Imágenes de página
PDF
ePub

the United States chargé d'affaires at Lima, has now forwarded another complaint presented to him by the Chinese laborers in Peru, setting forth their grievances and harsh treatment, worse than before, and asking that he would make their condition known to the Emperor, and see if an envoy could be sent to live in Peru, or whether the American minister could act as such and help them. It seems from the perusal of this petition, as well as the last, that the condition of these laborers is very lamentable. Far off in a distant land, they have met this suffering and misery; they are like a bird in a cage, out of which there is no escape.

The petition which they have sent I now submit for your highness's perusal, that you may devise measures for their deliverance and succor. If you decide to agree to their request, and make the United States minister at Lima the protector of the Chinese living in that land, it will be necessary to make the proposal direct to the President; and if he is willing to allow and instruct the American minister there to act in this capacity for awhile, (if the Peruvian government is also willing to have him do so,) then the arrangement can be effected. Hereafter, if China and Peru should enter into negotiations, the stipulations of the treaty could secure the welfare of the Chinese in that country. Just now it would be advisable to instruct the high officers at Canton to proclaim through all the districts and towns in Kwang-Chan prefecture, warning the people not to engage themselves to go to Peru as laborers, so that they may not fall into similar distress. I now inclose the original copy of the complaint made by the Chinese laborers of their distressed condition for your highness's perusal. I have the honor to be, sir, your highness's obedient servant,

His Imperial Highness PRINCE KUNG, &c., &c.

S. WELLS WILLIAMS.

B.

Prince Kung to S. Wells Williams.

TUNG-CHI, 10th year, 5th moon, 30th day, (July 17, 1871.)

Prince Kung, chief secretary of state for foreign affairs, herewith sends a reply. I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your excellency's dispatch of the 8th ultimo, in which you inform me that Mr. Brent, the United States chargé d'affaires at Lima, had sent a second complaint, made to him by the Chinese laborers in Peru, of the harsh treatment they received there, and that you accordingly inclosed the original copy of this paper for my examination, and to devise such measures for their relief as might be possible, &c., &c.

In relation to this matter I may here refer to the former memorial from the Chinese laborers in Peru, setting forth the cruel treatment of their masters, which was made known to me by Mr. Ross Browne. I replied to him at the time, requesting that he would write to the American minister in Perù, asking him to kindly examine into the truth of these complaints, and to devise some way of lending the sufferers a helping hand. It was also ordered at the same time that no merchants of a non-treaty power should be allowed to open an office for hiring laborers, and all natives were prohibited from engaging themselves to such, or going to Macao for that purpose. These regulations were communicated to all the foreign ministers to transmit to their countrymen, so that all might know that no laborers could be engaged or sent off from Macao. In May of last year Mr. Low informed me that the American minister in Peru had represented the hardships experienced by the Chinese laborers to the government at Lima.

From these, as well as the dispatch from your excellency now before me, it is manifest how much the miserable condition of the Chinese laborers in Peru has moved the sympathies of the American officials there and here. Judging from these documents, and the reports given in the newspapers, it appears that in no country are these laborers treated with so much cruelty as in Peru, and they are secretly and illegally hired as coolies only in Macao. It was plainly stated in the dispatch sent to the foreign ministers in June, 1859, which they were requested to make known to their countrymen that it was henceforth illegal to open emigration offices in Macao, and no coolies could be shipped from there. This was done in order to prevent Chinese subjects from being inveigled into such evils in future. Though there is every probability that those prohibitions were made known by the resident ministers to their consuls, yet the Foreign Office has deemed it advisable to send a copy of the dispatch now under reply to the governor general at Canton, that he may make known to the people at large that they are not to go to Macao to engage themselves as laborers; and if necessary, to reissue the rules forbidding foreign merchants to open emigration offices there. He has also been directed to confer with the consuls at Canton how to carry these things into effect.

In regard to the best method to alleviate the sufferings of these Chinese laborers, so that they may no longer be subjected to these troubles, I am at present deliberating, and shall expect to avail myself of your admirable suggestions in the matter.

No. 80.]

No. 38.

Mr. Low to Mr. Fish.

[Extract.]

LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES,

Chefoo, August 5, 1871. (Received October 23.) SIR: The result of the trials of those charged with participation in the Tien-tsin massacre last year was that twenty were convicted and sentenced to death, and twenty-five others, besides the two local officials, were ordered to be banished. Sixteen of the twenty first mentioned were convicted of the murder of the French, and the remainder, of killing the three Russians. The sixteen were executed, but the sentence of the other four was temporarily suspended at the suggestion of the Russian minister, as I was then informed. Subsequently I learned that this action was taken because the Russian minister declined to accept the punishment decreed to the four culprits in full satisfaction for the crime, nor would that, or any other number of executions, be considered as ample, unless the guilt of those accused be established by a joint examination in which the Russian consul should take part. It was finally agreed that the four men in question should be re-examined in the manner proposed. After a searching investigation the Russian consul general became satisfied that two of the accused were guilty of the murder of his nationals, and that the other two, while aiding and abetting, did not actually commit any overt act.

