No. 41.

Mr. G. F. Seward to Mr. Davis.

No. 478.]

Sir: On the 21st of June, 1870, occurred the massacre at Tien-tsin. The consul for France at that port, the vice-consul the interpreter of the French legation at Peking, and his wife, a Roman Catholic priest, nine Sisters of Charity, a French subject engaged in trade, and his wife, and three Russians (one a lady) were most barbarously murdered. It has been asserted also that very many Chinese connected with the consulate, the Catholic cathedral, the hospital for native children under the control of the Sisters of Charity, and with various mercantile establishments were similarly sacrificed.

It is important to know the causes which led to the massacre, the circumstances which attended it, and the course pursued by the government toward the offenders. Such knowledge will throw light on the Chinese character and the condition of the Chinese mind, and it will instruct us how to deal with this imperfectly known people. History, it is said, [Page 166] repeats itself. If the massacre was the result of causes which are still operative, we may see a renewal of its horrors. It stands out in the course of our relations with China with dread prominence. It should be made a beacon of warning.

To the citizens of Western states the Chinese people offer a complete riddle. They are pronounced by some observers the most peaceful and industrious race under the sun. By others they are declared to be crafty, rapacious, and cruel. One person gives them a foremost place among the nations, and predicts that a few years will correct the slight evils which exist in their system. Another holds that their nationality is decayed and their stock worn out; that they are too far gone to accept ameliorations of their religion or policy. To many they seem possessed of a chief share of the wealth of the world, which is described as having flowed to their shore for centuries. Others say that their towns and cities are squalid, and that beggary is seen on all sides. One is of opinion that education is so universally diffused that, there is scarcely a man in the empire who cannot read and write. Another proclaims that they are groveling in depths of ignorance and superstition.

Mr. Burlingame, with that wealth of generosity which characterized him, nourished in his imagination the more attractive qualities of the Chinese. There was so much that was exalted and honorable in his views, so much that touched the generous sentiments of the age, so much withal that was true and capable of demonstration, that he aroused the enthusiasm of our people. He was only less successful in Great Britain, in North Germany, and in Russia. France alone distrusted him and his client, profoundly and consistently.

But even while the wandering eloquent envoy was pursuing his mission, news of outrages committed in widely separated parts of the empire threw discredit upon his representations. He was only a few months in his grave when the news of the fearful tragedy at Tien-tsin was flashed to the ends of the earth. During the next few months the items of information received from China contained indications that the Government was preparing for war; that further outrages were greatly feared, and some minor ones actually committed; that redress at Tien-tsin was tardy and inefficient. A little later reports were published that the government had put out a decree intended to expel missionaries from the interior of the empire, and to hamper their efforts at the ports. The last effects of Mr. Burlingame’s glowing statements were then effaced, and an impression left that the Chinese entertained an unyielding, bitter hatred of foreigners.

Where, then, shall the mind rest when it contemplates the Chinese qualities and disposition, the future of foreign intercourse and of the empire, The prevailing tendency among foreigners in China is to debase the Chinese to a very low place in the scale of nations, to belittle their intellectual capacity, to condemn their morals, to declare them destitute of vitality and energy. Each person who argues the case finds facts ready for his use which seem to him to demonstrate his own particular view.

I confess that the case is different with me. Faith in the race is a matter of intuition with me. I find here a steady adherence to the traditions of the past, a sober devotion to the calls arising in the various relations of life, an absence of shiftlessness, an honest and at least somewhat earnest grappling with the necessities and difficulties which beset men in their humbler stages of progress, a capacity to moralize withal, an enduring sense of right and wrong. These all form what must be considered an essentially satisfactory basis and groundwork of national character. Among the people there is practical sense, among [Page 167] the gentry scholarly instincts, the desire for advancement, the disposition to work for it with earnestness and constancy. Among the rulers, a sense of dignity, breadth of view, considering their information and patriotic feeling. Who will say that such a people have not a future more wonderful even than their past? Why will not the wheels of progress and empire roll on until the countries of Asia witness again their course?

It is of course true that different races exibit generally different capacities and qualities. But we are likely to be deceived by appearances, and to attribute to differences of stock peculiarities which might be explained by a statement of differing circumstances.

Holding fast to this idea, we may proceed to investigate the causes of the massacre, just as we would a similar case elsewhere occurring. If like causes will produce like effects in China as elsewhere, if ordinary rules of evidence and an ordinary spirit of justice are to be regarded, we ought to set down naught to malice until malice is fairly proven. We ought to ascertain by careful inquiry what induced and actuated the malice. We ought to discriminate between its developments and the general tendencies of the people, if we find special circumstances existing to which we can trace the occasion of the massacre in whole or in part.

In truth, there were many and diverse causes of the massacre. Elements of danger flowed in from widely separated sources. Their combined stream was resistless.

In exhibiting these causes, I shall state—

First. The general elements of hostility to foreigners, the general reasons why the Chinese dislike and distrust us.

Second. The forms which this distrust has taken, having reference practically to the forms exhibited at Tien-tsin.

Third. The special circumstances of an exciting character which were present and active at Tien-tsim.

Foremost among the influences of a general character which are averse to foreigners, may be set down

PREJUDICES OF RACE.

We all know that prejudices of race exist everywhere. Those entertained by the white people of the United States toward the blacks offer a ready and strong instance. I suppose it would be difficult to find, even among the most advanced advocates of equal rights, a single respectable white man in America who would be willing to sustain intimate relations with one of the despised race. Aversion to the negro has its correlative in that universally felt for the Indian. Not all the pages of romance and of poetry devoted to illustrations of their higher qualities have been able to affect greatly the current of sentiment against them. So, the Chinaman who visits our shores must meet unconcealed suspicion and hatred. We invite emigration from other countries, and no power is strong enough to turn or check any of the streams which make its tide. Hostility to the Chinese is so great that immigration is limited to a fraction of its normal flow.

Prejudices and antipathies of race are so strong, indeed, that we expect the most serious consequences when people of different stocks are brought suddenly into intimate relations. The question is not, will hostile feeling follow such contact, but how may intercourse between races of different characteristics be carried on so that the fewest conflicts hall occur?

[Page 168]

A second reason why the Chinese are averse to foreigners may be found in

THE EXCLUSIVE POLICY OF THE EMPIRE.

The situation of China is such that she has been able to work out her development for the most part free from foreign intercourse. Her territory extends from the Pacific on the east to mountains on the west, which offer an almost equally impassable barrier. On the north are mountains and vast stretches of desert, on the south the jungles of the tropics. Within her boundaries are many water-courses forming admirable channels for communication and commerce. There are widely extended and fertile plains. The climate is agreeable everywhere, and marked by similar features.

It is not a matter for wonder that a people living in the undisturbed possession of such a country should avoid intercourse with the outside world, and that, having successfully done this for a long period, they should cling to their policy with a strength that can be measured only by its antiquity, and by the numbers of the empire.

A third reason why the Chinese are averse to foreigners may be found in the fact that

THEY ARE AN IGNORANT PEOPLE.

There are perhaps 25,000 characters in the Chinese language. A good knowledge of 10,000 of these would suffice for the requirements of any of the higher walks of life, say of statesmanship; but such knowledge implies a great deal of study. Seven-eighths of all the characters in the language have been formed from 2,000 symbols; until these are known neither the sound nor the sense of a compound word would be more apparent to a Chinaman than to any one else; but the meaning of a compounded character is seldom deducible from the symbols. Each character has still to be learned, just as words are in other languages.

It will be understood that the practical difficulties of the language are very great. It is about the result, however, that we need to be informed.

I am assured that about three Chinamen in each one hundred can read works written in a full or classical style. The number of women would be one in a thousand.

The Chinese, then, must be set down an uneducated people. As such they are necessarily superstitious and suspicious. They cannot justly estimate the bearing and weight of the facts which they observe. They are likely to imagine that they are beset by dangers and difficulties where none exist.

A fourth reason may be found in

DIFFERENCES OF RELIGION.

It is often said that the Chinese are very tolerant of religious opinions; that in fact the greatest difficulty met by the Christian missionary arises from the apparent absence of religious sentiment.

If this be so, the Chinese are comparatively free from influences which have in all ages and countries greatly affected the minds of men. It is not necessary to recount struggles to defend or to impose faiths which are exhibited in history, the division of races into ranks and castes dependent upon priestly influence. With mankind at large it is believed that conceptions of supernatural agencies, of future states of existence, [Page 169] of divinely imposed rewards and punishments, are universal. It cannot be that the Chinese are exceptional in this respect. If so, why do temples for the worship of superior powers exist everywhere in the land? why does the priestly class form a considerable fraction of the population?

