Page images

a nephew of the owner, objected, but I have no evidence that he acted by authority, and he had declined to negotiate early in the spring, when I wished to rent it. Some angry words passed at this interview, at which I probably showed too much feeling. The next day, June 22d, I went to the house, and in this man's presence Mr. Mateer removed a window from it, whereupon he left as in a passion. The next day he came and ordered some of the workmen to leave; but in the afternoon, in company with another member of the family, he returned and offered to settle the matter for me. I agreed to do so if he would put his offer in writing, but he declined doing that, and, as a third course, proposed to leave the whole matter to the decision of the district magistrate. I consented, and we repaired to the office for that end, but the magistrate refused to see us. I then proposed to accept the same terms from the prefect; but he declined going to that officer unless I would lead the way to his office, which I objected to. not being a Chinese subject. We therefore did not visit the prefect.

The next day, June 24th. two land agents, named Hwang (a distant relative of the owner) and Chu, came to my house early, and requested me to postpone my repairs on the house. They said they came with authority, and were sent by the nephew. I accordingly stopped work; but, toward evening, they came again to say that the title could not be made out then, but directed me to go forward with the repairs. I believed this to be authoritative. A day or two after the nephew, Hwang Tang-ming, met me there, and we conversed together without any ill feeling, when he intimated that some difficulty existed which he wished to explain privately to my assistant. They then held a private conversation, when Hwang said that the only fear was that the district magistrate, taking advantage of a misunderstanding existing with the owner, Hwang Tsun-King, since last winter, would make a pretext of the sale to injure them. They both urged me to call on him in their behalf to request him to settle the case. I did so, but he failed to execute the promise he made to settle it. Shortly after my teacher called on the family, when this nephew and others of the household promised him that they would draw up a paper authorizing me to proceed with the repairs, but it

was never sent.

My relations with the renter, Hwang Yuh, have uniformly been friendly. He had sublet the house to one or more persons, one of whom received a compensation from me for moving out. Hwang Yuh has consistently expressed the utmost willingness that I should occupy the property, and has given me a receipt signed by his father-in-law for the 20,000 cash which I paid him for damages done to the garden during the alterations made on the premises.

I have made this statement at Chifu, and there is consequently a want of precision in the dates; but I have given all the facts, so far as I know, necessary to a clear understanding of the case, and am not conscious of having withheld any facts because they might not promote a decision in my favor.

CHIFU, September 2, 1864.


P. S.-I have just received from a man at Tangchau, in whom I have entire confidence, what purports to be a message from the district magistrate, recommending me to hand the eight hundred strings of cash to the consul, with the request that he would in turn hand it to the intendent of circuit, who was to be requested to transmit it to the district magistrate, who would then offer to pay it to the owner and give me a title to the property.

I started for Chifu the next day in order to pay the money to Mr. Morrison, in compliance with these suggestions, and had actually called on him for that purpose, when I learned that D. B. McCartee had been invested with authority to examine the case, which would probably render such a course inexpedient at present. I may add that my informant stated that the district magistrate wished it might not transpire that this action was proposed by him.

C. R. M.

[Enclosure F.]

Mr. Burlingame to Mr. McCartee.

Peking, October 8, 1864.

SIR: I beg to acknowledge your despatch No. 2 of the 9th ultimo, with its enclosures, referring to and explaining the renting of the premises outside of the east gate of Tangchau by the Rev. C. R. Mills. These papers, together with your own clear statement, have put me in possession of those facts and inferences which have enabled me to present the case to the foreign office in as favorable a manner as they permitted. I have not yet received an answer to my proposition to Prince Kung to refer the settlement of the case back to you and the local authorities at Tangchau, but as he may notify the latter of this proposal before he replies, I send you a copy of my despatch to him that you may see how I have stated the case. I maintain the right of foreigners to live at Tangchau city by treaty, and base this right on the city and its dependent port being both included in the intention of the treaty. Tientsin and Taku, Canton and Whampoa, Ningpo and Chinhai, are all similar cases in this respect,

In it

except that at Tangchau no consuls have opened their offices. When the treaty was made in 1858, its capabilities as a port where ships could anchor and trade be carried on were not well known, and it has since proved to be less commodious than was expected.

