Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States, With the Annual Message of the President Transmitted to Congress December 2, 1902
Mr. Conger to Mr. Hay.
Peking, January 8, 1902.
Sir: I have the honor to confirm my telegram of the 7th instant.
On the 6th the Russian minister called on me, and after discussing in a friendly way the unfortunate situation at Niuchwang left a memorandum, which I inclose.
He not only complains of the acts of the sailors set out in his memorandum, but of the refusal of our consul to recognize the gravity of the situation, and of his and Commander Barry’s unwillingness to cooperate, in a friendly and quiet way, to settle the affairs mentioned and to prevent the occurrence of others. I said to him that because telegraphic communication was cut off by the Russians at Niuchwang I had not yet received report of these troubles, and, of course, could not tell upon whom the prime responsibility rests, but I was sure there must have been some real or fancied provocation for the sailors’ conduct; but at any rate I would at once wire to the United States consul to go to the farthest consistent limit in meeting in a friendly way the Russian officials, and to try every way possible to settle the matters quietly and amicably, and I would urge the commander of the United States gunboat to use extra efforts to control his men.
The situation at Niuchwang is undoubtedly very critical, and the strain is daily growing more severe, and unless better relations are established serious results may follow.
As far as I can learn, when the Russian captain, Eberhard, assumed the office of civil administrator, for some reason he did not call on the foreign consuls, as has always been the prevailing rule there and at other oriental ports; hence, when the English and American gunboats arrived their commanders did not call on him, finding sufficient reason in the fact that their respective consuls could not accompany and introduce them, and from this source I apprehend most of the trouble and ill feeling has arisen.
The Russians claim that the foreign consuls and naval officers treat them as if they were Chinese, and the consuls and naval officers claim that the Russian authorities are domineering, assuming, and doing much beyond their rights, etc.
The Russians have evidenced annoyance because the English and American gunboats came there without permission of or notice to them. The Russian minister asked me yesterday why this was done. I replied, because Niuchwang is an open treaty port, and we had quite as much right there as they, and neither their permission or special notice of the coming of the gunboat was necessary. I said further, that since the occupation of Niuchwang by the Russians was temporary, and it was understood that they were soon to leave, it was not thought, under [Page 147] the unsettled conditions, to be safe to leave our interests and our citizens there unprotected during the long and icebound season. He quickly asked if that was the only reason the gunboat was sent there. I replied yes, so far as I was informed, and at any rate it was the only ground upon which I requested that the vessel should be sent. He said he was greatly pleased to know this, for the Russians had all believed that the coming of the Algerine and Vicksburg was a sort of combined naval demonstration against the Russians, and was evidently the cause of the apparent bitter feeling on the part of the officials at Niuchwang.
I said to him that he should also telegraph to his consul and other officials there, that they must also go to the farthest consistent limit to settle amicably, and to restrain their soldiers from unwarranted acts or provocation. This he promised to do. I to-day called on him and left a memorandum, copy of which I inclose.
Of course I can not speak intelligently of the attacks mentioned, because I have only the Russian account, and I am sure there are two sides to the story. You will undoubtedly have received full particulars from the consul before this reaches you. I have, however, believed it my duty to write to Mr. Miller that in view of the strained relations existing, and the constant probability of unhappy encounters between the soldiers and sailors, he ought not to depend upon the usual formal consular court procedure in cases like those mentioned, or waste time or temper in unnecessary official correspondence over them, but that consuls and military and naval officers should get together and settle them quietly and equitably, and especially should he urge Commander Barry to prescribe and carry out methods of discipline and control which would prevent the recurrence of like troubles. I inclose all the recent correspondence with Mr. Miller concerning the unfortunate situation.
I have, etc.,
The Russian Minister to China to Mr. Conger.
memorandum.
On the 23d of December last, at Niuchwang, American sailors were the authors of disorders and of a quarrel, during which they beat two Russian soldiers belonging to the police.
On the evening of the 25th of December three American sailors attacked a Russian sentinel at the gate of the city. Thanks to the coolness and to the sentiment of discipline manifested by the sentinel, who, instead of exercising his right of firing, merely aimed at his aggressors, bloodshed was avoided and probably the life of an American sailor preserved.
In view of these incidents the administration of Niuchwang again called the attention of the United States consul at that place to the necessity of the establishment of a regulation for the conduct of sailors going ashore, and to the urgency of the punishment of the authors of the attack against the sentinel.