It is perfectly safe to say that China has her confirmed beliefs. If this is so, the incoming of people to proselyte must be regarded with great disfavor. I should so believe if I recognized no elements of discord excepting those which must spring from the priests. If they are earnest men they will cherish their faith from a sense of duty. If they are singly selfish they will do so to preserve their authority and power. In either case, missionaries must expect the hostility of a class that has seldom failed to play a prominent part in the control of states.

But whether the introduction of new religions by ordinary methods would or would not give rise to hostile feeling, it is certain that methods have been resorted to which have occasioned the ill-will of government and people in a marked degree.

Various allegations have been made against Roman Catholic missionaries. It has been alleged that the bishop of one of the western provinces resides in a palace which vies with that of the viceroy; that he uses a palanquin decorated in a way allowed only to the highest officials of the empire, and that his progresses from one part of his diocese to another are made in a regal way. It has been asserted that the priests claim the right to correspond with the officials on terms of equality; that they combine with and arrange combinations among their converts to defeat the objects of the government; that they claim for their converts various unusual and objectionable immunities; that in fact they are building up a rule within the territorial rule which is very dangerous to the state.

One who has studied the history of the Roman Church cannot be surprised when he hears that China is seriously alarmed; but we can estimate the actual danger more perfectly than she. Any exposition of her fears which she is likely to make will exhibit many puerilities. Yet we must admit that her statesmen would be unwise if they should fail to study the problems which the presence of the church presents.

A fifth occasion of the hostility of the Chinese may be found in

THE OPIUM TRADE.

The value of the opium imported into Hong-Kong in the year 1870 was, (Mexican) $62,988,624
The tea exported from China reached the value of $40,376,849
The silk, the value of 32,021,916
72,398,765
A difference of 9,410,141

Sixth-sevenths of the products of the empire, valuable for exportation, are thus consumed in a drug which is absolutely deleterious to the people. Let people interested gloss over the opium trade as they will, let the government and people of Great Britain plead that opium, is necessary to correct the diet of the Chinese, the fact remains that the connection of foreigners with it is a blot upon their civilization, an occasion of deep and bitter resentment on the part of the Chinese.

A sixth occasion of hostile feeling may be found in

[Page 170]

THE EXTRATERRITORIAL SYSTEM.

As you are aware, clauses exist in the treaties between China and western states by which the citizens of the latter are freed from the control of the territorial authorities, and made subject only to the functionaries of their own countries.

Such a condition of intercourse cannot be otherwise than distasteful to China. It is based on the undisguised assumption that foreign states cannot trust her to act with justice toward their people. It is a standing humiliation, and occasion of resentment. The government is in many respects a proud one. The nation entertains a radical belief in its own superiority. When, therefore, western states, by force of arms, impose upon China an unusual system, one which they would never yield to others, it is not wonderful that deep resentment is aroused, and that prominent statesmen have been led to declare that they will not long submit to the indignity.

It would be difficult to say that the extraterritorial system is not often productive of injustice to the Chinese. We cannot always have wise, upright, and unprejudiced judges in our eastern establishments, men who know what substantial justice is and are prepared to yield it to despised Chinese suitors, in face of foreigners and their interests. And even should substantial justice be accorded, the interests, passions, and prejudices of the Chinese will often lead to the most serious disagreements. A few years ago the viceroy at Nanking, in presenting a case on behalf of some poor boat-people, whose vessels had been sunk by a foreign steamer, declared that the frequency of such accidents had so aroused the people along the river that he feared they would endeavor to make reprisals should the foreign courts continue to refuse redress. More lately the viceroy at Tien-tsin became incensed because an unfavorable judgment had been given in a similar case, and threatened to seize and hold the steamer until payment should be made. The people of Shanghai once seized and maltreated the native magistrate because he had not procured a favorable decision in a case which had aroused their sympathies.

A seventh reason why the Chinese dislike foreigners may be found in

THE TEMPER AND TONE SOMETIMES EXHIBITED BY FOREIGN OFFICIALS AND OTHERS.

A prominent instance of the rampant style sometimes used by foreign representatives is that of M. Bellonet, detailed by Mr. Burlingame in the diplomatic correspondence of 1866. Such instances have been rare at Peking, where foreign governments have been well represented, as a rule. At the ports, the ease is different. The mercantile communities demand that the consuls shall be vigorous. These have often no way to show vigor, excepting by complaining to the native officials in a strenuous way. Gun-boats have been used to effect the settlement of disputes, property has been seized, and lives sacrificed at the bidding of consuls.

The disposition to override the more mildly disposed Chinese is frequently seen at the foreign settlements. Older residents and men of refinement treat the natives with uniform consideration. Younger men, new-comers, and those low in the social scale, are seen to push them rudely in the streets, and to strike them with whips when riding and driving. Masters of ships and steamers have, in times now I hope passed by, carelessly run down native boats, not stopping sometimes to pick up the unfortunates.

[Page 171]

Our reputation with the government and people has been greatly affected in this way, the kindliness, the generosity, the deference, the high qualities shown by very many foreigners finding its more apparent and powerful opposing influence at the harshness and brutality exhibited by others.

An eighth occasion of hostile feeling may be found in

THE UTTERANCES OF THE FOREIGN PRESS.

The impersonal aggregate tendency of foreigners in China is toward aggressive measures. I have heretofore explained this, and urged that it is natural and commendable. I do not esteem the man who, in full view of the many imperfections of this system and the undeveloped state of their country, thinks that all is going on well in China. I wish the representatives of the civilization of the West to be urgent, but ever respectful. It is our duty to set before the Chinese the golden opportunities they are losing, and the dangers which assail them. I hold that this may be done in such manner that animosity will not be aroused. I know that both officials and people are ready to receive advice, and that they seek for it from men whose counsels they have come to respect. Confidence growls slowly with them, but is firmly rooted.

The foreign press represents the aggressive tendency of foreigners, and being printed for them does so in a radical way. Its temper is not always just, its information often defective and partial, its expressions severe. The Chinese know more or less of what appears in its columns.

I do not doubt that very much rancor is thus occasioned. The general result must be beneficial, however, even though the press has no more grateful task to perform than to hold up, as it were, a mirror in which the Chinese may see their deformities.

Having thus recounted certain inevitable and indisputable causes calculated to draw down upon us the ill-will of the Chinese, causes the tendency and scope of which we can estimate but the effects of which must be determined by experience, I pass on to state the forms which this ill-will took at Tien-tsin.

At this point my task becomes an unpleasant one. I have spoken of my faith in the Chinese. The story that is to be told will seem to belie my favorable declarations. I shall have to recount some of their superstitions. They are dark and hideous, and the lurid light of the massacre will exhibit them in their worst aspects. Let it be remembered, then, that the good sense and the good will of the Chinese are so great that, in the main, our relations move smoothly, that the massacre is after all an exceptional incident in our intercourse.

Soon after the massacre occurred, Teeng Kwo-Fan, viceroy of Chihli, the province in which Tien-tsin is situated, a man who has played a prominent part in the recent history of the empire, was sent to investigate its causes. With him was associated Chung-How, now embassador to France, a commissioner of foreign trade, and honorably engaged in many matters of a special character. About one month after the date of the massacre these high officers put out a proclamation, (page 125, British Blue Book, China, No. 1, 1871,) in which they stated various charges that the people of Tien-tsin had preferred against the members of the Roman Catholic establishments. These were as follows:

1. That they kidnapped and bewitched people.

[Page 172]

2. That they mutilated bodies to obtain ingredients for the concoction of medicines, even killing children to this end.

3. That the priests were given to the seduction of women.

At a later moment I shall inquire what immediate reasons, read or apparent, the Chinese had to believe these charges. But I will show first that such charges were not new at the empire, but have been widely urged in different parts of it, and indeed that they are founded upon beliefs and superstitions common among the Chinese, apart from their intercourse with foreigners.

The first charge which I have recited is that of kidnapping.

Under this head I quote from the North China Herald of June 23, 1870, as follows:

Thirty-five years ago a writer complains that kidnapping is growing more and more common in Canton. The way was, “for kidnappers to give notice to the parents that if a certain sum were sent, within a certain time to a certain place, the girl would be returned, otherwise she would be sold as a slaved.” A little later mention is made of the crime at Peking and Macao. That notable publication, the Peking Gazette, spoke of it as “a gross infraction of the laws, which ought to be carefully investigated and prohibited.” In 1833 we find a complaint in the Canton Circular that there are “several hundred of kidnappers in and about the city of Canton, who are constantly carrying off and selling young women and children, and gain their livelihood by this in famous traffic.” “In 1834 a censor complained to the Emperor about a system of kidnapping children and young persons in Peking.”

