26
Judge, viz., the Shanghae Magistrate, should sit with him on the bench, and to this proposal he was ready to agree.
After this case had been settled, regulations could be drawn up to prevent news- papers from publishing inflammatory articles in the foreign settlement.
Prince Ching said that it was very necessary that such regulations should be drawn up. The suggestion was an excellent one, but he was under the impression that, under the Treaties, China could demand that such offenders should be handed over to her.
Sir Ernest pointed out the distinction between ordinary offenders and political offenders, and explained that it was the practice of all nations to refuse to hand over political offenders. Hong Kong was specially mentioned in the Article of the Treaty referred to by the Prince, but no political offenders were extradited from that Colony.
Sir Ernest inquired whether the Viceroy of Nanking had sent in a report on the course suggested to him by the Taotai.
The Prince said that the Viceroy had only reported that the prisoners should be handed over. He would telegraph to him to consider the suggestions that had been made.
Sir Ernest asked whether he should instruct His Majesty's Consul to negotiate with the Taotai, but the Prince said it would be better to wait the result of his com- munication to the Viceroy.
it..
Inclosure 2 in No. 34.
Memorandum of Interview with M. Dubail.
I CALLED on M. Dubail, and, after some conversation on other matters, mentioned the Circular of the doyen of the 15th instant, inclosing translation of a letter from the Viceroy of Nanking to the senior Consul demanding the surrender of the six Shanghae journalists. I had remarked that he had merely noted "Vu" on When it went to the Italian Minister he observed on it that the Italian Consul already had received instructions on this point, but that he thought that, if the Ministers whom the Foreign Board had addressed on the matter were to be empowered to discuss the affair with the Board, a solution acceptable to all the Legations might be arrived at. I had added a note that this might perhaps be feasible, and had requested the doyen to send the Circular round once more after it returned to him.
M. Dubail said that his note implied simply that he had read the Circular and its contents without expressing any opinion. He had at the outset maintained the principle that the wording of the Treaties ought to be adhered to, by which we were bound to surrender criminals, but he was not in favour of surrendering them to the Chinese authorities in the present case.
I remarked that there was a good deal to be said as to the meaning to be attached to the XXIst Article of the Treaty of Tien-tsin. It was negotiated during the Taiping rebellion, and I felt certain that we had never given up a single Taiping rebel to the Chinese authorities.
M. Dubail said that France also refused to surrender political offenders, and that they could not be given up under ordinary Extradition Treaties unless it was expressly stipulated. (Of course not!)
I told him of my conversation with the Taotai at Shanghae, reported in Mr. Townley's telegram No. 208, and of my discussion with Prince Ch'ing on the 9th instant, ten days later than the date of the Viceroy's letter; that, on my making it clear to his Highness that His Majesty's Government would not consent to the surrender of the prisoners, and desired that the original Agreement between the Taotai and the Consuls-General of Great Britain, Japan, and the United States should be maintained, he had undertaken to recommend the Viceroy, by telegraph, to reconsider the Taotai's later proposal.
M. Dubail was of opinion that it would have been better at the outset to take our stand on the view that the Treaty only applied to ordinary criminals, and to have got the men out of the way. Chinese Government that we were not bound to surrender political offenders, and He thought, perhaps, that if we made it clear to the undertook to expel them from China, say to Hong Kong or Singapore, we should get rid of the imbroglio in the simplest manner.
I replied that this proceeding would have the disadvantage of expelling at least
27
555
four men, against whom I was informed there was not a shred of evidence, and who must be acquitted if the trial before the Mixed Court was proceeded with. As to the two others, they had avowed the authorship of the pamphlets quoted by the " Supao," but I was given to understand that they were not responsible for the publication, the pamphlets being in fact rhetorical exercises composed by their authors when studying in Japan, and surreptitiously published by some one else. My Government desired that the trial of the six should be concluded before the Mixed Court, and that if they were found guilty, a proper punishment should be inflicted. The addition of the Shangbae Magistrate to the Mixed Court for this occasion would enable a severer sentence to be pronounced than the powers of the ordinary Mixed Court Judge were adequate to. I had no objection to a sentence of five years in case of guilt proved, coupled with expulsion at the end of the period.
M. Dubail was of opinion that (1) if the matter were left in the hands of the three ministers already seised of it by the Foreign Board, the assent of the remaining Ministers must be obtained afterwards, (2) the trial before the Mixed Court would be in the nature of a formality, the sentence being fixed at Peking, and communicated to the Magistrate beforehand, as otherwise there might be divergence between the Court and the foreign assessor, and (3) that the Diplomatic Body could not as such give instructions to the Consular Body, but cach Minister must give instructions to his Consuls. To these views I assented. I gathered from M. Dubail that he was disposed to ask for authority to declare to the Chinese Government that political offenders could not be surrendered.
I said that the Chinese note to Mr. Townley in fact, admitted this, since it based the demand for the surrender of the accused upon the assumption that they were not political criminals.
I added, that I expected every day to hear what was the result of Prince Ch'ing's telegram to the Viceroy at Nanking, and that I would, on hearing, at once let him know.
ERNEST SATOW.
Peking, September 18, 1903.
No. 35.
(Signed)
Sir E. Satow to the Marquess of Lansdowne.-(Received November 9.)
(No. 330.) My Lord,
Peking, September 24, 1903. WITH reference to my despatch No. 326 of the 10th instant, I have the honour to inclose copy of the letter received by the senior Consul at Shanghae from the Viceroy at Nanking, therein alluded to, together with a copy of the Circular of the doyen of the Diplomatic Body, on which the heads of Missions had noted their opinion.
Your Lordship will perceive that the Italian Minister's proposal, already reported, that the affair should be placed by the Diplomatic Body in the hands of those foreign Representatives who had been already directly addressed by the Wai-wu Pu on the subject, and that it should be left to them to come to an arrangement with the Chinese Government, which would meet with the approval of the foreign Representa- tives, did not meet with anything like general support.
The only other suggestion is that of M. de Radowitz, in the absence of the German Minister, that the Foreign Board might be advised to address the Diplomatic Body, so as to enable the latter to discuss the matter with it.
I do not consider that this suggestion, if adopted, would have the effect of expe- diting a settlement, which is much more likely to be attained by pressing the Viceroy to approve the course proposed by the Taotai.
I have, &c. (Signed)
ERNEST SATOW.
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.