The United States consul refuses to recognize the gravity of the offense committed by the American sailors, and answered stiffly to Captain Eberhard by referring to the treaties, and said that he was ready to examine the matter in case a complaint were made to him according to the established rule; that is to say, if the sentinel presented himself at the consulate and gave his testimony.
On the night of January 1 a still graver incident took place. Two American sailors fired a revolver several times at a Russian soldier who was passing along the [Page 148] street on his way to the telegraph office performing his duties, and wounded him in the arm.
In view of the provoking attitude of the American sailors and, contrary to their expectations, the refusal of the United States consul to amicably cooperate with the Russian authorities, General Alexieff’s aid-de-camp believes himself obliged to take severe measures to protect his soldiers, and maintain at Niuchwang the order and respect of the authorities, and that he must henceforth decline the responsibility of the consequences which may result.
Mr. Conger to the Russian Minister to China.
memorandum.
Because of the closing of the telegraph office by Russian authority at Niuchwang, no report of the troubles between American sailors and Russian soldiers has yet been received from the consul of the United States. Its arrival must await the slow course of the mails.
However, without waiting to ascertain definitely upon whom the prime responsibility for the disorders rests, telegrams have at once been sent to the United States consul and the commander of the United States gunboat to meet and confer with the Russian officials in a friendly spirit, and to go to the fullest consistent limit in cooperation with them to settle all matters quietly, quickly, and satisfactorily, and to devise such stringent regulations for the control and discipline of the sailors as to make it impossible for them to be the aggressors in any future disturbances.
It is to be hoped that no further troubles will occur, but in any event no one can avoid the final responsibility for the resultant consequences of any action he may take.
Mr. Miller to Mr. Conger.
Niuchwang, China, December 14, 1901.
Sir: I have to report to you the following notice received at this consulate yesterday:
“Notice is hereby given that this office, the Chinese Eastern Railroad Telegraph station, Niuchwang, will be closed from 1st December, Russian date.”
This means that this port will have no telegraphic communication with any part of the world outside of Russia.
Another office, under the control of the military authorities, will take messages and deliver them to any part of Manchuria and Russia.
We are at this time, therefore, absolutely without any means of sending messages to Pekin or any country but Russia.
The military forces are trying gradually to assume entire direction of all affairs here.
We were for more than three weeks without any mail communication on account of the military refusing to allow mails to be carried on the trains from here to Port Arthur for either the Chinese or Japanese post.
Last winter mails were carried regularly for the Chinese post.
This difficulty has been corrected as far as the Chinese post is concerned; but they still refuse to carry the mail for the Japanese post, and complain that the Japanese have no right to establish a post-office here, and therefore our mail from the United States coming by the Japanese post is delayed and held up.
Now we are to be without telegraphic communication.
The Russian authorities have complained because the British and American gunboats came and docked here without notice to them.
The new administrator refuses to call upon the consuls and make their personal acquaintance, as has been the custom of this port.
All new officials call upon those in office. This is the custom with consuls and Chinese officials, and was practiced by the Japanese at the time of their occupation of the port.
[Page 149]We recognize the civil administrator as our equal, and expect him to follow the usual custom.
There is a growing feeling on the part of Russians generally that all foreigners are here by the grace and courtesy of Russia and not by treaty with China.
If you have any suggestions to offer in way of advice I shall be most happy to receive them.
I have, etc.,
Mr. Conger to Mr. Miller.
Peking, December 28, 1901.
Sir: I have received your No. 58 of the 14th instant, with information that the Chinese Eastern Railroad Telegraph was closed, and in consequence you had no telegraph communication outside of Russia and Manchuria, etc.
In a conference with the Russian minister yesterday he informed me that this grows out of an existing arrangement with the Danish Telegraph Company, which Russia is bound to observe (the Danish company pretends to have a monopoly of international telegraphic service in China), but that the Russian consul at Niuchwang, as well as Admiral Alexieff, had telegraphed to St. Petersburg urging that some arrangement be made whereby telegraph service might be restored, and the minister expresses the belief that it will soon be accomplished.
If the Russian authorities make formal complaint to you that the American gunboat came to Niuchwang without giving them notice, you might reply that Niuchwang is a treaty port, open to all nations, and you know of no rule requiring such notice, etc.