Kidnapping, indeed, is fully recognized and provided for in the penal code of China. As the paragraphs are long and explicit, I content myself by giving the following résumé by Mr. Wade, the British representative at Peking. (Blue Book, p. 40.)

It is laid down in the second by-law, appended to the statute, against “the obtaining possession of persons by unlawful means, or the sale of persons so obtained possession of, as amended in the year 1801, and again in 1806, that whosoever shall entice away a boy or a girl, either for sale, for purposes of marriage, concubinage, or adoption, whether the same be bond or free, whether the sale of the same shall have been completed or not, shall, if the person stolen were no party to the act, be punished, the principals by being garroted after detention in prison till the autumn assize, the accessories with 100 blows of the heavier bamboo, and banished 3,000 li.”

The bewitching of people, referred to in connection with foreigners, seems to be effected, according to the Chinese, by the use of drugs, the purpose being to facilitate kidnapping.

Mr. Wade at the same place quotes the provisions of the penal code where drugs are used in kidnapping, as follows:

If a child, boy or girl, be kidnapped by the use of medicated cakes, to stupefy, or by other bewitchments, the principal shall be strangled at once, and the accessories banished to the frontier, there to do military service.

The following curious case is quoted by Mr. Wade from a Chinese case book, printed in the year 1834.

In the year 1808 the governor of Canton memorialized that Lin-a-Kuei and his wife, Nee Liang, went about the country in a boat begging, in company with one Li-a-San It so happened that Li-a-San met with a venomous snake, and having been told by some one, whose name he did not know, that the poison of snakes could be converted into a stupefying drug, he killed it, burnt it, and taking the remains on board the boat, arranged with Lin-a-Kuei to set about stupefying and kidnapping children.

The boat arrived at a place in Kai-ping-Sisim just as a popular festival was in progress, and it occurred to Lin-a-Kuei to make his wife dress up as a respectable spectator of the feast, to furnish her with the drug, and set her to stupefy and kidnap a female child. In the street of the village the woman met with Chin-a-tui, the daughter of Chin Hon-tsung, carrying some cash with which to purchase cakes. She rubbed some of the drug on the child’s head, who at once became bewitched and followed her to the boat, into which she was forcibly carried by Lin-a-Kuei. Chin-a-tui screamed, whereupon the woman Liang gagged her with her hand. The boat then got under way, and on reaching an unfrequented spot, Lin-a-Kuei ordered the woman Liang to bind the child and dose her with a stupefying draught. The woman Liang then held her down with a plank across her shoulders; and while Li-a-San held her [Page 173] bands and feet, Lin-a-Kuei cut the sinews of her wrists and ankles. Her eyes were pierced by the woman Liang with a needle. Haying thus cobbled and blinded her they intended to make her support the company by sending her out to beg. In this case Li-a-San died in prison; the woman Liang and Lin-a-Kuei were sentenced to summary decapitation, in accordance with the provisions of the code in cases where robbery (kidnapping) has been committed by means of stupefying drugs.

THE MUTILATION OF BODIES TO OBTAIN INGREDIENTS FOR THE CONCOCTION OF MEDICINES, AND THE MURDER OF PEOPLE TO THIS END.

The writer in the North China Herald, from, whom I have before quoted, says:

Dr. Porter Smith has shown us that the idea of children’s bodies being used in the manufacture of medicine is familiar to the Chinese. He points out that the last of the sixteen great classes, into which all medical substances are divided in the Penn-Tsan-Kang-Muh, is devoted to a description of, at least, thirty-nine kinds of medicines derived from the human body, in its various conditions of sex and age. The skin, bones, flesh, brain, nails, sweat, blood, tears, and many other secretions too numerous to mention, are all directed to be used as medicine.

The sixth annual report of the Hankow Medical Mission Hospital contains the following statements:

The Chinese believe that any sick or unsound part of the human body may be recovered or renewed by appropriating the similar part of another person in whom that organ is sound.

From the same report I quote again:

Eyes and other portions of the human body, removed in the course of hospital practice among the Chinese, are often preserved in spirits of wine as interesting and instructive memorials. This is just the way in which the natives make preparations from such disgusting things for actual medical use.

The North China Herald of July 22, 1870, gives an extract from a Peking letter, as follows:

The Peking Gazette of July 5 contains some interesting matter in connection with Chinese civilization generally, and more particularly with the theory of the treatment of disease by means of portions of the human body cut off for the purpose. Ma-Hsim Yi, the governor general of the two kiangs, memoralizes the throne to the effect, that a young girl of Kiang-Ming-Fu cut off two joints of one of her fingers and put them into the medicine which her mother was taking for a disease which the physician had pronounced incurable.

The traditional and orthodox custom for which, as the memorial says, there are numerous precedents, even in recent years, is to use a portion of the flesh of the thigh. This, the young girl, aged only fifteen, actually attempted to do, but had not either strength or courage to do. The governor general indulges in boundless laudation of this most commendable act of filial piety, which had, of course, it’s reward in the immediate recovery of the mother. He begs that the Emperor will bestow some exemplary reward on the child, such as the erection of a triumphal arch in the neighborhood to commemorate the act. By this means, he says, filial piety all over the world will receive encouragement. The Emperor in his reply refers the matter to the Li-pu (board of rites) for consideration.

Mr. Wade, in his memorandum on the Chinese law upon kidnapping, gives the following note:

In a case where a woman, calling herself a curer of toothache, procured an abortion of an illegitimate child, the bones of which were stewed and formed a portion of a philter for producing insensibility to punishment, the chief criminal was strangled in accordance with the enactments against such as practice and teach magical arts how to endure punishment.

Six days before the massacre the Tantar at Chinkiang issued the following proclamation:

Whereas, of late, whenever young children have been kidnapped at various places along the river (Yangtse) by means of stupefying drugs, it has always transpired, through the depositions taken from time to time by the local authorities, that the [Page 174] culprits had taken passage in steamers and conveyed their children to Shanghai, where they were sold for the purpose of having their eyes scooped out and their private parts cut off, to be used in the preparation of mysterious drugs, a fact also now lamentable! And whereas it is presumed that the captains and Chinese stewards who traverse the rivers and coasts on board the steamers are not wanting in benevolence and rectitude, a special appeal is made to them, to be careful in noting whether they have any passengers travelling without their families, but having in charge any young boys or girls, and if such persons cannot give a good account of themselves, while their appearance is clearly suspicious, to watch them, and lay private information against them at the custom-house, on their arrival in port. The customs officials will, thereupon, seize the individuals and forward them to the Tantar for trial and punishment.

The British consul at Chefoo, writing to his superior at Peking, under date of July 1, 1870, (Blue Book, p. 77,) records the following conversation with the Tantar, (chief local magistrate,) at his post:

I communicated the particulars of the massacre to the Tantar, who, when I mentioned that the dreadful outbreak owed its origin to the false reports previously circulated with reference to the kidnapping and mutilation of children by the French missionaries, interrupted me with the question: Oh! now tell me what is the real truth about this matter. Do they really make away with children as the people say? I replied that I was astonished to find a man so well informed as the Tantar asking such a question; he must know as well as myself how thoroughly baseless were these calumnies, which had no foundation in reason, however much they might he strengthened by ignorance and superstition, and added, that it was precisely because the authorities at Tien-tsin apparently had resembled him in admitting even the appearance of a doubt on the subject, that the mob bad become incited to the degree of which information has reached us. A long argument ensued, the Tantar maintaining that accusations which have endured for three hundred years must have at least some foundation in fact, and that the Roman Catholics, by their secret practices and objectionable doctrines, have themselves to blame for any popular resentment they may provoke.

Tseng Kwo-Fan, governor general, and at one time generalissimo, is quoted by Sun, prefect of Yang-Chow, in a letter dated September 6, 1868, and printed in the British Blue Book, China, 1868, No. 2, as saying:

The missionaries must not return for several months. I will refer their case to the Tsnng-li Yamen, (Board of Foreign Affairs,) and when the yamen, after consultation with the foreign ministers, informs me that it has come to the conclusion that the missionaries really do not abstract brains and eyes, I will, myself, issue proclamation to that effect to the gentry and to the people at Yang-Chow, after which the missionaries may return.

