Mr. Adee to Mr. Conger .
Washington , August 24, 1899 .
Sir: You transmit hither, with your dispatch No. 232 of the 12th ultimo, copies of correspondence exchanged by you with the tsungli yamen and with the consul at Chefoo, and Messrs. Johnson and Chalfant, American missionaries at I Chou-fu, in the province of Shantung, touching their trouble with the provincial authorities growing out of the antiforeign riot cases pending in that prefecture.
[Page 176]It appears from the correspondence transmitted by you that under date of June 5 the missionaries reported that their native Christians had not been allowed to return to their homes and resume their agricultural pursuits, and that no steps had been taken by the local authorities to settle their claims for injuries received; that on June 27 you wrote to the tsungli yamen, calling attention to this condition of affairs, and to the trifling way in which your representations to the Chinese Government had been treated, and requesting that immediate telegraphic instructions be sent to the provincial authorities to bring about the punishment of the offenders and reparation to the missionaries, as well as security for the native converts; and that under date of June 30 the yamen replied that it had already instructed the governor of the province to consider the matter and take action thereon, and that they were now in receipt of his report, which they proceeded to summarize. From that summary it appears that those directly responsible for the outrages were not found; that the place of their occurrence was quiet and peaceful; that the gentry and people of the locality were willing to pay the losses sustained, as well as to rebuild the chapel which had been destroyed; and that all that was required to bring about a peaceful settlement was that the missionaries and their converts should return to I Chou-fu to consult with the local authorities. Three of the persons implicated in the crime were then, according to the statement of the yamen, under arrest awaiting trial.
Under date of June 30 you wrote to the consul at Chefoo, inclosing a copy of the yamen’s note, and, while noting a number of errors in its statements, saying that you deemed it advisable “in view of there being so many officials from high to low to deal with, the distances so great, and the means of communication so slow,” for the missionaries to take up the case themselves and try to make “the best arrangement possible” with the prefect, adding that by such means you thought “a reasonably satisfactory settlement” ought to be reached.
Finally, on July 6, you wrote again to the tsungli yamen, acknowledging their note of June 30, informing them of the advice you had transmitted to the missionaries, and stating that you would only take up the question of fact again upon the failure of the missionaries and the prefect to satisfactorily arrange the matter.
Upon this showing the Department is disposed to think that, while the procedure suggested by you may operate to bring about a settlement of this particular case satisfactory to the immediate sufferers, you have foregone a convenient opportunity for insisting upon the responsibility of the local authorities of I Chou-fu, whose punishment you might have continued to urge on the lines of the policy laid down in the instructions heretofore sent to the legation in analogous cases, such punishment being in complete accord with Chinese ideas, and being, moreover, apparently the only recognized method of preventing the recurrence of such inquiries. There is ground for apprehension lest an omission, the appropriate case arising, to strongly bring to the knowledge of the tsungli yamen the purpose of this Government to insist upon the punishment of the local officials may tend to weaken any representations you may hereafter be called upon to make in that sense under standing instructions.
I am, etc.,
Acting Secretary.