When the result of the re-examination became known, the friends of the least guilty parties petitioned the consul general to get his consent to the commutation of their punishment, to which reply was returned that any such action would be transcending the powers of the consul general. The matter was then referred to Peking, and finally to St. Petersburg; the Russian minister consenting that the execution of the sentence upon all might be suspended until instructions from his government could be received. Thus matters stood at the beginning of April, when I left Peking.

I am now informed by the Russian minister, who is temporarily residing here for the summer, that agreeably to instructions received, investing him with authority to consent to such an arrangement as he deemed proper, by which substantial justice should be done, he had consented that the sentences of the two least guilty might be commuted to banishment for life. The action of the Russian minister in the reexamination of the case was, I think, wise. It will serve as a precedent in the future, should similar cases unfortunately occur, and will impress the Chinese with this truth: that a given number of executions will not meet the demands of justice unless the guilt of those accused be proven. The leniency shown by the Russian government ought to teach both officials and people that foreign nations desire the punishment of the guilty only, which should be meted out according to the measure of their guilt.

It is proper to add that the result of this examination goes far to disprove the assertion which has obtained general credence, that the men executed at Tien-tsin last autumn were purchased victims, the greater portion if not all of whom were innocent, and that the really guilty ones escaped punishment altogether. That many of those deserving punishment escaped is quite probable, but no evidence worthy

of credence was ever brought to my notice which tended to show that those who did suffer were innocent.

[blocks in formation]

SIR: With reference to your dispatch of the 20th of June last, (No. 74,) detailing the events connected with the expedition to Corea, I have to inform you that the Department approves your general course of proceeding on the occasion referred to, but thinks that your communications should have been addressed to the principal minister of foreign affairs instead of the King. Their being thus addressed may be appealed to as justification for their not being received.

It is to be regretted that in the communication of June 18 (inc'osure No. 17) by Mr. Drew, acting secretary of legation, addressed to Li, guardian general of Fu-Ping prefecture, the declaration of intention to make "a prolonged stay in the vicinity of the capital" was made, and was accompanied by the expression of a determination "to retain the dispatch until means are found to forward it to its destination." This refers to a dispatch which the Coreans had declined to receive. This declaration was not carried out. The minister left Corea about sixteen days after its date without having found means to forward the dispatch to its destination. But for this unfulfilled promise or threat the Coreans would be without justification in alleging that all that had been contemplated or intended had been accomplished.

I am, &c.,

No. 40.

Mr. Davis to Mr. Low.*

HAMILTON FISH.

No. 57.]

DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, October 19, 1871. SIR: The delay in answering your No. 56 has not been caused by a disposition to disapprove of your reply to the Foreign Office note on the subject of missions. On the contrary, the President regards it as wise and judicious.

Two versions of these regulations have found their way to the Department-the translation inclosed in your No. 56, and a translation apparently made from a French version, presented to the houses of Parliament in Great Britain, in June or July last, and printed in British Blue Book, entitled "China, No. 3, 1871." These versions differ widely in form and expression, and, to some extent, in sense.

This correspondence has been transmitted to the ministers of the United States in London, Paris, Berlin, St. Petersburg, Vienna, and Florence, with instructions to transmit a copy in each case to the foreign minister. (See ante, note to Mr. Low's dispatch to Mr. Fish, of March 30, 1871.)

The version presented to Parliament has been or will be made the subject of instructions by Her Majesty's government to Mr. Wade. A copy of these proposed instructions was communicated to this Department by Her Majesty's chargé at Washington in August last. A copy is herewith inclosed, and also a copy of the version to which they relate.

The most material variance between the two versions is in the designation of the missionaries against whom the Chinese Foreign Office complain. Your version limits the complaints to missionaries of the Roman Church. The British translation, following the French version, represents the complaints against "Christians." For instance, the British version renders the beginning of the first article or rule as follows: "The Christians, when they found an orphanage, give no notice to the authorities and appear to act with mystery." Your translation of the same sentence reads, "The establishment of asylums for training up children by the Romanists has hitherto not been reported to the authorities, and, as these institutions are carefully kept private," &c., &c.. From the English version of the accompanying note from the Yamên, it is evident that the Chinese Foreign Office recognizes that there are in China Christian missionaries of different faiths; for they say that "the people in general, unaware of the difference which exists between Protestantism and Catholicism, confound these two religions under this latter denomination." Your version is to the same effect.

