File No. 7655/24–26.

Minister Rockhill to the Secretary of State.

[Extract.]
No. 990.]

Sir: I have the honor to inclose herewith a copy in translation of a note which I received on the 24th instant from his imperial highness, Prince Ch’ing, in which (1) he complains of the judgment rendered by the United States Court for China in the case of a killing of a Chinese subject by an American citizen, and asks me to take up the case and practically retry it.

In the second part of the letter Prince Ch’ing, referring to the United States Court for China, to its creation and jurisdiction, to the office of judge in said court, and to his position in relation to the Chinese Government, concludes by saying the “so-called judge is only an executive officer to be treated by the Chinese Government and officials only as a consul of high rank with specialized functions.” The Chinese Government, it is stated, proposes, notwithstanding the fact that the judicial powers of the minister of the United States to China have been transferred to the United States Court in China, to consider the minister as “still having ultimate appellate jurisdiction in all matters concerning the exercise of judicial power over foreigners in Chinese territory,” and will consequently only deal with the American minister when cases arise in which Chinese inters ests are involved.

I have, etc.,

W. W. Rockhill.
[Inclosure—Translation.]

The Prince of Ch’ing to Minister Rockhill.

F. O. No. 465.]

Your Excellency: On the 2d day of the sixth moon (June 30) I received a dispatch from the superintendent of southern trade stating that in the case of the American traveler, De Menil, who shot and killed the lama, Pu Keng-lung, at Wei-hsi-t’ing in Yunnan Province, the viceroy of Ssu-ch’uan delivered the criminal to the American consul at Chungking who forwarded him to Shanghai to be tried in the United States Court. The Shanghai tao-t’ai deputed Li, the district magistrate of Shanghai, on the 13th and following days of the tenth moon of last year (November-December) to watch the proceedings of the court, but had not time to insist upon the fulfillment of treaty rights, and the judge of the United States Court set De Menil free. The decision of the American judge was that the criminal did not premeditate the killing of Pu Keng-lung, and he called it accidental killing, ignoring the fact that De Menil discharged his gun twice with the undoubted intention of killing his guard, Li Yu-shan, but that unexpectedly he missed the guard, Li Yu-shan, and accidentally killed the lama, Pu Keng-lung. So, although the killing of [Page 56] Pu Keng-lung was accidental, yet in firing twice lie had the purpose to kill some one. The decision of the American judge, that the killing was accidental, and that the man should, therefore, be released was exceedingly unjust and did not satisfy the demands of the case. The superintendent of southern trade has copied fully all the proceedings in this case and forwarded them to the board of foreign affairs, and the board has very carefully scrutinized them. In these records, under the date of December, 1907, 25th case, folio 10, we find the statement that the defendant being angry with his guard, Li, for loitering abused him, then snatching Li’s gun pointed it at Li, who ran off in fear. The defendant then fired the gun, the bullet passing over Li’s head. The defendant then reloaded and fired again, killing the lama. Li and Ch’en again testified that the defendant threatened Li with the gun, that Li ran away, and that the defendant fired in the direction in which Li ran. This was all brought out clearly by the judge, so that it is evident that the criminal De Menil intended to kill the soldier Li. Although he failed to kill the soldier, Li, and accidentally did kill the lama, he had murder in his heart. The testimony was clear and unmistakable. The decision of the judge that the affair was accidental and that no punishment should be inflicted nor even a fine assessed for the lama’s death, how can this satisfy the minds of men or display justice?

Our board also observes that the criminal De Menil was traveling in Ssu-ch’uan Province, and that he passed into Yunnan Province contrary to the terms of his passport. The viceroy of Ssu-ch’uan treated him with great kindness, sending guards for his protection. The said criminal fell into a passion with his guard and fired at him, and thus killed an outside party. After thus taking human life he is not convicted of any crime and is not even fined. The great wrong done the murdered man is not in the least atoned for. When the people of Ssu-ch’uan and Yunnan hear of this the hair will rise on their heads. Their anger will grow and the consequences will be serious for travelers. In this case justice does not shine, and the good name of America suffers. It is our duty to refer this case to your excellency that your excellency may think of a way to straighten this affair out, determining the crime of which the aforesaid criminal is guilty, or the fine which he ought to pay, so that angry passions may be calmed and justice displayed. Furthermore, in the eleventh moon of the thirty-second year of Kuanghsu (December-January, 1906–7) a note was received from your excellency stating that the United States Congress had passed an act to establish a United States court in China, and the regulations of the court were inclosed. In the first section of the said act the following words appear: “which shall have exclusive jurisdiction in all cases and judicial proceedings whereof jurisdiction may now be exercised by the United States consuls and ministers.” The board of foreign affairs understands these regulations to mean that the judicial powers of the American judge are the same as those formerly exercised by the American minister and consuls, which derived their existence from the grant of judicial powers over foreigners made in the treaties.

The United States has the undoubted right to establish independently courts of law in its own territory, but the circumstances are very different in this case. The seventh section of the act states that the tenure of office of the judge of the said court shall be at the pleasure of the President. From this it appears that the status of this court is different from that of an independent judiciary. Although the term “judge” is employed it is evident that he is only an official of the executive department appointed for the conduct of foreign relations. So, in the estimation of the Chinese Government and officials, the American judge is to be treated only as a consul of high rank with specialized functions. In any legal case the provincial authorities will deal with him according to the rules for dealing with a consul. Therefore, although the American judge exercised part of the official functions of the American minister, yet the minister is the sole representative of America, and as long as China has not recalled the extraterritorial judicial powers the American minister at Peking will be regarded as having ultimate appellate jurisdiction in all matters concerning the exercise of judicial power over foreigners within Chinese territory. In all legal cases the board of foreign affairs will, as formerly, deal with the American minister. It is proper to state our position clearly.

A necessary dispatch.

[Seal of the Wai-wu Pu.]