As soon as I receive an answer from the Chinese officials I will furnish you with a copy and such directions as may be necessary.

I am, sir, your obedient servant,

D. B. MCCARTEE, Esq., M. D.,


United States Consul, Chifu.

[Enclosure G.]

Peking, October 3, 1864.

SIR: I have the honor to inform you that on the 19th of August I sent orders to D. B McCartee, the United States consul at Tangchau, and he has, in return, furnished me with the following report respecting the case of Rev. C. R. Mills renting a house and lot:


It appears that when Mr. Mills desired to rent the old garden and premises belonging to the widow Hwang, situated outside the east gate of Tangchau, he employed one man named Ching, with three others as brokers, whose occupation was to arrange the leasing of houses, and they inquired of the owner Hwang Tsun-King, and informed Mr. Mills of the conditions on which the place could be rented, and that the owner, Hwan Tsun-King, was quite willing to come to an arrangement. These brokers said that he was willing enough, but as the gentry might make difficulty when they heard of it, perhaps the best way would be to make the repairs first, and that the contract for the terms of the lease could be drawn up after they (the foreigners) had moved in.

"It was in this way that the brokers induced the two missionaries to begin making repairs; and they knowing that both the owners of the property and the brokers were men of respectable character, while they were much crowded in their present residence, and the hot weather was approaching, and had even come, accordingly came with workmen to repair the buildings. The work had gone on for a few days, when Hwang Tan-ming, a nephew of the owner, came to the place and compelled the workmen to leave, and also entered his complaint before the district magistrate of Punglai. The missionaries then continued the repairs themselves, as it was difficult to stop them midway; and the nephew likewise expressed himself as quite willing to allow Mr. Mills to proceed with the repairs, and that afterwards a regular contract could be made with the owner. When these repairs had been completed a man named Hwang Yuh, who had lived on the premises as a gardener, complained that the workmen had injured and trampled down his garden while doing the job; which, when Mr. Mills learned, he compensated him for, by paying him the sum of 20,000 cash ($27,) and took his receipt for the money, dated August 29, now in Mr. Mills's possession.

"It is evident from these statements that the landlord and Mr. Mills had a good understanding with each other, and it was owing measurably to the arrangements and advice of the brokers that no regular lease was made out. Mr. Mills had no desire to oust any person by violence, nor had he the least intention to insult or oppress the widow, Hwang, in anything that he did."

In presenting this report, I may observe that the port of Tangchau is mentioned in the foreign treaties among the ports where foreigners can reside for trade, although, owing to the discommodities of the anchorage at the city of Tangchau, the merchants carry on their trade at Yentai, and their vessels anchor there. Moreover, foreigners have resided at Tangchau itself several years, and leased houses there, so that it cannot be regarded as a violation of treaty stipulations to do so. The consul has forwarded to me several documents

connected with this affair; and as the whole matter seems to be much mixed up, and there are discrepancies in the statements, I think the best way will be for me to refer it back to the consul to manage; and I request that the Foreign Office will likewise instruct the local magistrates to meet him, and let them consult upon, and amicably settle, the whole question between them in a spirit of mutual consideration.


I have the honor to be, sir, your highness's obedient servant, His Imperial Highness PRINCE KUNG, &c., &c., &c.

[Enclosure H.]

Chifu, October 25, 1864.

SIR: I have the honor to inform your excellency that, on the 29th of September, I received a communication from the Rev. Messrs. Mills and Mateer, American citizens, residing at Tangchau, informing me that they "understood that prosecution had been instituted before Chinese officers against Chang Kan-chin, on account of his having attempted to rent houses" for them in Tangchau, and soliciting for him "protection, that he may not be delivered up to Chinese officers."