Matter of this sort may be detailed without limit. There is no end to the stories adverse to foreigners, to vile imputations against them which circulate among the Chinese; stories and imputations which are ever tinged by vices familiar among them, or firmly based in superstitions they have cherished for centuries. I have not quoted from anonymous placards or documents intended to be incendiary.

I have taken matter put out by high Chinese officials. The case I have made is indubitable.

Touching the charge that I have further recounted as found in proclamation of Tseng Kwo-Fan, and Chunghow, to wit:

THAT THE PRIESTS ARE GIVEN TO THE SEDUCTION OF WOMEN,

I need say little.

I am told that the Chinese, who would be naturally disposed to distrust profoundly the celibacy of the Roman Catholic priests, place as little faith in them, in this respect, as they do in the Buddhist priests, who are notoriously vicious. A book has been recently printed in Chinese, and largely circulated, which contains the vilest stories imaginable of the lewdness of the priests, repeated with particularity and great variety of detail. I doubt not that it receives the implicit faith of a great portion of its readers.

[Page 175]

Going back in a general way over the charges thus made against foreigners, I have to remark that they should not surprise us. They have, in the first place, a substratum of fact.

Kidnapping has been practiced extensively in China by foreigners, or by Chinese in the employ of foreigners. I refer to the coolie trade, the last of which has not yet been seen. I do not doubt that in years gone by the number of Chinese carried off against their will, to be sold into a servitude from which death might be esteemed a happy relief, has reached annually ten times that of the foreign men and women murdered at Tien-tsin.

There is no direct evidence to connect the charge of kidnapping, alleged at Tien-tsin, with the outrages of the coolie trade; but as communication between the south of China, where they have occurred, and that port is constant, it may well be supposed that the facts were known there, at least in a general way.

No further basis for the charge that foreigners mutilate bodies occurs to me than the fact that we frequently make post-mortem examinations, and that we preserve specimens of abdormal human growth in spirits. Dr. Porter Smith says that these specimens “often speak illustrated volumes to the credulous Chinese.”

The use of the wafer, so called, in the administration of the Lord’s Supper, has given rise, it is said, to many absurd stories, the Chinese attributing to it the ability to render the person eating it infatuated with the person administering it, and with the religion. The book referred to above, the “Death Blow to Corrupt Doctrines,” is full of stories of love-potions administered by the priests.

Nor are the tales prevalent among the Chinese, that children are killed by foreigners, entirely without a seeming support in facts.

The Romanists are said to have implicit faith in the saving efficacy of infant baptism. As a consequence they receive young children into their hospitals in the last stages of sickness; this practice, and the frequency of deaths giving support to the belief that they have occasion to use the bodies of children for mysterious purposes.

The secrecy, or perhaps it should be said the privacy, observed in the Roman Catholic hospitals and asylums gives rise to many suspicions. I quote as follows from a synopsis of the celebrated Missionary Circular. (Note to Rule 1.)

It is the custom in China for the superiors of native asylums to report all particulars touching the inmates to the magistrates. Parents of children can see them. If any one wishes to adopt a child it can be done, and parents may, when they wish, take their own home again. Similar regulations, we understand, exist in foreign countries, but in China when once a child is put into an asylum it can never be visited again, the parents cannot get it back, no one else can adopt it. Such a mode gives rise to grave suspicions, and though it has been proved that nothing like the gouging out of eyes or cutting out hearts is practiced, yet owing to this secret mode of managing the asylums the people still have doubts.

One cause of the outbreak upon the Rev. Mr. Taylor’s mission at Yang-Chow, about which I wrote at length last year, (Diplomatic Correspondence, 1870, p. 349,) was the fact that, contrary to Chinese ideas of modesty, the male and female members of the mission were seen to exhibit an apparently unrestrained intimacy.

As in other countries the confessional in China has been the occasion of bitterly adverse criticism. The practice of allowing men and women to mix indiscriminately in public worship has given rise to denunciations such as were visited upon Christians in Pagan Rome. The Missionary Circular touches this point also.

An able writer in the Westminster Review, J. Barr Robertson, esq., [Page 176] of Shanghai, dwells forcibly on the fact that there is much in the disposition of the Chinese to impute to foreigners mysterious and malicious practices to remind us of the belief in witchcraft prevalent in Europe and America one hundred and fifty years ago. I requote from his article what is said touching this delusion, by Lecky, in his book, “Rationalism in Europe.”

The predisposition to believe in the miraculous was so great that it constructed out of a small germ of reality the vast and complicated system of witchcraft; accumulated around it an immense mass of the most varied and circumstantial evidence; persuaded all the ablest men for many centuries that it was incontestably true; conducted it unshaken through the scrutiny of the law courts of every European nation, and consigned tens of thousands of victims to a fearful and unlamented death. It resulted not from accidental circumstances, individual eccentricities, or even scientific ignorance, but from a general predisposition to see satanic agency in life.

One peculiar feature of the witchcraft delusion was that the persons charged as witches frequently, and with great particularity, confessed their evil agency. We now understand that, in consequence of the excitement of the public, persons so feared that they might become the vehicle of satanic influence that they at last came to be convinced that the spell was upon them. It was only a different phase of that constitution of the human mind which permits one person to witness angels attending his way, heaven itself opening to his upturned view, while it inflicts upon another constant visions of devils and visitation of all dire influences.

So it is possible that the belief in the malpractices of the Roman Catholic missionaries has so affected the people that different individuals have come to believe they have themselves, or in their families, suffered from their malevolence.

It is certain that Chinese have, at different times, given evidence directly incriminating foreigners. Such is the tenor of the Chinkiang Taulais proclamation, and it is directly declared in the report of the governor general at Nanking. (Diplomatic Correspondence, 1870, page 366.) He says:

One kidnapper was taken almost in the act, and when before the authorities he stated that a man named Choo-Teh-Shing, belonging to the Roman Catholic establishment, was his principal.

The popular belief in the mysterious practices of foreigners has been strengthened, doubtless, by an important agency. The use of torture is common in China. It is permitted, even required, by the laws of the empire. No man can be punished for the commission of a crime which he has not confessed. Magistrates, therefore, torture persons, of whose guilt they are convinced, until they procure confessions.

Such an engine is terrible for harm. It has been the chosen resource of despotism and intolerance in all ages. There is no evidence which cannot be wrung out by its use. There is no crime, the confession of which cannot be procured. Men will die at the stake rather than face the agencies of a thousand deaths, which it may inflict. He who holds it wields a greater power than that of life and death.

I doubt not that confessions have been wrung from many poor wretches in China incriminating foreigners in whatever way prevalent superstitions have demanded. Nor is it necessary that actual malice should be present. People demand the use of torture where its use is common, and refuse to believe statements not made under its pains. The suspected person, on the other hand, hastens, in anticipation of torture, to confess the offenses of which popular opinion has pronounced him guilty.

Having thus briefly reviewed the reasons why the Chinese distrust [Page 177] and dislike foreigners, and the general forms which this distrust and dislike have taken, having reference always to the forms exhibited at Tien-tsin, I proceed now to deal with the massacre, my task for the moment being to indicate

THE SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES OF AN EXCITING CHARACTER WHICH WERE PRESENT AND ACTIVE AT TIEN-TSIN.

These circumstances will most clearly appear if stated in the course of a general description of Tien-tsin, of the events preceding the massacre, and of the massacre itself.

The city of Tien-tsin is situated on the right bank of the river Pesho, sixty miles from the gulf of Pechili. It is at the head of navigation for sea-going craft, native and foreign; and the sea-port for Peking, and an immense district lying north and west of that city. The population numbered about 400,000.

A populous suburb extends from the river above the native city to the foreign settlement. The neighborhood of Chung How’s yamen and the French consulate is also well built over. The bridge of boats connects these districts, and is used by travelers toward the capital and the north. It is closed when in use, and open when a central boat is displaced to allow the passage of river craft. The prominent native officials resident at Tien-tsin were the superintendent of trade, the tantai, the chi-fu, and the che-hsien.

The first of these was Chung How, of whom I have already spoken. He is a Tartar, and said to be related to the imperial family. He is an able man, ambitious to be useful and to advance himself. He had been many years at Tien-tsin, and had succeeded in drawing the government into enterprises of which he had charge. The drilling of troops after European methods was one of these, and the establishment of an arsenal and of powder-works were others. Having met him, and been long familiar with his reputation, I judge that he is well disposed toward foreigners, and likely to be just in his dealings with them.

