citizens, and
there can be no doubt that in consideration of the protection
afforded by the Government it has the right to demand and will
demand the exercise of prudence and discretion from its
beneficiaries.
I am, sir, etc.,
