Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States, With the Annual Message of the President Transmitted to Congress December 2, 1902
Mr. Hay to Mr. Tower.
Washington, February 21, 1902.
Sir: In continuation of my dispatch No. 275, of February 6, 1902, I now inclose for your information a copy of a dispatch and its inclosures from the United States consul-general at Shanghai.
I am, etc.,
Mr. Goodnow to Mr. Peirce.
Shanghai, January 21, 1902.
Sir: I hand you herewith copy of my No. 375, of this date, to the United States minister at Pekin, being a report “Telegraphic communication between this port and Niuchwang.”
I am, etc.,
Mr. Goodnow to Mr. Conger.
Shanghai, January 21, 1902.
Sir: I beg to hand you herewith copies of two letters received from the American Trading Company, with inclosures, and a letter from the American Association of China, with regard to the telegraphic communication between Shanghai and Niuchwang.
On January 3 I wired Consul Miller in cipher, simply asking him to acknowledge receipt of my telegram. On the 9th he acknowledged the receipt, also in cipher, which I received on the 10th. The Chinese telegraph line refused to receive even a Government message in cipher for Niuchwang.
Yesterday I was enabled to find out the full history of the cable troubles there, which I send you for your information and such action as you deem proper. The Chinese telegraph and the Great Northern each has its own line to Chefoo. Thence to Port Arthur they both use the cable operated by the Great Northern. After the trouble in 1900 the messages were sent from Port Arthur to Niuchwang by the railway telegraph with only the condition that cipher messages from Chinese would not be transmitted. About six months ago the Great Northern was notified that the service from Port Arthur to Niuchwang would be done by the field telegraph, a military institution, and that the railway telegraph would be no longer allowed to take any other than railway telegrams. The field telegraph at once notified the other telegraph companies that no cipher messages would be transmitted from any source. The Great Northern Telegraph Company at once protested to St. Petersburg, and now has been informed that the field telegraph will transmit Governmental cipher dispatches, but will not transmit dispatches in cipher from any other than Government officials. So the matter stands at present.
I desire to call your attention to the inconvenience thus occasioned to our merchants who do an extensive trade at Niuchwang. It also seems to our people here that this emphasizes the Russian occupation of Niuchwang.
I am, etc.,
The American Trading Company to Mr. Goodnow.
Sir: We beg to inclose herewith a press copy of a letter written by us to the Joint Telegraph Company, Shanghai, and we also inclose their reply (original). From the last paragraph of the Joint Telegraph Company’s reply you will note that messages in cipher are not accepted by the field telegraph administration. This at the present moment, we understand, is an entirely Russian service. We have it on the very best authority that no telegrams to Niuchwang are received by the Chinese telegraph service unless written in plain English. As we are not aware that Niuchwang is Russian territory, we are anxious to know by what right the Russian authorities, who now control, so we understand it, the telegraph service at that port, refuse to accept telegrams in cipher or secret code. We may say that this censorship of telegrams is extremely detrimental to our trade as American merchants, and we would kindly ask you to assist in the relieving us from the present unfortunate position.
[Page 922]In a word, the present situation seems to be this: That telegrams are not allowed to leave or be received at Niuchwang unless written in a form acceptable to the Russian authorities. Respectfully requesting your assistance in this matter, we remain, etc.,
Frank P. Ball, Acting Agent.
American Trading Company to the Joint Telegraph Company.
Dear Sirs: In reply to your memorandum of January 6, we note that our message of the 3d instant, addressed “Napoleon, Niuchwang,” has been undelivered. Will you kindly send a service message changing the name of “Napoleon” to “American Trading Company?”
We have been using this address for our Niuchwang office for several years and we dispatched a wire on the 24th December, 1901, and although the receipt of the message has not yet been acknowledged by letter, we believe it must have been delivered as you have not advised us to the contrary.
On the 25th of November, 1901, we dispatched a telegram addressed “Napoleon, Niuchwang,” which has been duly received.
We will be greatly obliged if you will fully inform us regarding the present telegraphic service at Niuchwang, and whether any restrictions have been placed on messages sent from Niuchwang, and, furthermore, if the Russian authorities are exercising any control on messages sent or received at that port.
Thanking you in advance for any information you can give us, we remain, etc.,
Frank P. Ball, Acting Agent.
The Joint Telegraph Company to the American Trading Company.
Dear Sir: In reply to your letter of even date I beg to say that a service has now been sent, at your cost, explaining that your telegram of the 3d instant, addressed “Napoleon, Niuchwang,” is intended for “The American Trading Company.”
As regards the delivery of your telegram of the 25th of November, and the non-delivery of your telegram of the 3d instant, the explanation is probably that on the 1st of December last the administration of the telegraph line beyond Port Arthur was transferred from the Russian railways to the field telegraphs.
As to restrictions placed to and from Niuchwang, I am only aware of the fact that messages in cipher, i. e., containing groups of figures with secret meaning, are not acceptable by the field telegraph administration.
I am, etc.,
The American Trading Company to Mr. Goodnow.
My Dear Mr. Goodnow: Following up my respects to you of the 7th instant, I now beg to hand you copy of letter received from the Joint Telegraph Company, which may prove of interest.
I remain, etc.,
The Joint Telegraph Company to the American Trading Company.
Dear Sirs: We beg to inform you that we have received a service advice to the effect that your telegram of the 3d instant, addressed “Napoleon, Niuchwang,” was delivered yesterday at 4 p.m. to the American Trading Company. The delay in delivery is due to an interruption of the Russian field telegraph line.
Yours, etc.,
The American Association of China, to Mr. Goodnow.
Sir: The attention of this association has been called to the fact that telegrams destined to or emanating from Niuchwang are not accepted for transmission by the Imperial Chinese telegraph administration when the messages are tendered in cipher or secret code.
So far as we have knowledge, Niuchwang is the only Chinese treaty port with reference to which such a regulation is in force, and it is not only very objectionable to our commercial institutions, but to a certain and very perceptible extent acts in restraint of trade. We therefore earnestly request that you will be so good as to represent the matter to Minister Conger and to the director-general of the Imperial Chinese telegraphs, with a view to the early restoration of a normal service.
It is the understanding of this association that the Chinese lines between Shanhaikwan and Niuchwang have been inoperative ever since the outbreak in 1900, and that the present telegraphic route to Niuchwang is via Chefoo, Port Arthur, and thence by Russian field service. To the latter we owe the present situation. Not only has this service refused to transmit messages except they be in plain language, but the delays occasioned bv it have been both vexatious and expensive; important messages in some instances having been as much as a week in transmission between Shanghai and Niuchwang.
This very unsatisfactory state of the present service might be easily rectified by the restoration of the Chinese lines. With the exception of 40 or 50 miles beyond Shanhaikwan the entire Chinese service is in good working order between this port and Niuchwang. We are advised, however, that when the Chinese administration has sent out workmen to repair the line they have been repeatedly prevented by the armed forces of the power now in temporary occupation of Manchuria.
It is therefore the earnest wish of this association that every effort be made to secure the early restoration of the Chinese telegraphic service between the ports above mentioned.
The manner in which the telegraphic service has been dealt with by those who now control it in Manchuria is suggestive as indicating the subtilty of action which would doubtless be ceaselessly encountered were the present Russian occupation to result in permanent control.
Assured that the importance of American interests in the province of Manchuria will commend this matter to your careful consideration and action,
I am, etc.,