The rule of etiquette you mention as to calls is the general one in the Orient, and unless it has heretofore been modified by local practice at Niuchwang, you are correct in following it.
I am, etc.,
Mr. Miller to Mr. Conger.
Niuchwang, December 20, 1901.
Sir: I have the honor to inclose you a copy of a dispatch from the Russian consul, Mr. Kristy, and my reply to the same.
This is simply a plan of annoyance and interference with Mr. McCaslin’s property interests adjoining Russian Town, the terminus of the Russian railroad, 3 miles up the river. It is the beginning of a movement on the part of the Russians to irritate and annoy foreign interests, property owners and merchants, so as to destroy the business of foreigners in this port. I shall always stand ready to enforce decency and respect for law and order on the part of American citizens here, but I can not permit at the present time the complete domination of the Russian authorities and their unrestrained control over American interests here.
If my position is not tenable I beg you to cable me proper instructions.
I would thank you to advise me by wire if I am correct in my position.
I have, etc.,
Mr. Kristy to Mr. Miller.
Le 5 (18) Decembre, 1901.
Sir: There are some stone buildings near the Russian settlement belonging to an American citizen, Mr. McCaslin, and rented by the owner to Chinamen. All these [Page 150] houses are inhabited only by Chinese element, and many of a very suspicious character and profession. Stolen railway materials of different kinds are hidden in these houses; again, railway tickets are forged and sold to the ignorant people going by the train up country; also, offenders against the law find refuge in the said houses; in short, deeds are committed of an undecorous nature.
Again, this port and its environs being infested with pest, the Russian authorities in the Russian settlement are very anxious to take the most important and necessary sanitary measures in all houses peopled by Chinese near the Russian settlement, particularly where the Russian troops are situated.
Under the above-mentioned circumstances I hope you will understand the state of affairs, as you will clearly see that it is against the interests of the railway company and also the Russian military authorities to have such disorder in the said houses.
As the above-mentioned houses being the property of an American citizen and peopled merely by Chinese, who live on an extraterritorial place, the latter no doubt thereby hope to carry on their nefarious traffic with impunity. I have the honor to inform you that the Russian authorities in the Russian settlement will take all steps and issue necessary orders to discover any crime, and also to take the necessary precautions to see to that the said houses are kept in a sanitary condition.
I have, etc.,
Mr. Miller to Mr. Kristy.
Niuchwang, China, December 20, 1901.
Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your dispatch of the 18th instant, in which you say that “the Russian authorities in the Russian settlement will take all steps and issue necessary orders to discover any crime, and also offenders who find refuge in those houses owned by Mr. McCaslin, and also take the necessary precautions to see that the said houses are kept in a sanitary condition.”
I beg to advise you that it will be my pleasure to assist you in preventing criminals from taking refuge in any property owned by American citizens, and to do whatever is necessary to have proper sanitary conditions maintained therein.
In this connection I beg to advise you that whatever may be required in arrests of occupants of these premises, it will be necessary to enter a complaint in this consulate and have the arrest made by my sanction. If complaints are justified I will send the United States marshal to make the arrest and turn over the offenders to the Chinese courts for trial and punishment.
I beg further to suggest that any complaints of unsanitary conditions of these premises be filed at this consulate, where they will receive prompt attention and correction.
Am I to understand that it is the intention of the Russian authorities to assume the jurisdiction and control of the property owned by Americans in Manchuria, and to assume the duties, responsibilities, and direction heretofore belonging to the consul of the United States of America?
If this is the meaning of your dispatch, will you be kind enough to inform me by what authority you supersede with Russian rule the treaty right under which American citizens have become property owners and under which they have carried on business affairs, and under which the consuls of the United States of America have performed their functions?
I have received no notice from my Government of any change or alteration in the right of American citizens or of my duties and official responsibilities.’ And until I receive them I shall endeavor to perform all the functions of consul heretofore belonging to the office.
In the absence of the Chinese authorities I understand that your Government is temporarily administering the affairs of the country, but in no way altering the rights and privileges of foreigners. I must therefore call your attention to the fact that the course you seem to indicate that your authorities propose to take in regard to Mr. McCaslin’s property is a direct and absolute violation of these rights, and I insist that your officers must not interfere with the sanitary affairs or any others pertaining to Mr. McCaslin’s property except by the authority of this consulate.
