Mr. Williams to Mr. Seward
No. 30.]
Legation of the United States,
Peking,
April 12, 1866.
Sir: I have the honor to send you some
particulars relating to the desecration of the American cemetery at
Tangchau, which is interesting chiefly as showing one of the modes in
which the natives of China vent their ill-will upon their enemies, and
have done so in this instance against missionaries. Out of many
depositions and official papers, which it is not necessary to send you
in extenso, I have learned that when the
missionaries first went to Tangchau they found it difficult to purchase
land for a burial ground from the people. They therefore applied to the
district magistrate of Punglai, who rules over a portion of Tangchau
prefecture, and he kindly set apart a plot of ground that belonged to
government, which he told them he could not sell, but would grant, in
perpetuity, for this purpose, and file the record in his archives. He
also was at the expense of setting up the boundary stones and a marble
slab, on which was engraved the grant to the missionaries. This act of
consideration and courtesy deserves notice, for I am not aware of
another instance like it in China.
This was in the autumn of 1861, and during the next eighteen months
several headstones were erected, some trees planted, and the plot partly
turfed. No injury appears to have been done for two years, but in the
spring of 1864 it was noticed that some of the trees had been removed,
three headstones thrown down, others chipped, and the official
inscription mutilated. These acts were reported to the magistrate, who
readily promised the missionaries to investigate the affair and deal
with the offenders.
“A few days after our visit,” says one of them, “an old man with a chain
around his neck was led to my house by the mandarin’s runners, who
presented his card with a verbal message to me stating that this was the
constable, whom we might punish as we saw fit. I sent the man back with
a written reply, expressing our surprise and dissatisfaction at this
mode of procedure. On receiving it the magistrate expressed great
surprise that the man had thus been sent to me; that it was the
unauthorized doings of his underlings. It seems, however, that he sent
his policemen into some of the neighboring villages to make inquiry on
the matter; he also issued a proclamation warning the people not to
interfere with the graves; but nothing more was done. The broken stones
were replaced by us.”
During the next year, (1865,) further damages were occasionally
perpetrated, until, by the end of it, all the trees had been ruined, and
hardly a whole stone remained in the lot, the fragments lying scattered
about. Particular pains had [Page 508]
been taken to obliterate the Chinese inscriptions in the epitaphs,
especially the name of Jesus, proving the deliberate purpose to annoy as
well as destroy.
Dr. McCartee, the former consul at Tangchau, demanded that the
authorities should see that these aggressions were stopped, but in vain.
Mr. Sandford has done all that remonstrance can do, since he arrived, to
urge the intendant to punish the offenders. I send a copy of the
latter’s reply to the consul, (enclosure A,) as it exhibits his view of
the responsibility of the proprietors of the graveyard. A second
proclamation forbidding natives to go to the place was issued by the
Punglai magistrate, January 11, 1866, under orders from the intendant;
but through fear of the people he seems to have retained most of the
copies in his office.
I also enclose copies of Mr. Sandford’s statement of his preceedings and
my reply, (enclosures B, C,) which furnish all that is important.
Although I do not think that the Chinese government, according to a fair
interpretation of the treaty, is liable for damages done to the graves,
unless it can be shown that their officials have screened the offenders,
yet, lest this ill feeling proceed to other acts, which may render a
residence at Tangchau very disagreeable, I have requested Admiral Bell
to visit that city, if he can, as no United States national vessel has
yet been there.
The missionaries concur in attributing these acts to a dislike to
foreigners generally, and an unwillingness on the part of the citizens
to see them settling permanently in their midst; and not to any personal
pique against them as missionaries, for none others yet live there. One
of them remarks, when explaining this point, that “I believe these acts
of injury did not arise from ill-will to any individual foreigner in
Tangehau, neither did it arise from hatred to the American residents, as
a body, because they are missionaries or Americans; but simply because
of a general hatred of us as foreigners. After residing among the
Chinese nearly fourteen years, I am deliberately of the opinion that
they bear no malice against missionaries because of their religion, but
they bear intense malice against the white race, simply because they see
that they differ essentially from themselves—that there is no common
ground of union. They see in the white man will, energy, purpose, and
they dread and hate him as a latent power, and an intruder in their
country, foreboding no good, but much future trouble. Under the
influence of these feelings, it gives many of them exquisite pleasure to
injure a foreigner, or anything belonging to him, and I think they have
destroyed these gravestones simply as a luxury. They entertain no such
feelings, as far as I have been able to discover, towards any other
race, and those who enjoy luxuries should pay for them in dollars and
cents at a fair valuation, and thus they will be able to calculate
beforehand to what extent they can afford to indulge.”
Such a feeling as is here described no doubt exists to some extent all
over China; but it cannot be checked at all times, and is often
stimulated by proud, literary families, while others of the same class
will oppose and somewhat neutralize it. The officials belong to the
literary class, but they desire to keep the peace with both natives and
foreigners, and think that to trim and delay a matter is their safest
course. Every Chinese official comes to regard his own safety as his
chief object, and his rule of action is to do as little as possible.
I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant,
S. WELLS WILLIAMS. Charge
d’Affaires.
Hon. William H. Seward, Secretary of State, Washington, D. C.
[Page 509]
A.
[Translation.]
