2
in my despatch No. 12 of the 16th January, 1906. His Majesty's Judge was quite prepared to conduct the inquiry, and he wrote to Sir Ernest Satow on the 11th January a despatch to that effect, explaining at the same time how the plan failed to be carried out. The inquiry did not take place owing to the refusal of the two Magistrates to attend.
The minutes of the Consular Body's meeting with the Taotai of the 13th December, 1905, show that they repeatedly offered to fully investigate all matters connected with the Mixed Court, but only asked that it should first be reopened. This proposal was persistently ignored by Yuan Taotai; he would not open the Court unless his conditions were complied with unreservedly (see inclosure in my despatch No. 104 of the 24th December, 1905).
Nevertheless, in writing on the 22nd December (after the riot and the arrival in Shanghae of the Viceroy) to the Senior Consul announcing the reopening of the Court, Yuan Taotai stated that there was an agreement that the police concerned should, "after inquiry, be severely dealt with," and that the case of Mr. Twyman should be arranged with the Wai-wu Pu.
Mr. Drummond's second letter appeared in the "North China Daily News" of the 8th instant, and appears as being spontaneous, not provoked. The foreign press, while occasionally translating items of news from the native papers, has refrained during all these months almost altogether from comment on the subject; the native press has from time to time given fitful attention to the matter when any new development, rumoured or actual, has occurred; but nothing has arisen to my knowledge or that of the police to show that there will, as Mr. Drummond stated in his telegram to the Foreign Office, be serious trouble if the indemnity is paid without full inquiry. If the publicity given to the matter in the native press was intended to resuscitate public excitement, it has signally failed.
In the second paragraph of this letter Mr. Drummond states that the case on the Chinese side is "that the riot was the natural outcome of the grossly aggressive policy of the Municipal Council during 1904 and 1905." The scheme of inquiry laid before you by the Wai-wu Pu, comprehensive as it is, does not include anything of the
kind.
If the third paragraph of this letter is a correct statement of the present position of the Chinese Government on this question, it constitutes a complete change of front entirely out of accordance with their despatch to you of the 7th May this year. Mr. Drummond's letter would lead the public to believe that this had all along been their attitude; and a curious admission of the connection of the Chinese officials with the riot is to be observed in his statement that it was the natural outcome of the "Council's aggressive policy," and this becomes specially significant when it is remembered that the rioting was the work of the dregs of the population.
The fifth paragraph is prophetic of further trouble in Shanghae between foreigners and Chinese if an inquiry is held here. Evidently Mr. Drummond wishes the foreign public to believe that an inquiry will mean the stirring up of ill-feeling, at the same time that he is attempting to persuade the Foreign Office that settlement of the claims without inquiry will result in serious trouble.
It is difficult to conjecture what may be the object of these letters; they are quite uncalled for by any development in the situation, and, coming from a person holding a semi-official position in the service of the Chinese authorities, they constitute an attempt to aggravate a situation already not without difficulty, and, misrepresenting the facts as they do, they have a most mischievous tendency. He is speaking throughout for the Chinese authorities, and I have no doubt particularly for the former Taotai Yuan, who is now in Shanghae after a visit to Nanking made, it is said, in connection with the question of the claims.
The strong resemblance in some points between the letter signed by the two Mixed Court Magistrates on the 8th January and Mr. Drummond's letters to the "Mercury" and the "North China Daily News" incline me to the belief that he has throughout been the adviser and support of Yuan and the other Chinese authorities in their attitude respecting the fracas, the riots, and the resulting claims. It will be necessary to watch carefully for any further effusions of a similar kind, and for the effect they may have upou native opinion as shown in the press or otherwise; and I consider it my duty to bring the present letters to your notice without delay as having some bearing upon the question of the claims as it stands at present.
I have, &c.
(Signed) PELHAM L. WARREN.
3
Inclosure 2 in No. 1.
Extract from the "Shanghae Mercury" of July 3, 1907.
IF Britons are getting a little angry at the delay over the settlement of the claim for indemnity on account of the riots of the 18th December, 1903, it is only what might be expected. The protection of China is all very well when it comes to such attempts at her despoilment as were made by Russia in Manchuria in the first years of this century. It is all very well for the Britain of the West to join the Britain of the East, and say that such attempts shall no longer be tolerated from anybody. But between that and submission to the hot-headed instigation of riot of which Yüan We have waited long enough Taotai was guilty in 1905 there is a great gulf fixed,
for redress, and our patience is exhausted. There were heavy losses on that occasion which have not yet been made good, but which must be made good if only to prevent such attempts in the future. To draw back now would be fatal to foreign prestige.
Let the
But there are two sides to the question, say the Chinese. Granted. whole set of circumstances be thoroughly investigated by a Tribunal fit for the purpose. We have offered to have it so submitted. We have declared our willir. gness to place the whole case before the present Chief Justice in Shanghae, and with him the present Taotai. What can the Chinese Government want that is fairer than that? But we insist, as is customary in British Courts, that the investigation shall be thorough, that nothing shall be done by halves, but that, as our form of oath puts it, we shall To do that we should find out "the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth." require the presentment in Court of all necessary documents, official and otherwise. Specially we should require the presence in the witness-box of his Excellency Yüan Taotai, as he then was, and his son.
It is our belief that with such evidence as would then be forthcoming, and such as we already have, there would be no difficulty in proving our case, which is that the riot was the direct result of the inflammatory speeches, some of them official speeches, which were delivered shortly before the event, with the express intention of rousing native feeling against foreigners in general and the Council and its officers in particular. We feel pretty confident that it could be conclusively shown that the actual rioters-- many of them, at any rate-came into the Settlement from the outside, and that the officials knew they were coming and what they were coming for.
Are these things so, or are they not? If the Chinese officials deny them, there is the simple course before them which we have mentioned. Let them not merely agree Can it be to the examination, let them demand it for the sake of their honour. imagined for a moment that innocence would shrink from so perfect a means of vindicating herself? But no; the Chinese officials have long since refused to have anything to do with such an inquiry! Of course, they have a
reason which
may be conclusive to native understandings, but which to us is but a quibble fit only for such as dare not come under the searchlight of truth. They cannot accept such a suggestion for the reason that his Excellency Yuan is now of higher rank than the present Taotail This, as we say, may appear in Chinese eyes a sufficient reply, but to ns who know nothing whatever, not even the person of the King himself, to be above If that is the only the law, the excuse is too poor a one to bear any weight whatever. answer, the matter must be decided against China in default. And that is probably what she expects. The suggestion of the present Viceroy, Tuan Fang, some time ago, that if the indemnity were paid there would be another riot, can be looked upon only in the light of a threat before which it is utterly impossible that we can recede. We have made certain demands on certain grounds, believing those grounds to be so sure that we are willing to have them examined with all the legal light that can be brought to bear on them. The Chinese refuse to satisfy our demands; they also refuse to have the case examined. We are thus at a deadlock, out of which there will soon be no issue but by force.
In all probability the Peking Government is only too anxious to save its protégé, Tuan, who is very rich, and who had in Chy Hung-chi an extremely powerful supporter in the metropolis. It will be remembered that while the riot affair was still at fever heat the then Taotai was promoted to the Governorship of Peking, as proof positive that his action had the approval of the officials then in power. That, however, will not affect our determination to have justice done, and it is because this has been Western nations are not, as a so long delayed that we once more draw attention to it.
B 2 [2652 i--2]
132
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.