Under these circumstances it may be well to re-examine the original, and ascertain which version is correct. Both, however, agree in the statement that the government of China is apprehensive of a popular outbreak which may endanger the peace of the country and its relations with the United States and the European powers, and that, therefore, it has determined to submit to the representatives of the foreign powers a plan for regulating the condition of Christians in China. Your prompt and able answer to these propositions leaves little to be said by the Department.

The rights of citizens of the United States in China are well defined by treaty. So long as they attend peaceably to their affairs they are to be placed on a common footing of amity and good-will with subjects of China, and are to receive and enjoy for themselves, and everything appertaining to them, protection and defense from all insults and injuries. They have the right to reside at any of the ports open to foreign commerce, to rent houses and places of business, or to build such upon sites which they have the right to hire. They have secured to them the right to build churches and cemeteries, and they may teach or worship in those churches without being harassed, persecuted, interfered with or molested. These are some of the rights which are expressly and in terms granted to the United States, for their citizens, by the treaty of 1858. If I rightly apprehend the spirit of the note of the Foreign Office,. and of the regulations which accompany it, there is, to state it in the least objectionable form, an apprehension in the Yamên that it may become necessary to curtail some of these rights, in consequence of the alleged conduct of French missionaries. This idea cannot be entertained for one moment by the United States.

The President will see with deep regret any attempt to place a foreign ecclesiastic, as such, on a different footing from other foreigners residing in China. It is a fundamental principle in the United States that all persons, of every sect, faith, or race, are equal before the law. They make no distinction in favor of any ecclesiastical organization. Prelates, priests, and ministers can claim equal protection here, and enjoy equal rank in the eye of the civil law. The United States ask no more in China

1

than they confer at home. Should the peace of the empire be disturbed by efforts from any quarter to induce or compel the government to confer unusual civil rights on foreign ecclesiastics, you will make it plain that the United States have no sympathy with such a movement, and regard it as outside of the treaty rights which have been conferred upon the western nations. Should these demands, however, be complied with, this Government will then consider whether, under the thirtieth article of the treaty of 1858, a similar right will not at once inure to the benefit of all the public officers, merchants, and citizens of the United States.

The President would look with equal regret upon any attempt to withdraw the native Christians from the jurisdiction of the Emperor without his free consent, or to convert the churches founded by the missionaries into asylums. He can well conceive that the enjoyment of such a right might, as intimated by the Yamên, operate for the nominal and apparent conversion of desperadoes and criminals, who need a place of refuge to escape from punishment. On the other hand, he is mindful that the faith of the empire is pledged to the United States that not only citizens of the United States, but Chinese converts, who peaceably teach and practice the principles of Christianity, shall in no case be interfered with or molested. He feels confident, therefore, and expects that whatever may be the disposition of the turbulent and evil-disposed among the subjects of the Emperor, the native converts to Christianity will enjoy the full measure of protection guaranteed to them by the treaty of 1858. Except so far as the guarantee of that treaty extends, the President cannot permit the officials of the United States to participate in any attempt to disturb the natural relations between the Emperor and his Christian subjects. He particularly desires it to be understood that the profession of the Christian faith is not regarded by the officers of the United States as a protection against punishment for crime. Ecclesiastical asylums for criminals have never existed in this country, nor will they be planted elsewhere through its agency.

This Government has studiously and steadfastly observed its treaty engagements with China. The policy of the President and of his administration was elaborately set forth in the dispatch of August 31, 1869, to Mr. Bancroft, a copy of which was inclosed in Mr. Fish's No. 2 to you. The President has seen no reason to change that policy. On the contrary, the events which have occurred since that dispatch was written have the more convinced him of its justice. We stand upon our treaty rights; we ask no more, we expect no less. If other nations demand more, if they advance pretensions inconsistent with the dignity of China as an independent power, we are no parties to such acts. Our influence, so far as it may be legitimately and peacefully exerted, will be used to prevent such demands or pretensions, should there be serious reason to apprehend that they will be put forth. We feel that the government of the Emperor is actuated by friendly feelings towards the United States. We recognize the existence, to a limited extent, of the popular feeling and danger of outbreak which are set forth in the note of the Foreign Office. As far as we can, consistently with the duty which the govern. ment owes to those who have the right to claim its protection, we desire to aid the government of the Emperor in calming that feeling and in preventing such outbreak.

Should other nations seek our advice, or counsel with us on this subject, we shall not fail to urge these views. But in order to urge them with success, we must be in a position to say that the Chinese government is able and anxious to perform all its international duties, whether

« AnteriorContinuar »