[Page 151]I must also insist that any arrest of occupants of those premises be sanctioned by me.
This has been the mode of proceeding under the Chinese administration and should be maintained by your temporary administration.
Hoping that you will see the points of my views of a proper mode of proceeding in this matter, I have, etc.,
Mr. Kristy to Mr. Miller.
Le 5 (18) Decembre, 1901.
Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your favors dated November 27 and 7th instant concerning the docking of a Russian launch on the ground belonging to one of your nationals, Mr. C. McCaslin.
In reply I have the honor to point out to you that none of the Russian authorities wanted intentionally to make depredations and unwarranted use ot land belonging to one of your nationals. Even if the dock has been dug on the ground of an American citizen, it happened by a misunderstanding, which was the fault of the owner.
When we drove out together to see where the dock had been made, I called your attention to the fact that the stones with the owner’s initials, marking the boundaries of your national’s property, were placed beyond the dock.
This circumstance put the dock builder on a wrong scent, as he thought that the stones were in the proper place and acted according to the common sense and indications of people living in the Russian settlement.
Besides, according to the Chinese and Russian laws, a certain part of the ground from the bank of the river can not be anybody’s property.
I have had a personal conversation about the matter with Mr. McCaslin to endeavor to settle this affair amicably, being firmly convinced that Mr. McCaslin would be modest in his claims. Now, Mr. McCaslin is unwilling to settle this matter for 500 rubles under the conditions mentioned in the copy of a letter which you sent to me from Mr. McCaslin.
This claim of Mr. McCaslin as a rent for a small dock, in comparison with the rent for which the provisional imperial Russian civil administration paid for rent for a much larger dock, in my opinion, is too immodest, the more so that the above-mentioned gentleman was at fault in this matter.
Therefore I absolutely refuse to give any attention to any claim of Mr. McCaslin.
Owing to the complete undetermination of the boundaries of the land belonging to Mr. McCaslin near the Russian settlement, I have the honor to ask you kindly to let me have the plan of American property there.
This is necessary to enable me to inform the Russian authorities there distinctly where the property of Mr. McCaslin is situated, and what marks show the boundaries, thereby avoiding all unpleasantness and misunderstanding in the future.
I have, etc.,
Mr. Miller to Mr. Kristy.
Niuchwang, China, December 19, 1901.
I have the honor to acknowledge your dispatch of the 18th instant, concerning the docking of a launch owned by the Russian authorities. I am surprised at the position you take in saying:
“Therefore I absolutely refuse to give any attention to any claim of Mr. McCaslin.”
You admitted to me in conversation over the matter that a wrong had been done, and that compensation would be made, but complained that Mr. McCaslin’s demands were too much.
I am therefore astonished that you should refuse to do justice to an American citizen, and am at a loss to understand by what right you claim to enter upon his property without due compensation.
[Page 152]There was an abundance of river frontage owned by the Russian authorities, a mile or more, adjoining Mr. McCaslin’s land, where your boat could have been docked as well as on Mr. McCaslin’s land.
It is true that all of this river bank and land is subject to constant washings and destruction, and it would have increased the washing away of this land belonging to the Russian authorities to have broken the bank by docking a boat there, and this may have been the reason for not using their own land for that purpose.
The same condition of damage by washing, however, pertains to the land of Mr. McCaslin and the measure of damage that he claims is based upon this fact.
Your claim that the occupation of this land by Russian authority is the fault of the owner is a point that I fail to comprehend.
His agent there remonstrated at the time, and as soon as he was notified he addressed you a communication giving the terms and conditions upon which it could be occupied. After that the dock was completed, and long after the boat was docked there, and the action of your authorities in completing the dock and docking the boat after Mr. McCaslin’s letter of notice and terms were received by you, and after I had called your attention to the violation of Mr. McCaslin’s rights, was a practical acceptation of his terms.
Your claim that the boundary stones were beyond the limits of the dock has an appearance of an excuse for your getting on to Mr. McCaslin’s land, but it is not a fair excuse for continued occupation.
The boundary stones to which you refer were not all of the original stones, as some have been washed away in the 150 feet of his land that has been destroyed and washed away.
Your further claim that by Chinese and Russian laws a certain part of the ground along the bank of the river can not belong to individuals does not, in my opinion, apply to this case.