Next in grade was the tantai, sometimes called by foreigners the intendant. He was the chief local executive officer, and had charge of one-half the province, if I am rightly informed. Under him were the chi-fu, or fue, called by foreigners the prefect, and the che-hsien, called indiscriminately the sub-prefect and the district magistrate. These two were in fact the peace-officers of the city. They were banished after the massacre because of their failure to maintain order. (Decree of October 15, 1870, Blue Book, page 224.) Both had judicial functions and control of the police of the city.

It is impossible to offer from any foreign source or sources an original narrative of the massacre, as but a few foreigners who were near the scene were saved, and these saw only a small part of it. One gentleman named Coutres was in the yamen of Chung How, when in or near it the French consul was first assailed, but he seems to have made no detailed statement, while the particulars narrated by him from time to time vary so greatly that one is indisposed to credit anything he says which is not supported by independent evidence.

There are, however, three letters extant which throw a flood of light on the subject. The first of these was written by Chung-How to the Foreign Office at Peking on the 19th of June, two days before the massacre; the second, by the French consul to his minister on the morning of the 21st; and the third, by Chung How to the Foreign Office on the afternoon of the fatal day.

[Page 178]

The first of these, as given in the Blue Book, page 12, reads:

You have doubtless received my letter of the 4th of June, on which I requested you would deign to bestow your attention.

At the beginning of this month, the popular mind being disturbed in consequence of an extraordinary long drought and want of rain, rumors of all sorts prevailed. The first of these was to the effect that young children were being drugged and kidnapped. This was followed by a story that bodies of children had been laid bare in the public cemeteries on the eastern bank of the river. The district magistrate of Tien-tsin made inquiries into the case, from which it appeared that these children had been buried by the Sisters of Charity. It was then further stated that the eyes and hearts of these children had been tom out, but there was no evidence of this. Later on, the prefect and district magistrate apprehended two kidnappers named Chang-Chuan and Kuo-Kuai, who having been convicted of drugging and kidnapping, were put to death on the spot, by the local magistrates, in obedience to orders contained in a circular issued by his excellency the governor general of Chih-li. Although they confessed having torn out eyes and hearts for the manufacture of drugs, yet their statements in no way implicated Christians.

Subsequently, Shen Hsi-pao, a teacher in the Roman Catholic establishment, returning home in company with his pupil, Wu Cheng, was mistaken by the people for a kidnapper, and was arrested and assaulted, but on investigation of the case by the magistrate, it was proved that they were really teacher and pupil, and that no kidnapping had taken place. He was sent to me. I informed the Catholic missionaries, and they took him away.

On the 18th of June, Wu-Lan-Chen, the kidnapper of Li-so, was caught at Fao-hua Kóu by some natives of the place, and sent before the magistrate. He implicated Wang San and other residents in the Roman Catholic establishments. Chou Tansai reports that on this he proceeded in person to the French consulate, and had a conversation with Monsieur Fontanier, the French consul, on the subject; that he gave him the minutes he read; and that the consul for his part, in view of the great number of stories in circulation, agreed to take action.

I now forward for your information a copy of the deposition of Wu-lan-chen, made before the district magistrate. As soon as the case has been thoroughly investigated, and action taken, I will report further. Meanwhile I have the honor to present this note.

With respectful compliments.

Wu-lan-chen’s statement, (a kidnapper apprehended June 18.)

I am a native of Ning Chin Swien, and 19 years of age. My father and grandfather are still alive. My father’s name is Wu Tsun, and he is in his 45th year. My mother’s maiden name was Fang. I have no brothers. I married in the first month of the present year. As I had nothing to do at home, I left my home on the 18th of February and went by land to Cheng-chia K’óu, and come on by a relation’s boat to Tien-tsin, where I gain my living as a sailor. Up to this time I was not acquainted with Wang-san of the Ho-Lou, (one of the Roman Catholic buildings is indicated,) but on the 13th June he drugged me and carried me off to the Roman Catholic church at Ho-Lou. I was not allowed to go into the inner rooms, nor did I see any foreigner. I went, indeed, only to the threshold. Wang San urged me to become a Catholic. I at first refused. Wang San said he would have my life. This put me in a great fright, and I then consented. He gave four dollars to a man named T’ang, to keep for me. On the 14th he gave me a packet containing a stupefying drug, and told me to go all over the country and kidnap men by means of this drug. The drug was a fine powder wrapped up in a paper. I went to Mu-chang-tzu, and there met a man of about 20 years of age, and wearing a light blue coat and trowsers. I put some of the drug in the palm of my hand and rubbed it on his face. He became quite silly and followed me, and I hurried back to the Roman Catholic church, and handed him over into Wang San’s keeping. For this Wang San paid me five dollars, and gave me another packet of the drug, which I took to Tao-hua-ssu village, where I saw the individual Li-So drawing water. I stupefied him with the powder, and he followed me in the same way as the first man had done. But I was caught by some of the villagers and brought before the magistrate. There are seven other men in the Roman Catholic church besides myself who were engaged in kidnapping. Every evening we slept inside the harrier in the church. Wang San was our chief. Every morning he brought out some powders from the inner room and gave one to each man, as well as 300 cash to buy food with. If we did not succeed in drugging any one before the evening, we gave hack the powders to Wang San. Of the other seven engaged in this work, I know Wang San and Wang Ush are natives of I-chow-ch-eng; Lin Hsias, and Lin Ha, and Linurh natives of Tu Kou-i, in the district of Ch’ing-non. The other man’s name I do not know.

[Page 179]

Wang San is about twenty years old; has a fair complexion, slightly marked with the small-pox. After I bad been drugged by Wang San and carried off to the church, he gave mean antidote, which I drank and immediately recovered my senses. Wang San then told me that when such nostrums have been used, some sweet grass, a cicadas shell, and a certain insect should be dried before the fire and ground to powder, and then worked up with oil of sesame. A draught of the hot decoction of this will bring people round at once. Yesterday, when I was caught in Tao-Nua-ssu village, the people asked me what to do, and I told them to give Li-So this antidote, and said he would recover after drinking it. The five dollars I received for kidnapping the man from Mu-chang-tzu I concealed in the belt of my trowsers. but when I was seized at. Tao-hua-ssu I lost them. When I was living in the Roman Catholic establishment, every day before I went out Wang San gave me a red-colored powder to take as snuff. After a pinch of it I felt very brave, and thought of nothing but kidnapping people. When I returned in the evening, Wang San gave a draught of medicine as an antidote, which brought me to my senses, but by that time the gates were shut and I could not get out.

The following is Consul Fontanier’s letter:

Our little town of Tien-tsin, generally so quiet, has been troubled for several days by shouting and mobs in the neighborhood of the establishment of the Sisters of Mercy, and of the consulate. The sisters were accused of tearing out children’s eyes. Those who were more hold exhumed the dead that came from their hospital. Finally the tantai came and presented to me the depositions of several witnesses, declaring that they had been victims of the kidnappers employed by our missionaries.* I had no trouble in proving to him that all these reports were the work of ill-will, but the tantai having come officially, I promised him, at his reiterated demand, that I would watch that our Sisters of Mercy should not, for the future, employ any but persons of proved good character.

Some hours after, the che-hsien came to the consulate, accompanied by a delegate from Chung How, with the intention of bringing about, on the spot, an official search at the domicile of the Sisters and of the Lazarist missionaries. But as he was so ill-advised as to become angry, and even to threaten me with the anger of the populace, wishing apparently to exact from me that which his superiors had left entirely to my judgment, I profited by his conduct to terminate the interview, reminding him that it was only with the commissioner for the three northern ports that I intended to continue this matter, but that I made him none the less responsible for the consequences of the troubles with which he seemed to threaten me, for I was confident that he alone was the instigator of them.

I requested the delegate of Chung How to inform his excellency of the result of my interview with the Che-hsien, until I should myself go to complain to him of the improper conduct of this magistrate. I had the satisfaction of receiving next morning a visit from Chung How. He spoke very ill to me of the Che-hsien, trying all the time to exculpate him. He complained of the little consideration given to his observations by the local authorities, when he had attempted to deny the false reports spread against our missionaries, having at last been obliged to let them take a step in which he refused to join, which again gained for him the epithet of “the right arm of the Europeans.”

This little incident, which might have taken a bad turn but for the intervention of Chung How, appears to-day to be almost at an end, Chung How having besides promised me to publish, in the course of a few days, a small proclamation to allay the excitement.

