Minister Rockhill
to the Secretary of State.
American Legation,
Peking, September 27,
1905.
No. 105.]Sir: In continuation of previous correspondence
about the boycott of American goods, I have now the honor to transmit
copies of two more notes which I have in the last few days addressed to
Prince Ch’ing on this matter.
My note of September 23, asking again for the punishment of Tseng
Shao-ch’ing, the ringleader of the boycott movement at Shanghai, was
written because I had reason to believe that the government now felt
itself strong enough to deal with this person who was in great
perturbation at my pressing for his punishment. Our consul-general at
Shanghai had furthermore asked me to call attention to this attempt to
revive the agitation in that city.
My note of the 26th instant was based on the recent dispatches and
telegrams from our consul-general at Canton.
I inclose also a copy of a note received from Prince Ch’ing transmitting
a telegraphic reply from the viceroy of Canton to the communication
addressed to him at my oral request about a week ago.
I am disposed to believe that the explanations therein made by the
viceroy of his apparent dilatoriness are to a certain extent true; the
fear that if he adopted radical measures for at once stopping the
movement in the excitable and turbulent city of Canton uprisings might
take place is a natural and reasonable one. I think that the agitation
will gradually die down.
* * * * * *
I have, etc.,
[Inclosure 1.]
Minister Rockhill to Prince
Ch’ing.
American Legation,
Peking, September 23,
1905.
Your Imperial Highness: I have the honor to
transmit herewith a copy of the “Sin Wan Pao” newspaper of September
14, 1905, containing an open letter from Taot’ai Tseng Shao-Ch’ing
of Shanghai, in which the writer openly declares that the boycott of
American goods will be continued, notwithstanding the express orders
of Their Majesties in the edict of August 31, last, and the
proclamation and orders of the viceroy of the Liang Kiang
Provinces.
This Tseng is the man whose punishment I requested of your highness
in my note of August 14, as the ringleader of the anti-American
agitation in Shanghai, and as the man who more than any other had
created hostility against us. I urged on you his severe punishment,
beginning with the deprivation of his official rank, because I was
well aware that persons holding rank by purchase can be as readily
punished for their offenses by your government as those holding
substantive rank.
With the text of the imperial edict of August 31 before me it is
quite unnecessary that I should show in what this man has offended
again. He incites your people to violate the treaties between China
and the United States, and he scoffs at the imperial commands.
I trust that your highness will see your way to finally comply with
my oft-repeated request concerning this man, and that an exemplary
punishment will be inflicted upon him—such punishment as is due to
the United States and to the dignity of the law in China.
I also desire to renew, etc.,
[Page 228]
[Inclosure 2.]
Minister Rockhill to Prince
Ch’ing.
American Legation,
Pelting, September 26,
1905.
Your Imperial Highness: Several times of
late I have had the honor to call the earnest attention of the board
of foreign affairs to the very inadequate measures adopted by the
viceroy of the Liang Kuang to put an effectual stop to the agitation
in Canton against American trade.
In a proclamation which the viceroy issued a few days prior to the
publication of the imperial edict of August 31, he confined himself
to telling the people that they must wait until December of this
year before putting their boycott into effect. In other words, he
approved the plan, but objected to the time for its being put in
operation.
Since then the viceroy has, it is true, published the imperial edict,
accompanying it with a few tame admonitions but so evidently lacking
in earnestness that no one in Canton entertains any doubt that his
excellency is in full sympathy with the movement.
Meetings of the agitators are still being held, though the general
public is excluded. The native press continues to urge the boycott,
and the Chinese employees of our consulate are threatened, as are
also would-be purchasers of American goods. In other localities in
the viceroy’s jurisdiction the state of affairs is no better, as,
for axample, in Swatowand Wuchow.
The imperial edict of August 31 directs the viceroys and governors to
order the people to preserve the peace and to carry on their
business as usual, and the said viceroys and governors are made
responsible for the effective execution of the edict and commanded
to severely punish those who incite the people to lawlessness, yet
people are not allowed to carry on their business as usual, and
those who are threatening the law-abiding and fomenting disturbance
are allowed to go unpunished. It is plain, therefore, that the
viceroy is not complying with the edict, and I must insist that your
imperial highness’s government, to which he is amenable, and which
has placed upon him the responsibility of making the edict
effective, shall take such additional measures as may be necessary
to secure prompt obedience of the imperial will and proper respect
for the treaties between the United States and China.
I avail, etc.,
[Inclosure 3.]
Prince Ch’ing to
Minister Rockhill.
I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt, on the 15th of the
eighth moon of the XXXI. year Kuanghsü (September 13, 1905), of your
excellency’s dispatch, saying that the American consul-general at
Canton had telegraphed to the effect that the boycott of American
goods in protest against the immigration treaty was still continuing
and causing trouble, that the local authorities were not taking any
energetic measures to carry out the imperial edict which forbade
(the boycott), and that several agitators who had been arrested upon
the complaint of the American consul-general had been released after
a secret trial; that employees of the consulate were being
threatened, and that he feared that further delay in suppressing the
boycott might lead to violent disturbances.
Your excellency has requested that more efficient measures than had
yet been adopted should be promptly taken to put down the agitation
and protect American citizens and their employees at that port.
Immediately upon receipt of your dispatch my board telegraphed to the
viceroy of the Two Kuang, directing him to make a thorough
investigation at once, take needed action, and report by
telegraph.
I have now received his reply, as follows:
“Regarding the protest against the immigration treaty by the
merchants of Kuangshi, upon the receipt recently of the imperial
edict I at once directed the prefect and district magistrates to go
in person to the hall of assembly and read the edict to the company
and exhort and induce the merchants to disperse in obedience to the
edict and await the negotiation of a fair arrangement by the board
of foreign affairs and the American Government.
“For ten days past all meetings and addresses have been entirely
stopped.
“Sometime ago, when the daughter of the President came to visit
Canton, some persons posted anonymous placards in the streets,
containing slanderous expressions, and I received a request from the
American consul that two members of the boycott league, Ma Ta-ch’en,
and P’an Hsin-ming, said by him to be slippery fellows, might be
dealt with. Thereupon I directed the prefect and district magistrate
to arrest them and bring them to court, and keep them under
surveillance. On examination, Ma Ta-ch’en acknowledged that he had
ordered the committee to appropriate funds for the printing of
anonymous placards. P’an
[Page 229]
Hsin-ming knew nothing of the circumstances. They are still held in
the custody of the district magistrate, and there has been no secret
trial or release. As to the statement that the employees of the
American consulate had been repeatedly threatened, sometime since I
received from the American consul a copy of an anonymous letter
which urged the employees of the consulate to resign their
positions, and I presume that it is to this that reference is made.
I have already directed an investigation to be made, but the author
has not been discovered. The general opinion outside, however, is
that the letter in question was fabricated by the employees of the
consulate themselves, that they might take advantage of it to make
representations.
“In a word, the protest against the American treaty originated among
the merchants of the whole province, who were righteously indignant
at the persecutions endured. The local authorities have been able
only to take measures to suppress it gradually, and at present the
agitation is little by little quieting down. If more hasty measures
were to be taken, they would stir up a revolution, and it would be
more difficult than ever to ward off calamity.
“In obedience to your telegram I have again issued a proclamation
instructing the people, and have directed the officials in my
jurisdiction to give protection according to the treaties. In
addition to this, I beg that you will carefully explain the
situation to the American minister in Peking, by which I shall be
obliged.”
As in duty bound I forward this reply for your excellency’s
consideration.
A necessary dispatch:
Kuanghsü, XXXI year, 8th moon, 28th day
(September 26, 1905).
[seal.]