I must beg you to point out to me when and by what authority “Russian law” has been substituted in lieu of the treaty rights of China guaranteed to American citizens here.
This Chinese law to which you refer is evidently the custom and regulation by which a passage along the river can not be closed by individuals.
The Chinese custom or law does not, however, give your people the right to close a passage to the river by docking a boat there without permission of the owner of the land adjoining; but on the other hand would be a perfect bar to your using the place for any such purpose. The motive and purpose of the law is to allow free passage along the river bank, and this law you have violated by obstructing the passage with a dock and a boat.
Because Mr. McCaslin demands a recompense that appears too large to you, you therefore refuse to pay any attention to the matter. I can not believe that your Government will sustain such violations of the rights of American citizens, and I can not, in so far as my duties extend, permit that Russian authorities should forcibly occupy land belonging to American citizens without due recompense.
This land is duly registered in this consulate as the property of Mr. Charles McCaslin, an American citizen, and I must therefore insist that settlement be made with him for its use.
Concerning your request for a map of Mr. McCaslin’s land, I will say that such a map is not in the possession of the consulate, and you must apply to Mr. McCaslin, or secure it from the proper records. The land records of this consulate will be open to you for compiling such a map, if you will recognize the rights of American property owners.
If, however, you do not propose to pay any attention to the claims and rights of property of American citizens, I can see little use for such a map.
In conclusion, I beg to say that I consider that the property and treaty rights of Mr. McCaslin have been violated in this case; that a boat belonging to the Russian authorities has been docked upon his land without his consent, except on condition with which you refuse to comply; that this boat is to be continued on this land belonging to Mr. McCaslin for several months; to all of which I must enter my earnest protest, and the facts concerning which I must report to my Government.
I have, etc.,
Mr. Miller to Captain Eberhard.
Niuchwang, China, November 1, 1901.
Sir: Complaint has been filed in this office by Mr. C. McCaslin, an American citizen, against the action of your soldiers’ taking possession of his land and digging dock for winter quarters for tugboats.
This land is registered at this consulate as the property of Mr. McCaslin, and you can readily understand that no one has a right to use or possession of it except by arrangements with Mr. McCaslin.
Your men were warned against using this land by Mr. McCaslin’s agent.
I must therefore beg to call your attention to this matter, and urge that proper adjustment be made at an early date.
I have, etc.,
United States Consul.
Captain Eberhard to Mr. Miller.
In reply to your letter of this date, No. 78, I beg to inform you that Mr. McCaslin’s property is beyond the limits of the city under my administration, and you have to address this complaint to the imperial Russian consulate.
I have, etc.,
Captain, I. R. M., Civil Administrator.
Mr. Miller to Captain Eberhard.
Niuchwang, China, November 25, 1901.
Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge your dispatch of the 22d instant, in which you say that the matter of Mr. McCaslin’s complaint should be addressed to the Russian consulate.
I beg to inclose you a copy of Mr. McCaslin’s letter to the Russian consul and a copy of his reply.
There surely must be someone here with the proper authority to deal with this matter, and I beg you to advise me to whom the case should be brought.
Such violations of the rights of American citizens should not be allowed by your people, and there ought to be means of prompt redress, and I beg you to point out to me the proper authorities.
I have, etc.,
United States Consul.
Mr. McCaslin to Mr. Kristy.
Dear Mr. Kristy: I am sorry to make a complaint to you again. This time it is against the people who are docking the steam launches. They started to-day to dig a dock on my ground next to the Russian settlement.
Anything they dock there they will have to pay for; each launch $600, and if the Sampson, $1,000; then the expenses of filling up the docks will have to be paid by the people who dug them.
These docks will cause my land to wash away twice as fast as if they had not been there.
[Page 154]It seems to me as though some of the Russian people here think they can do what they like with my land.
I do not wish to make trouble, but they are going a little too far. If you will notify the people who are digging the dock what they are doing, you will greatly oblige.
Yours, truly,
Mr. Kristy to Mr. McCaslin.
Dear Mr. McCaslin: You are quite right in your to-day’s letter, but I am sorry to say that I have nothing to do with the mentioned dock. Please address to the administrator.
Yours, sincerely,
Captain Eberhard to Mr. Miller.
Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter, No. 79, in which you say that the violations of the rights of the American citizens should not be allowed by our people and, further, that there surely must be some one here with the proper authority, etc. Though I am ignorant of whom you designate by the words “your people,” I surely agree with your opinion.
Of course, an authority for any questions beyond my jurisdiction exists here, and, as I pointed out to you before, in the person of the imperial consul for Russia. I am sorry that you are guided more by the private correspondence between Messrs. Kristy and McCaslin than by my dispatch.
I have, etc.,
Captain, Imperial Russian Navy, Civil Administrator.
Mr. Conger to Mr. Miller.
Peking, December 27, 1901.
Russian minister says he will telegraph consul that Russian authority only replaces Chinese, and that all treaty rights must be respected and all former lawful practices followed, and direct him to meet you and try amicably to settle all questions. You can hardly claim complete and exclusive jurisdiction of Chinese subjects because they live in American houses.
Mr. Conger to Mr. Miller.
Peking, December 28, 1901.
Sir: I confirm my telegram of yesterday, and reply to your dispatch, No. 59, herewith.
You should in all cases do your best to settle questions amicably, and while maintaining with dignity all treaty and other rights, you should be sure that your demands are always within your rights, and that in presenting them you do not adopt a style that will unnecessarily give offense.
I note that Captain Eberhard objects to your use of “your people” in referring to the Russian authorities. It appears to me, also, that your note of December 19 would have been stronger had you left out the imputation of improper motives in the selection, by the Russians, of Mr. McCaslin’s land for docking purposes instead of [Page 155] their own. I trust you will be able, after the Russian consul receives the minister’s telegram to confer amicably with him and come to a satisfactory settlement of Mr. McCaslin’s claim. If you are not able to do this, then please send me in detail all the facts in the case, reporting all personal interviews concerning the matter, and giving information as to charges of other owners of land for like usage, and how much is paid for the Vicksburg’s dock, etc.
I am, etc.,
Mr. Conger to Mr. Miller.
Peking, December 28, 1901.
Sir: Continuing the subject-matter of my No. 1281, referring again to my telegram confirmed therein, and replying to your No. 60, in which you ask if your position is tenable, I have to say I can not quite agree with your position as stated in your letter to Mr. Kristy, of December 20, substantially claiming jurisdiction over all Chinese occupying American-owned houses, and particularly that you should undertake to decide whether or not arrests of Chinese by Chinese authorities were justifiable.
Russian authority might be permitted, under its assumed jurisdiction, to do whatever Chinese might have done before, but nothing more. It has been, so far as I can learn, the general custom not to permit Chinese in foreign employ to be arrested except with foreign consent, and within foreign settlements to require consular consent before arresting Chinese in foreign-owned buildings; but consent in the latter case is always given. Insistence by the consul that-justification of arrest should be proven beforehand would, I apprehend, be an unwarrantable interference with Chinese administration. Outside of foreign settlements the consul might properly exercise a certain jurisdiction over foreign-owned property, but not over Chinese domiciled therein.
I am, etc.,
Mr. Miller to Mr. Conger.
Niuchwang, China, December 27, 1901.
Sir: I have to report the inclosed copy of a dispatch received from the civil administrator, and my reply thereto.
This raises the question of the right of the United States to land troops in Manchuria.
While I have purposely evaded a reply to that question, I am firmly convinced that we ought not to surrender our right to land troops at any time that we consider it necessary for the protection of life and property of our citizens, and I am further convinced that it would not be wise, under existing conditions, to grant that Russia has the sole right to land troops in Manchuria.
It would be impolitic and injudicious to land troops to interfere with the civil or military administration of Russia, but we certainly ought not to grant Russia that we have no right to do so at any time we deem it imperative for the protection of American interests here.
The Russian administration is gradually pressing the claims of Russian authority in this port and over all Manchuria, and we are in almost daily receipt of some communication along these lines.
In this matter I have no doubt that Russia will object to the landing of the crew of the Vicksburg for drill.
I am of the opinion that we are entitled, as much as Russia, to land troops in this port, under existing conditions, and that we ought not surrender that right by any intimidation.
As long as Russian administration protects American interests we ought not to interfere, and, so far as I am concerned, will not.
The circumstance that aroused the excitement of the civil administrator was the taking of six rifles and accouterments from the British ship Algerine to the public hall, where the crew of the ship were giving a theatrical performance in which they used these guns.