In replying to this communication, I informed these gentlemen that, although by treaty the United States government had secured to its own citizens exemption from the jurisdic tion of the Chinese officers, "the Chinese government had never surrendered its jurisdiction over its own subjects, and that, should it appear that any of them are accused of infraction of their own laws, the officers of the United States of America have no power to interfere to prevent their arrest or punishment;" but that "if it can be shown that they suffer injury on the part either of the government or of individal Chinese for their lawful employment under American citizens," that "this will be an infraction of article XXV of the treaty of Tientsin, and will constitute a proper subject on which to demand redress. Such redress may, however, come too late to remedy the evils complained of. I also reminded Messrs. Mills and Mateer "that the consular representative of the United States of America is stationed at Chifu, fifty miles from Tangchau; that he has no man-of-war or other force at his disposal; and that his ability to render aid, or to enforce the provisions of the treaty must depend in a great measure upon the prudent conduct and cordial support and co-operation of his fellow-citizens." I also forwarded to them a document in Chinese, to be given to Chang Kan-chin, (enclosure No. 1,) in which, after reciting the provisions of article XXV of the American treaty of Tientsin, I request from the local officers their aid and protection for him while peaceably pursuing his employment according to the treaty. At the same time I advised Messrs. Mills and Mateer that Chang "is a Chinese subject, and that we have no right to prevent his arrest for an alleged crime against the laws of China;" that "even should we suspect that the alleged crime was but a pretext for persecution on account of his lawful connexion with the citizens of the United States of America, it might be very difficult to obtain such proofs before the trial as would justify the foreign authorities in interfering ;" and that if, in their opinion, "the man is in danger of arrest, the safest plan would be to send him at once to this consulate, and let the Chinese officers make their requisition for him upon us," &c.

I have also the honor to acknowledge the receipt (on the 18th) of your excellency's despatch of the 8th ultimo, enclosing a copy in Chinese of your despatch to Prince Kung, proposing to him to refer the settlement of Mr. Mills's case back to myself and the local authorities at Tangchan. On the 20th instant I received an official visit from Pwan, intendant of circuit, &c., who came to propose that he should send for the district magistrate of Punglai, together with the men, Wang Tsin-ping and Ching, referred to in my previous despatch to you, and that I should send for Mr. Mills, when the dispute could be examined and decided by the public officers of the two nations, acting in conjunction, agreeably to article XXVIII of the treaty. I informed him that I had just received your excellency's despatch, in which you stated that you had proposed to Prince Kung to refer the settlement of the case to the local authorities and myself, and that I thought it would be better to await the answer from the Foreign Office. He replied that the prefect of Tangchau was then absent from the city, but would probably return in about ten days, and that I might fix upon any time after that for the joint trial. I told him that by the time specified I thought I should be able to make some arrangement of the kind proposed.

About an hour after he left me I received a letter from Mr. Mills, at Tangchan, dated October 17, enclosing a document from the district magistrate of Punglai, addressed to the American missionary, (or missionaries,) and sent to Mr. Mateer's house on the 15th. In it he says that he has received instructions from the intendant to eject Mr. Mills summerily from the house, and restore it to Mrs. Hwang-Chang, and, after accusing him of breach of treaty and gross irregularity, requests him to fix a day upon which he will leave the house, and enjoins him not to delay. Upon the receipt of this letter, I addressed the intendant, reciting the stipulations of articles XI and XXVIII of the treaty, reminding him of the propo sition he had made to me with reference to a joint trial; acquainting him with the fact of the magistrate's order to Mr. Mills, which I quoted in full; and telling him that it appeared to me to be irreconcilable with his own proposition the day before, as well as contrary to the treaty. In his reply the intendant states that his proposition to have the district magistrate bring Wang Tsin-pin, &c., and that I should cite Mr. Mills to Chifu for a joint trial, was according to article XII, which prohibits citizens of the United States from " compelling [persons] to rent, and from taking forcible possession," &c., (Chinese text;) that his order to the magistrate was given because Mr. Mills had taken forcible possession of a house without having had any agreement to rent it, and has already occupied it four months and more; and that he had been ordered by the Foreign Office to command the magistrate of Punglai to transmit orders to Mr. Mills to respect the treaty, which did not allow compulsory renting of people's houses, and that if Mr. Mills had forcibly taken possession of one he must leave it, in obedience with the treaty; and that, therefore, his (the intendant's) orders to the magistrate were not contrary to the treaty, nor incompatible with his proposal to me. (See enclosurd No. 2.)

