393.1123 Lincheng/171: Telegram
The Minister in China (Schurman) to the Secretary of State
[Received June 23—9:55 a.m.]
236. Your 118, June 21, 6 p.m. I have taken all along with committee and others the course indicated in your paragraph 2.
As regarding your paragraph 3, I have not hitherto made it clear that the proposed demands with regard to Shanghai constitute the sum total of the progressive sanctions, while [which] the diplomatic body on May 9th announced they would impose on the Chinese Government after May 12th if the foreign captives were not all released by the latter date—see my 140, May 8, 5 p.m., and 155 [156], May 14, 3 p.m.
Committee is unanimous in the view that these sanctions should not consist of a pecuniary indemnity. The force of your objection that the Shanghai demands are not homogeneous with the essential [Page 666] purpose which is the protection of foreigners in their treaty rights is fully recognized, but if that criterion is insisted on without reservation, it would seem to make impossible the imposition of any progressive sanctions whatever and thus cost diplomatic body loss of self-respect, prestige and face: such loss would affect disadvantageously the influence of the nations having representatives in the diplomatic body and especially those who had nationals in the Lincheng capture.
I may add that I can speak with a certain detachment in this matter as I was in Shanghai when the diplomatic body adopted and announced the policy of progressive sanctions.
Whatever the sentiments of any particular individual may have been, the committee as a whole has been animated by the desire of dealing justly and in a spirit of moderation with the Chinese. The settlement of Shanghai questions would remove future causes of friction between Chinese and foreigners while equally advantageous to both. And the committee can think of nothing else so suitable to cover the sanction to which the diplomatic body committed itself.