[Page 156]We are cut off telegraphic communication, and our postal connection is slow and bad, and we are being annoyed almost daily by petty complaints from the civil administrator; and the situation here in every way has the appearance on the part of the Russians of aggression against all foreign interests.
I have the honor to be, etc.,
Captain Eberhard to Mr. Miller.
Sir: I am just informed that to-day, after the sun set, about 40 men from the foreign men-of-war entered this city armed with rifles and swords.
According to my instructions from the Imperial Russian Government, I strongly protest against landing the armed men at this port occupied by the Imperial Russian forces, and I insist on their immediately withdrawing from the town.
I have, etc.,
Mr. Miller to Captain Eberhard.
Niuchwang, China, December 27, 1901.
Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge your dispatch of December 26, complaining that about 40 men from the foreign men-of-war entered this city armed with rifles and swords on the evening of the 26th instant.
I beg to advise you that none of these men belonged to the United States gunboat Vicksburg stationed here for the winter.
I have the honor, etc.,
Mr. Conger to Mr. Miller.
Sir: I have received your No. 63 of the 27th ultimo, inclosing correspondence with the Russian, civil administrator, which, you say, raises the question of the right of the United States to land troops in Manchuria.
It is true that the particular case mentioned (the landing of British marines with rifles to take part in a theatrical performance) does not at present require a discussion of the question on your part, but as you apprehend it is likely to arise at any time in relation to the going on shore for whatsoever purpose of the crew of the Vicksburg, you should be prepared for it.
In my judgment we have quite as much right to land troops at Niuchwang for the protection of American rights and interests as have the Russians, and particularly is this true under the present situation, where Russia has formally declared that her occupancy of Niuchwang was not in the nature of conquest, but simply a temporary occupation to protect Russian interests and to be terminated as soon as order was restored. I think, however, that during this temporary occupancy, in which Russia has taken upon herself the responsibility of keeping order and of civil administration, that without formally recognizing any right in the Russian authorities to do this, it would only be a prudent precaution to notify them of the intention before taking any of the crew on shore for any purpose. I hope that it will not be found difficult to have an amicable and satisfactory understanding in anticipation of any necessary or desired movement on shore. It would be wise for the commander of the Vicksburg to be provided with instructions from the Navy Department upon this question.
As to telegraphic communication, can you not send your telegrams to Port Arthur by mail for the present, under some arrangement for transmitting them hence by wire?
I am, etc,
Mr. Conger to Mr. Miller.
Sir: Confirming my telegram of this date, and in continuance of my dispatch No. 1292 of to-day, I have to say that the Russian minister called on me yesterday and left the memorandum,a a copy of which is inclosed. Of course I had to say to him that I had not yet received written report from you of the affairs, and that since the Russians had cut off telegraphic communication you had been unable to wire me; that of course there could be no legal justification for such conduct if it had occurred as stated, but there must have been some previous provocation on the part of the Russians of which I would probably be informed later.
The minister complains of what he calls your curt reply to the civil administrator, and your demand that the formal proceedings of a trial should be had with the witnesses produced, etc., and that the officers of the Vicksburg and yourself are unwilling to cooperate in necessary regulations for and discipline of the United States sailors.
There certainly must be some misconception on the part of the Russian authorities of your statements, attitude, and actions, and it would be most unfortunate if serious troubles should grow out of an unnecessary misunderstanding. There is no doubt that the civil administrator is wrong in failing to call upon you, but you should not let this failure of his lead you to do anything unwarranted in retaliation.
It is very difficult to always preserve the peace where soldiers of different nationalities come in contact, and where they do commit indiscretions it is always best to settle all such difficulties quietly, by friendly conferences, agreements to punish, etc., instead of through the formality of court procedure. This has often had to be done here since the occupancy of foreign troops.
Several of the treaties require that special regulations for the discipline of sailors should be made during the stay of war vessels in Chinese ports, and it should always be done; and I presume the commander of the Vicksburg has taken every possible precaution in this direction. It would be a source of infinite regret if serious troubles should come and the United States representatives or officials were in any measure responsible. I must, therefore, again urge that both you and Captain Barry should go to the utmost consistent limit to lessen the present strain and avoid further troubles. You should keep both the Department and me opportunely and thoroughly advised.
I am, etc.,