Yesterday I again addressed the intendant on the same subject. (Enclosure No. 3.) Whether his proposition to me was an afterthought, and in consequence of a wish to have a new trial-if, indeed, any trial could be said to have taken place-and thus avoid the charge of having failed to conform to the stipulations of article XXVIII; or whether it was intended to take advantage of Mr. Mills's absence to recover possession of the house, I am unable at present to say. I am fully convinced, however, that there is a powerful party in Tangchau

which is determined to oust, not only Mr. Mills, but all other foreigners from the city; and this of itself would be enough to prevent the landlord from executing a lease of the premises to Mr. Mills. Under present circumstances, it would be quite impracticable to induce witnesses to give testimony which might draw down upon them the vengeance of the league of the gentry; and that not only the magistrates, as Mr. Crawford deposed, (see my last despatch, enclosure A,) but the intendant also is intimidated by them, and feels it to be his safest course to side with the opposition. The previous magistrate of Punglai district lost his office in consequence of a disturbance among the literary candidates, in which he was beaten by them; and the intendant himself, when we first spoke of this affair, related to me the ill treatment he had experienced at the hands of the people of Wai-hai-wei, where he went last year to establish new custom-house regulations. He was surrounded by several thousand men, who compelled him by threats of violence to write a proclamation upon a stone tablet, assuring him that no alteration should be made in the duties.

Since writing the above, I have received (October 26) a second despatch from the intendant, (enclosure 4,) from which you will learn that the Chinese officers have prejudged the case, and that a joint trial would be of no avail. If I had legal proof that Mr. Mills had rented the house in question, or if he had even obtained a document from any person pretending to be authorized to act for the owner, I might have some hope of making it appear, at least, that he had not acted wilfully, but had been deceived. Unfortunately, I am in possession of no such proofs; and from the tone of the intendant's despatches it is evident that the Chinese officers do not consider the question as an open subject at all; while, from what he says in reference to article XII of the treaty, it appears as if his object in proposing that I should send for Mr. Mills to come to Chifu was solely to have him punished by the consul according to the laws of the United States of America.

As I am obliged to prepare this despatch and its enclosures for the steamer hourly expected, and am entirely without assistance, so that I must do the whole of the translating from and into Chinese, and the copying, (save only of the Chinese documents,) I beg your excellency to excuse any appearance of haste in the present communication, and believe me that I have the honor to be, very respectfully,


United States Minister at Peking.


[Enclosure I.]

Peking, November 16, 1864.

SIR: I have received your despatch of the 25th ultimo, with its enclosures, and have carefully read them, and beg to express to you my thanks for the careful and judicious manner in which you have acted in this difficult case, and for your lucid statement of its present condition.

So far as I can see, the wisest course to follow now is to wait for the Chinese officials to move. If they insist on Mr. Mills vacating the premises, the right of residing at Tangchau at all must then be settled, and that involves their power to enforce a treaty stipulation, for they may not quote one part of an article so as to nullify another part of the same article; if Americans have the right to live in that city, the first part of article XII must needs be effectual to enable them to obtain houses somewhere in it.

A similar dispute about obtaining dwellings occurred at Canton in 1846, in which, however, the United States authorities had a better case on their side; for a lease had been obtained from the owner, who had readily consented to a profitable disposal of his house and lot on the strength of the treaty; yet he was imprisoned and harshly treated, and forcibly prevented renting the house. Another man died in prison, about the same time, for the same offence against the seclusive pride of the gentry of Canton. Subsequently the opposition died away, and our countrymen succeeded in obtaining good residences, and I hope & similar change will be seen at Tangchau and Yentai.

If the Chinese still insist on Mr. Mills leaving these premises, they should offer him others, and allow the owner of these to arrange with him, on equitable terms, for the repairs laid out on the place. From what you remark, it now seems unlikely that any good would come from an attempt to settle the matter by the local authorities and yourself, and it will be advisable to wait further developments both there and in the capital.

The principle which you have expressed in your reply to Mr. Mills respecting the interference of the United States authorities in behalf of Chinese subjects is the correct one; the Chinese government has never surrendered its jurisdiction over its own subjects, and all we can do in behalf of those who may be unjustly accused or punished is to represent the facts in their case as opportunity presents. We can make no demands, nor require any com pensation or satisfaction for their wrongs.