Chung How’s second letter is as follows:

“I presume that your excellencies have already had under consideration my letter of the 19th instant, reporting on the kidnapping at Tein-tsin, the implication of the Roman Catholic establishments by these proceedings, and the threatening rumors which were abroad.

On June 20, I went to Monsieur Fontanier, and begged him to come to my yamen, that we might together examine the kidnapper, and so ascertain the truth or the falsehood of the rumors which were abroad. To this Monsieur Fontanier responded that the Roman Catholics had been guilty of no practices of the sort, and that he had no jurisdiction. I then asked Monsieur Fontanier to at once send for Pere Chevrier, that I might myself examine him, informing him at the same time that unless this matter was sifted to the bottom, and the Roman Catholics proved clearly to be guiltless, it would be impossible to quiet the suspicions of the people, which were then so determinedly aroused. Pere Chevrier, who had been sent for, and Monsieur Fontanier, begged that the intendant, prefect, and magistrate would go to the Roman Catholic establishment and see for themselves. With a view to subsequent proceedings, I accordingly [Page 180] proposed to send those officers with the prisoner, Wu-lan-chen, on the 21st instant, to the cathedral, that he might point out the localities alluded to in his statement, and, if possible, identify from among the Chinese of the establishment his acquaintance and confederate, Wang-san, and the others. Pere Chevrier perfectly consented, and the arrangement was concluded then and there. Accordingly, at 10 o’clock to-day the intendant, Chou, the prefect, Chang, and the magistrate, Lin, took the man Wa-lan-chen to the French cathedral, where they met Pere Chevrier, who was very civil and respectful. The prisoner was directed to proceed to and point out the places he had visited. It was then found that the mat-shed and harrier-gate mentioned in his evidence did not exist on the premises, and that he could point out nothing to support the truth of his statements. As for the man Wang-San, and the others implicated by the prisoner, he could not identify any one of them. The officers brought the man back to my yamen, and informed me of the results of their investigation. By and by Pere Chevrier came to the yamen to consult as to certain measures to be taken for the future. We agreed that henceforth all deaths occurring at the hospital should be reported to the officials, who would examine the bodies and see them buried; also that a return should be sent in of the pupils in their schools, and of the children, male and female, supported by them; and, to disarm suspicion, that no opposition should be made to the officials examining their establishments at any time they wished. After taking leave of Pere Chevrier, I was in the act of drawing up a proclamation, which I was anxious to get out at once in order to dispel the suspicions of the people and quiet the minds of foreigners and Chinese, when, at 2 o’clock, I suddenly heard that a disturbance had arisen between some people belonging to the cathedral and a crowd of idlers. I sent a military officer to suppress them, when I heard that Monsieur Fontanier had come to the yamen. On going out to meet him I saw that the consul, whose demeanor was furious, had two pistols in his belt, and that a foreigner, who accompanied him, was armed with a sword. They rushed toward me, and as soon as Monsieur Fontanier came up to me he began talking in an indecorous manner, drew a pistol from his belt, and fired it in my presence. The shot, fortunately, did not take effect and he was seized. I could not accept Monsieur Fontanier’s challenge, and so withdrew.

On entering the room he began to break up the cups and other articles on the tables, keeping up, at the same time, an incessant storm of abuse. I went out again to see him, and told him that the crowd had a very threatening aspect; that as the entire fire brigade was with him, evidently intending to assist, I was afraid of a disturbance, and advised him not to go outside He, however, reckless of his life, rushed out of the yamen. I sent some men after him to escort him on his way. Monsieur Fontanier met the magistrate Lin, who was endeavoring to control the mob, and who tried to keep him back, but he fired at this officer, hitting one of his servants. The mob, enraged at this outrageous conduct on the part of the consul, at once pursued, surrounded, and killed him. They then set fire to the cathedral, but the fire was put down before it had time to spread. They also destroyed the establishment of the Sisters of Charity and the Protestant chapel inside the city. At this time, while the mob was raging, it was suppressed by me, in conjunction with my colleagues, civil and military, and by a force sent by myself, while I sent information to the consuls to allay their apprehensions, informing them of the steps I had taken. The mob found ten children in the establishment of the Sisters of Charity. The excitement is subsiding. This is a true account of the origin and progress of the disturbance.

This affair arose in the first place from the suspicions and hostility of the people being excited by an idle rumor that the children buried from the hospital have had their eyes and hearts cut out; and, in the second place, from the confession of the kidnapper, Wu-Lan-chen, implicating people belonging to the Roman Catholic establishment. I am memorializing His Majesty on the origin of the disturbances as ascertained, and have ordered the immediate arrest and punishment of the ring-leaders. It is my further duty to acquaint your excellencies at once with all the details of the collision and riot. I beg you will have the goodness to inform the French minister as soon as possible.

Without comment at this point, I will now offer two other statements of the massacre, one from a foreign, the other from a native source. The former appeared in the North China Herald of July 14, 1870, from an “occasional contributor,” writing from Tien-tsin. It is as follows:

“On Tuesday, the 21st June, a Chinese mob, with the connivance of the mandarin, and especially of Chung How, the governor of Tien-tsin, simultaneously attacked the French consulate, the Catholic Church mission, and the hospital of the Sisters of Charity. It was at two o’clock that the assault commenced. The French consul, Monsieur Fontanier, seeing himself menaced and his windows broken by stones, left the consulate in uniform, and insisted on being accompanied by a petty mandarin (who was looking on at the mob without impeding them) to the yamen of Chung How, and there he demanded protection for the consulate, the persons who were resident, and for himself. [Page 181] He also asked Chung How to protect the Sisters of Charity and their hospital, as he had by that time heard they were in danger. Chung How told him that he could not protect any of the persons whom he had named. Remonstrance took place, and as the French consul had a revolver in his hand that he had brought to defend himself, Chung How got frightened and left the room. The French consul then addressed his demand for protection to another mandarin, and he was answered that nothing could be done to help him. Some altercation took place, when one of the soldiers of the yamen stabbed the French consul in the thigh with a spear, and in that wounded state, with the blood having reddened the whole side of his white linen trowsers, the consul went to the door of the yamen, and, holding up the French flag, asked leave to pass. The soldiers and mob seemed awed for a moment, but it was for a moment only. They fell upon the unfortunate consul, pierced him with spears and swords, and, after mutilating him, threw his corpse into the river. It has been said that the consul fired at Chung How, or at one of the mandarins, and that he killed a servant of the yamen; but, fortunately for the cause of truth, a Frenchman named Coutres was in the yamen in the next room, where he, too, had fled for protection, and he declares that, up to the last, there was no shot fired, and that he saw the first wound inflicted on the consul by a soldier with a spear. M. Coutres also witnessed the consul advance in a bleeding state to the door, and saw the first of the brutal murder. Meanwhile, the mob, after allowing the French consul to go toward the yamen, immediately broke open the consulate, and cruelly murdered Monsieur and Madame Thomasen, and the Abbe Chevrier, and another Catholic priest. M. Thomasen was an attaché to the French legation at Peking, and had only arrived the day previous from France with his newly married and beautiful young bride. It is reported that, in the terrible moment of impending death, M. Thomasen killed several Chinese, in order to defend himself and his wife. The mob, led on by soldiers, then set fire to the consulate and the church of the Catholic mission, and burnt all other inmates who could not escape. Simultaneously with the assault on the French consulate, the mob and soldiery surrounded the hospital of the French Sisters of Charity. Having set fire to a portion of the building, they entered the gates and dragged all the sisters into the street. There they stripped them naked, exposed them to the public gaze, plucked out their eyes, cut off their breasts, ripped them open, dragged out their hearts, and deliberately cut them to pieces, and divided portions of their flesh among the infuriated mob. No European witnessed these outrages on humanity save the poor victims, who, in the presence of each other, passed through the terrible ordeal and perished, without any support in that extreme hour of misery and torment, save their confidence in a merciful God. whose behests they had endeavored, to fulfill among a barbarous people at the peril of their lives. Chinese spectators of the bloody scene relate other horrors perpetrated on those innocent ladies that cannot be mentioned. The lady superioress, it is said, was cut in twain while yet alive. God alone and the sisters know all they endured of moral agony and bodily sufferings. Their modesty outraged, their purity defiled, their poor frail frames torn asunder, their blood scattered, and their lives destroyed by savages, whose murderous rage inflicted all these and other outrages amidst a scene of horror that alone would be too terrible to encounter.

