Mr. Conger to Mr.
Hay.
No. 431.]
Legation of the
United States,
Peking,
China, October 27, 1900.
Sir: I have the honor to confirm my telegram of the
26th instant, and to say that on yesterday the several foreign ministers met
to formally begin the discussion of terms of a settlement to be presented to
the Chinese plenipotentiaries. Each had been instructed that all the powers
had agreed substantially or in principle with the French propositions; and
as the question of punishments was the first of these, it was the first
taken up. After much discussion it was unanimously decided that the
punishment of death should be demanded for 11 officials, whom, it is agreed
by all foreign ministers and Chinese Government, are chiefly responsible for
the crimes committed, to wit, Princes Tuan, Chuang and I (Pu Ching), Tsai
Lien and Ysai Ying, Duke Lan, Tung Fu-hsiang, Yü Hsien, K’ang I, Chao
Shu-chiao, Ying Men. The manner of their death was much discussed, but it is
believed that whatever we demanded, most of them would either voluntarily or
by Imperial order commit suicide, so we simply say “death.” I have to-day
received a note from Li Hung-chang, which I inclose, informing me that Kang
I had died and that Governor Yü Hsien had taken his own life by swallowing
gold leaf.
The details that come to us of the horrible murder and mutilation of our
missionaries in the interior are so frightfully shocking that less severe
punishment can not be asked, and I believe the Chinese Government are so
impressed by the terrible results of their efforts to get rid of the
foreigners that they will readily accede to our demand unless the court is
held in the power of those who are to be thus punished; [Page 44] but whether or no, they should be made to do it
and to furnish ample and satisfactory proof of its accomplishment. Provision
must also be made for adequate punishment for all provincial and local
officials who may be proved to be in any way responsible for or accessory to
the crimes.
I inclose copy of my correspondence with Prince Ching and Li Hung-chang
regarding the rumored probability of removal of the Yangtze viceroys.
I have, etc.,
[Inclosure 1.]
Mr. Conger to
Prince Ching and Li
Hung-chang.
Peking,
China, October 26,
1900.
Your Highness and Your Excellency: Reports are
reaching me from several sources that reactionary and disturbing
officials are being appointed in the Yangtze provinces; that the power
of the viceroys is being thus undermined, and the removal of the
viceroys Liu Kun-i and Chang Chih-tung is contemplated. I can not
believe this, for such appointments or removals would be acts most
unfriendly toward the foreign powers who are now trying to negotiate a
settlement of the troubles which China has unfortunately brought upon
herself.
And yet the matter is so important that I am constrained to file a formal
and energetic protest against such action, and respectfully request your
highness and your excellency to communicate it to the Emperor by
telegraph.
I avail, etc.,
[Inclosure 2.]
Prince Ching and Li
Hung-chang to Mr. Conger.
Peking, October 27,
1900.
Your Excellency: We have just received your
excellency’s communication, in which you state that reports have been
reaching you that reactionary and disturbing officials are being
appointed in the Yangtze provinces; that the power of the viceroys is
being undermined, and the removal of the viceroys of the Liang Hu
provinces and of Nanking is contemplated, but that you can not believe
this, etc.
In reply we have the honor to say that it is very evident from your
excellency’s communication that you are sincerely friendly in your
intercourse with us, for which we feel exceedingly grateful.
We would observe, however, that in regard to the two viceroys—Liang Hu
provinces and Nanking—a decree was recently issued appointing these
officers to consult with us in arranging terms of peace, and they are
granted the position of minister plenipotentiary. The court certainly
relies on the position of these officers, and they certainly have not
been removed from their respective posts. Even supposing that the idea
[of their removal] emanated from persons who are opposed to them, still
the fact of their being high officials of the Government would certainly
prevent them from venturing to defeat or overthrow them before the very
presence of the Throne. We may inform your excellency that we have never
heard of the reports to which you allude, and even your excellency knows
that they are certainly not really true.
In sending this communication in reply to your excellency’s, which we beg
you will duly take note of, we ask you not to listen to false reports,
etc.
[Enclosure 3.—Private note.]
Li Hung-chang to
Mr. Conger.
Peking, October 27,
1900.
Your Excellency: I beg to inform your
excellency that I have just received a telegram from the governor of
Shensi, Ts’en, stating that Kang I died on the 18th instant, and that Yu
Hsien died by taking poison (lit: swallowing gold). This information is
perfectly true. Further, that Prince Tuan is not allowed to accompany
the Emperor.
Card of Li Hung-chang, with compliments.