I am your obedient servant,

D. B. MCC ARTEE, Esq.,

United States Vice Consul, Chifu

28 D C *


[Enclosure J.]

Chifu, November 21, 1864.

SIR: I have the honor to inform your excellency that the suit of the widow Hwang-Chang against Rev. C. R. Mills, on an action of trespass and ejectment, has been amicably settled both parties having agreed at my suggestion to refer the case to arbitration. At the instance of the district magistrate of Punglai, the representatives of Hwang family nominated as their referee a Chinese named Li, (who I was afterwards informed was the assistant magistrate of the district,) and Mr. Mills nominated H. G. Howlett, esq., (who was connected with the British consulate.) An indenture was drawn up in duplicate, and signed by Mr. Mills and by the representatives of the Hwang family, by which Mr. Mills covenanted to vacate the house on condition that the magistrate should rent for him a temple, which he specified, and the Hwang family to pay Mr. Mills 400 taels for the improvements put upon the house, and he to pay a specified rent to the family until he left the premises.

I enclose a copy of the bond given to the district magistrate and myself by the representatives of the widow Hwang, and also a corresponding bond executed by the Rev. C. R. Mills. Their originals are filed in the office of the magistrate and in this consulate. I also enclose a copy of the indenture made between Mrs. Hwang and Mr. Mills in duplicate, signed by both parties, and witnessed by their referees, each party retaining a copy; also a copy of a note from the magistrate asking for an abatement of the award, and of my reply declining to do so. His worship returned to Tangchau on the 19th instant, and I expect in a few days to receive a despatch from him acknowledging the adjustment of the case; when I get it I shall again address your excellency, and forward copies of the correspondence. I have the honor to be, very respectfully, Hon. A. BURLINGAME, &c., &c., &c.


[Enclosure K.]

Chifu, December 31, 1864.

SIR: More than a month has now elapsed since I had the honor to address your excellency, announcing the amicable settlement of the suit brought by the widow Hwang-Chang against the Rev. C. R. Mills, and, as yet, I have heard nothing further from his worship, the district magistrate of Punglai. From private letters from Tangchau, I am led to believe that the complainants represented by the widow have come to the conclusion that it is more to their advantage to allow Mr. Mills to continue to occupy the house in dispute at the rent specified in the bond, than to pay him the sum awarded as remuneration for the improvements he put upon the house. I think it may be safely concluded that the affair is now finally settled. As it was solely with reference to the adjustment of this case that I consented to act as vice-consul, I beg, now, respectfully to announce to your excellency that I have written this day to the consul general, requesting that officer to transmit the Department of State my resignation of the office. This is the fourth time that I have had the honor conferred upon me without solicitation, and it is gratifying to my feelings to learn, through the secretary of legation, that the manner in which I have discharged the duties of the office, during the brief term for which I have held it, has met your approval.

I have the honor to enclose a communication from Mr. Mills, relative to outrages committed upon the graves in the American cemetery at Tangchau, sent at my request, as I thought I might wish to make some use of it in the discussion with the district magistrate. Finding, however, that he was much more likely to be conciliated than my previous correspondence with the intendant had led me to expect, I did not think it advisable to complicate the discussion by bringing forward the desecration of the tombs at that time. I now send Mr. Mills's statement, as Dr. Williams suggests that it may be of use to preserve among the archives of the legation for future reference.

His worship, the magistrate of Punglai, was very anxious that I should write to your excellency in reference to his conduct in this affair, in such terms as would induce you to make favorable mention of his name to the foreign office. I am very happy to testify that I found him much more reasonable, and apparently anxious to settle the affair amicably, and in accordance with the spirit of the treaty, than the intendant, who evidently desired to press the case to a decision adverse to Mr. Mills, and to drive him from Tangchau.

In taking official leave at this time, I beg to assure your excellency that, although the requirements with reference to consular officers are now such that it is impossible for me to retain the office under my present circumstances, yet, should any exigency arise in which my long residence in this country, and my acquaintance with the written and spoken language of China, may render my services desirable to promote the interests of the United States in China, I shall always be ready and willing to render such services to the extent of my ability.

I have the honor to remain, sir, very respectfully,

Hon. A. BURLINGAME, &c., &c., &c


« PreviousContinue »