No sooner had the mob and the soldiers glutted their thirst for human blood on the sisters, than they burnt the entire hospital. Nearly one hundred orphan children who had been received into the orphanage attached to the hospital perished in the flames. The mutilated members of the dead sisters were thrown into the burning ruins, and thus, together with the little children they were charitably nurturing, was the holocaust complete.

Such a tale of horror would suffice; but more still remains to be told. Mr. N. Protopopoff, a Russian merchant, with his wife, to whom he had been married only two days, were met in the town of Tien-tsin by the same infuriated mob and soldiery, and attacked with spears and swords. Mr. Protopopoff fell almost immediately, and was cruelly murdered. His wife, who was on a spirited horse, fled for her life; but, being repulsed from the road, turned hack and attempted to leap an open sewer in the town. She fell with her horse, but, extricating herself, hid for a few minutes in the sewer, until she was dragged out and killed by the mob. The bodies of these two Russians were thrown into the river, and afterwards recovered by their friends. They had been stripped naked and subjected to most barbarous usage.

A French merchant, Monsieur Chalmdiser, bearing that the Sisters of Charity were attacked, tried to get near the hospital to defend them, but he was caught in the street and hacked to pieces. His wife, on hearing of her husband’s death, fled to the house of a native Christian and remained there till night, when, disguised in a Chinese dress, she ventured to her house, thinking to see the body of her dead husband. After a fruitless search she endeavored to get back to the Chinese house, but, being discovered by some of Chung Hou’s trained troops, she was killed by them in the street. * * *

About fifty Cantonese men, who were suspected of being on intimate terms with Europeans, were murdered during the excitement; and even toward the end of the day some miscreants were prowling about the foreign settlements. One of them was [Page 182] taken with a loaded pistol, and he confessed that he had been sent to kill some of the Europeans in the customs-service. * * * * * * *

From this harrowing recital one turns with a sense of relief to the other narrative of the massacre, to which I have referred as coming from a native source. It purports to be a letter from a Cantonese at Tientsin, written for the information of his fellow-provincials residing at Chefoo. It is given at page 73 of the Blue Book:

“For some months past it has been reported about Tien-tsin that the foreigners’ Roman Catholic mission, (Tien Chu Tang,) hospital, (Jentsze-tang,) and missionary chapel (Li pai tang) habitually caused native converts to administer drugs to other converts, and to send them out in all directions to kidnap infant children, to be brought to the church to have their eyes and hearts dug out. This has gone on for a long time, and came to the knowledge of the people, and several of the kidnappers had been seized and handed over to the authorities. On being placed on trial they made confessions of their crimes, whereon, the district magistrate and the people also became filled with indignation. Some were even recovered from the precincts of the mission buildings. At length, at ten o’clock in the morning of the 21st of June, the prefect and the magistrate of Tien-tsin went in person to the mission buildings for the purpose of laying hold of a head man of the kidnappers, named Wang-san, but did not succeed in apprehending him, and they (the two officials) returned home. The people, however, still remained in assemblage around the mission buildings without dispersing. Some of them threw stones and entered the building, and the gate-keepers were unable to keep them out. The foreigners, therefore, came out with their arms to offer intimidation, but the crowd, notwithstanding, grew greater and greater. Close by the Roman Catholic church was the French consulate, and the French consul, seeing that it was impossible to maintain order, went, with a vice-consul of his, both carrying arms in their hands, to the imperial commissioner’s residence. They went in and sought to compel the imperial commissioner himself to go and maintain order, but the imperial commissioner refused to go. The foreigners, hereupon, fired off their pistols, and wounded with a sword an aide-de-camp of the commissioner. The people outside the gate, under the impression that the imperial commissioner was being attacked, raised an outcry and sounded their gongs, whereupon instantly a crowd collected from all quarters. The French consul went outside the gate, and there met the district magistrate, whereupon the foreigners again fired. This aroused still further the anger of the populace, who pursued the consul to the gateway of the mission buildings, where they killed both the consul and the vice-consul.

They next made an entry into the mission buildings, and dealt blows indiscriminately, setting fire to the place at the same time. The mission buildings were burnt down to the ground; and they further proceeded to burn the hospital. At the three places they rescued in all more than two hundred infants belonging to the people, and killed sixteen of the French men and women. They plundered the merchant establishment called the Fu-chang-hong, in Chen-she street, where a Frenchman and his wife were also killed. The people then felt that their indignation was assuaged. Among them were certain evil-disposed persons who wanted to plunder the foreign mercantile establishments, and destroy the foreign settlement, but, fortunately, when preparing to do so, they were prevented by the foreign drilled troops who were mustered for the purpose. Robberies are still being committed, night after night, by evil-disposed persons at the dwellings of the converts. After the affair occurred, the authorities issued proclamations to tranquilize the people and prohibit disturbance and now matters are quieting down into their accustomed state. During the last few, days Earl Tsêng has been ordered to come to Tien-tsin and inquire into the matter, and a high officer has been sent from Peking to maintain order. At the present moment all the foreigners have retreated to the settlement, where they maintain patrols by day and night unceasingly for their own safety. I accordingly write this for your information, and am only sorry that the disturbance has entirely broken up trade.

It is reiterated in these statements, and in a great mass of evidence which I have examined, that the rumors about the malpractices of the Roman Catholic missionaries became conspicuously current about one month before the massacre. Governor Low heard of the excitement so early as the 5th of June. (Diplomatic Correspondence, 1870, page 356.) This may have had its origin in the active malevolence of some individual or individuals, or in the circumstance that an epidemic occurred in the hospital at this time. (See Governor Low’s dispatch above quoted.) I incline to the latter belief, but at a later moment will discuss the question, how far the excitement and the massacre were [Page 183] brought about by the efforts of individuals. For the moment, it is sufficient to say that circumstances seemed to implicate the sisters. They were connected with the establishment from which burials were daily taking place. Their doors were ever closed to the public. They were employing agents to recruit children. They were receiving these even when they were in the last gasps of life. People had visited the cemeteries and found in each of several of the coffins sent by the sisters that two bodies had been interred. They had taken this method to avert the suspicion that was growing up against them. At this moment two persons were arrested and executed on the charge of kidnapping. Then followed proclamations by the magistrates, declaring that children were being kidnapped in all directions, and that their brains, eyes, and hearts were extracted for medicine.

One can imagine that an undefined dread, begot of the belief that horrible deeds were being perpetrated in a mysterious way, fell upon the great city.

At last occurred the arrest of Wu-lan-chen, and his examination. He acknowledged that he was a kidnapper, but claimed that he was an unwilling agent of the Romanists. He had been bewitched, and under continued bewitchment had gone out to bewitch others.

We should dwell a few moments on this strange story. The witness declares that he has been kidnapped by one Wang-San, of the Catholic mission; that under the influence of a drug administered by Wang-Sen he has kidnapped other persons, that Wang-Sen has kidnapped six persons besides himself and used them to prey for others. He speaks with much particularity, describes the drugs, the antidote to the one he was empowered to use, the places where he found his victims, their age and dress, and, as we may infer from Chung How’s letter, the rooms in the mission establishment where he was confined at night.

It would be difficult to imagine a tale more likely to excite the populace of a Chinese city. It tallies exactly with the superstitious beliefs that prevail among the Chinese. It was doubtless repeated with aggravations and illustrations drawn from old stories of the malevolence of foreigners. Taken in connection with the existing excitement and the predisposition of the people, it was enough to prepare them to take a dire revenge.

This was the condition of matters when, on the morning of the 21st, the Tautai, prefect and magistrate, in pursuance of the arrangement effected between Chung How and Père Cheverier, went to the cathedral, and were shown over it and the premises attacked; Wu Lan-chen was brought to identify Wang-San, (a person of that name was actually in the service of the missionaries,) but failed to do so. He failed also when asked to point out the apartments which he had spoken of in his evidence. The officials, satisfied with the result of their investigations, reported to Chung How, who was soon joined by the amiable Père Cheverier, and arranged with him that certain precautionary measures should be observed for the future. He then proceeded, as he says, to prepare the proclamation he had promised to issue, and was anxious to get out, but was interrupted by the receipt of information that a disturbance had occurred near the consulate and the cathedral. Soon after, according to Chung How, Monsieur Fontanier appeared. He complained bitterly of the action of the mob, and demanded that his excellency should go with him to put an end to the trouble. Monsieur Fontanier then left the yamen and made his way toward the consulate, but, upon meeting the magistrate of Tien-tsin, fired upon that officer. Chung How claims that this was the signal for the work of destruction and death.