The Intendent to Mr. Sandford
Pwan, intendant of circuit, commissioner of the gabelle, and acting
as collector of customs in the east of Shantung, has the honor to
reply to the despatch of the United States consul respecting the
destruction of gravestones in the American cemetery near
Tangchau:
On receiving your despatch I issued orders to the district magistrate
of Punglai to make inquiry, and he has now sent the following
report:
“I have to state that in October, 1861, Mr. Danforth and other
American missionaries reported to me that Mrs. Danforth had just
died, and as they had no place to bury her in, it was necessary for
me to get a spot somewhere. I therefore selected a plot in the
public domain, lying on the Little Gold-peak hill, and there they
laid her body. A map was made of the locality, and, at their
request, I issued a public notice confirming the lot to them. On the
10th of March, 1864, Mr. Hartwell and other missionaries represented
to me that the gravestones placed in this cemetery had been broken
by persons unknown. Finding that the statement was true, I sent
policemen to make careful inquiries through all that neighborhood as
to who had done it, and issued a proclamation warning people not to
do any damage to the grounds. Now this lot where the American
cemetery lies having been a portion of waste land belonging to the
government, it had not been rented by anybody and had, therefore,
paid no tax. When the missionanies complained last year that the
gravestones had been defaced, search was made for the offenders, and
a proclamation issued forbidding people to go there; but no explicit
evidence as to who committed the desecration this year has been
brought before me.
“I take the liberty to remark, however, that the gentry and people of
China usually appoint custodians to watch their burial grounds, so
that if evil persons and vagabonds injure them, some clew can be
obtained of the offenders, or they can be seized on the spot and
handed over to the magistrates for examination and punishment. But
this American burial ground lies remote from dwellings, in a wild
spot, and has been left unprotected by the missionaries, so that
although the gravestones have been repeatedly defaced, and they have
complained of the injury, it has been no easy matter to arrest the
offenders. As this affair is one that concerns the people of both
nations, I have not presumed to intrude my opinion as to the best
mode of protecting the place.”
In regard to this business, I (the intendant) may observe that in
China custodians are usually appointed to look after the burial
grounds, whether lying near or remote from dwellings, lest they are
injured by lawless people. If it is situated far away among the
hills, like this one belonging to the American missionaries, it is
still more desirable to have a watchman placed over it, and then if
damage be done, he can instantly seize the offenders and carry them
before the magistrate for punishment.
I accordingly inform you, sir, of these circumstances, and beg you to
urge the missionaries at once to engage a trustworthy person to take
charge of their cemetery, so that if the stones should again be
injured, he can instantly hand over the guilty persons for
punishment.
E. T. Sandford, Esq., United States Consul.
B.
Mr. Sanford to Mr. Williams
United States Consulate,
Chifu,
November 25, 1865.
Sir: I have the honor to inform you that on
the 21st instant I received a visit from Rev. C. R. Mills, who told
me that he had just received a letter from C. W. Mateer, stating
that the Chinese had again desecrated the American cemetery at
Tangchau, entirely ruining the stone which was placed at the head of
Mrs. D.’s grave, (one of fine American marble,) and those placed on
the graves of Mr. G.’s children, and requesting him (Mr. Mills) to
lay the case before the consul. I informed him that Mr. Mateer’s
deposition and his own would be necessary regarding the previous
occasions when the cemetery was desecrated, but that I would see the
intendant upon the subject.
According to arrangement, I visited that official on the 23d. He
requested me to furnish him with an official statement. When I
remarked that the perpetrators must be arrested and dealt with
according to law, and that an indemnity of one hundred and fifty
taels was demanded, he stated that the people of Tangchau were very
bad, and he was so far from them he did not know how it would end.
He added that the Americans ought to come to Yentai to reside, as
the treaty specified open ports. I urged their right to reside at
the city of Tangchau, and that I should insist upon it. I called his
attention to Articles XI and XII of the treaty, and he admitted that
it was his duty to arrest and punish the offenders.
[Page 510]
I have stated the various outrages committed on the tombstones to the
intendant from the first. I fear, however, from his manner and his
unwillingness to have foreigners reside at Tangchau, that he will
act in a very dilatory manner. I shall exercise patience.
I am, very respectfully, your obedient servant,
E. T. SANDFORD, United States
Consul.
S. Wells Williams, Esq., &c., &c., &c.
C.
Mr. Williams to Mr. Sandford
Legation of the United
States, Peking,
March 21, 1866.
Sir: I have to acknowledge your despatches
Nos. 4, 5, and 6, with their enclosures, relating to the desecration
of a cemetery at Tangchau, wherein were buried the bodies of several
American missionares and their children, by breaking the stones and
destroying the trees at various times during the last three years;
together with your efforts to obtain compensation and
protection.
I have carefully read these papers, for, so far as I know, it is the
first instance in China of persistent injuries done to foreign
graves, and I do not think that the district magistrate exerted
himself when informed of the outrages as he should have done; still
I do not think that the spirit or letter of the treaty will bear you
out in demanding one hundred and fifty taels indemnity for the
injury from the authorities, except as they can get it from the
offenders. It would be right to call upon the authorities to defend
a cemetery if it was threatened by a mob, and if there is any clew
to the offenders, demand that they be punished.
The owners of a cemetery are, however, expected to take measures to
protect it; and in all parts of China the natives do much to guard
their dead. The foreign burial grounds at the ports are usually
walled in and custodians appointed; but, so far as I can learn, the
missionaries have taken no measures at Tangchau to enclose their
ground, which lies exposed to depredations, being situated at a
distance from dwellings. Mr. Crawford speaks of the dislike to all
foreigners of the people of Tangchau, and they would seize such an
opportunity to show their malice without risk of detection,
mutilating gravestones being one of the ways in which one Chinese
irritates another.
I cannot call upon the authorities to maintain a guard over this
graveyard, and I see no other way for its protection than for the
missionaries to take some measures to secure it by appointing a
custodian, or otherwise, as they see best.
Your action in urging the local authorities to do what they can to
arrest the aggressors and punish them is very proper, and I hope
your efforts will lead them to act vigorously, and to understand
that a graveyard is a place held sacred by foreigners as well as
natives.
I am, sir, your obedient servant,
E. T. Sandford, Esq., &c., &c., &c.