[Page 184]

Up to a certain point, Chung How’s statement is in perfect accord with Monsieur Fontanier’s letter, and thereafter the circumstances blend to support the greater part of what he says. From other sources of information we may fill up gaps in his narrative, and reach a more complete conception of the massacre.

I have heretofore alluded to the evidence of a Frenchman named Coutres. Touching the death of Monsieur Fontanier and his secretary, he made the following statement to Mr. Lay, (Blue Book, page 33:)

As regards the death of the French consul and his secretary, I have examined Monsieur Coutres, a Frenchman, living not far from the French consulate, and he tells me that he heard a great outcry in the morning, and saw the people assembling from every quarter. Their cry was “kill the foreigners,” (not “kill the sisters.”) He ran into the French consulate, found all in confusion, and saw Monsieur Simon leave the yamen (the consulate is probably nearest,) with his writer; the consul had not been able to get his writer to go alone with his dispatch to Chung How.

“Monsieur Coutres went home then, and returning again soon, the Chinese told him that the consul had now gone himself to protest against the outrages. He rushed to the yamen and had much difficulty in getting protection, the officials in the courtyard being those who principally attacked him. He was kept in the yamen all night, and came down with Chung How in the morning. He did not see the French consul killed.

We may suppose that the Chinese, some of them, as we shall see, determined to create trouble, had gathered near the cathedral and consulate, to learn the result of the investigation which was being made; that they were not satisfied when the officials came out empty handed, and that they then began to call out at and revile the people in the two establishments. At this point the consul, becoming alarmed, and seeing the impracticability of dispersing the mob unaided, proceeded to Chung How’s yamen for the purpose of asking assistance. Governor Low thinks that he reached the yamen “in a state of excitement bordering upon insanity.”*

The fact that the consul was able to leave the house, and that Monsieur Coutres passed to and from it twice is evidence that, up to a moment later than that when the consul started for the imperial commissioner’s residence, the crowd had not proceeded to extremes.

I shall not stop to inquire whether Monsieur Fontanier did or did not fire off his pistol in the yamen of Chung How. He may have done so by accident, or in a passion, or with the intention to force Chung How, who, after the fashion of most Chinese officials, was probably in a state of helpless consternation, to go with him and quiet the mob.

And if Monsieur Fontanier discharged his pistol at the magistrate, the same explanations could be offered, or it might be said that he saw death staring him in the face, and used his pistol with a forlorn hope to drive back the surging crowd, or still believing that the magistrate had brought about the trouble, with the intent to die not unavenged upon him.

It would, of course, be interesting to know the exact facts, but they are not indispensably necessary to our knowledge of the massacre in its practical bearings. A study of the whole case leaves strongly upon my mind the conviction that, in all human probability, the outburst would have come in spite of any action the consul could take. He was in those moments a feather driven by the wind.

[Page 185]

Nor is it necessary to dwell upon the horrible scenes attending the massacre. The correspondent of the North China Herald, whose report I have quoted, has done this at length. It is sufficient to say that the destruction of life and property was complete, and attended with circumstances of a harrowing nature. I do not, however, find anything in the evidence to support his statement that a large number of Cantonese were killed. The letter of the Cantonese, also quoted, is silent on this point, a fact which raises a strong presumption that none of the writers, fellow provincials, were sacrificed. In the same way I find no evidence that a large number, or indeed any, children perished in the flames of the hospital; and it may be questioned whether the sisters were subjected to all the fiendish cruelties which the correspondent details. The victims of a mob are generally killed red-handed, and the mutilation of their bodies takes place at a later moment.

The statements and opinions which I have thus offered point to a gradual growth of excitement, culminating in the deeds of blood which have been described. But when one learns of such an excitement he naturally suspects that there must have been active malcontents at work, skillfully fanning the growing flame, and afterwards, perhaps, urging on the work of death. In this instance we have seen that Monsieur Fontanier was disposed to implicate the district magistrate as the fomenter of trouble. Count Rochechouart, French minister at Peking, was so satisfied of the guilt of that officer and the prefect that he demanded their execution. Some persons have held that Chung How must have foreseen the result, and, while they are indisposed to believe that he was actively criminal, they think that he cannot be excused from responsibility. There are even those who hold that the massacre was a part of a general scheme which had been elaborated by the government of China for the expulsion of foreigners from the empire.

It now becomes my duty to review the massacre in connection with the questions thus raised. I shall endeavor to do this in a spirit of fairness, not yielding to mere suspicions on the one hand, nor yet refusing to give facts the weight which they deserve. I shall, however, invariably insist that allegations not supported by shown facts must of necessity fall.

I have at hand, fortunately, an argument of an elaborate character, prepared by Messrs. Jonathan Lees and William N. Hall, missionaries at Tien-tsin, and intended to show that the massacre was the result of a conspiracy, in which the officials and gentry of the city were probably concerned. As it is, the only respectable argument of the sort which I have seen, as it is carefully and conscientiously drawn, and is temperate, if not moderate, in its expressions, I will quote it at length, and deal with it section by section. The document was addressed to the British consul at Tien-tsin, and may be found in the Blue Book and in the North China Herald of July 14, 1870.

The first section reads as follows:

I. We beg to remind you that it was well known for some days previous to the massacre that there was a plot of some kind against foreigners; that, although many of the injurious rumors relative to kidnapping, &c., were more immediately connected with French Romanists, the threats held out were by no means directed alone against them; that a fortnight previous to the outbreak, a lady member of one of the Protestant missions was so much alarmed by the jestures and language of the people that she did not dare to visit the city afterward as she had done before; that on the return of Mr. Lees from Peking, on the 13th ultimo, he found the anti-foreign feeling so strong as to have awakened general alarm among the converts of all the Protestant missions; that, on Friday the 12th, Mr. Lees, in the absence of his colleagues, had a long conversation with you upon the subject, and especially with reference to the obnoxious proclamation issued by the Fu, which well-informed natives, even then, confidently predieted [Page 186] would lead to riots; that you advised Mr. Lees to lodge with you an official complaint relative to this proclamation, and also to apply for a counter-proclamation as a measure of precaution in case the public sentiment should not abate; that the very same day it was found that threats had been uttered with reference to the new hospital premises just purchased by the London mission, and that it was not possible to find workmen courageous enough to undertake the needful repairs; that Mr. Lees accordingly applied for the protective proclamation as before agreed upon, Saturday morning, (the 18th;) that offensive demonstrations were made at the East Gate Chapel of the London mission on Sunday afternoon, (the 19th,) the shout being raised “they are killing a man in here,” and a riot averted, probably, only by the cool self-possession and good temper of one or two native Christians; that on the same day stones were taken up, threateningly, as the Reverend Mr. Turnock, Mrs. Turnock, and a friend were returning from a chapel on the east of the river; that Mr. Lees saw you again on the Monday to represent the extreme urgency of the case; and, finally, that on the Tuesday morning we both waited on you for the same purpose, having just received from a number of our most trusted native assistant renewed warning of the imminence of the danger, and the necessity for immediate action”

After having completed a cursory examination of Messrs. Lees and Hall’s argument, I shall come back to their statement, that rumors of the existence of a plot against foreigners had been some time in circulation. At the moment I shall proceed to consider the proclamation of the prefect, its bearing and significance. The other statements of Messrs. Lees and Hall offer only confirmation of the already sufficiently well-established fact that the excitement was growing for some time before the massacre, and was widely diffused.

The proclamation of the Fu may be found in the North China Herald of July 22, 1870. It reads:

Whereas, on the eight of the fifth moon, Chang Yang-an, of Yangfung garrison, deposed that he had caught two persons called Chang Shuan and Kuo Kuai, of Li-la-yang, kidnapping children of the district of Ching-Hai by means of drugs and magic; and whereas the two scoundrels, during their examinations, confessed to having employed drugs and incantations to kidnap children, they have already, by our orders, suffered the extreme penalty of the law. From reports which had previously reached us, it appeared that these vagabond wretches, together with others of the same class, were commissioned to kidnap children in all directions for the purpose extracting brains, eyes, and hearts to compound drugs—mutilation of the most barbarous sort. How but by their immediate decapitation could the neighborhood be pacified, or the majesty of law be upheld?

The Che-hsien has also issued a proclamation notifying that the police have received orders to make a general search for the kidnappers. But the city and suburbs of Tientsin have such a dense population, and cover such a large space, that it is feared the kidnappers may evade search and make their way here, and, concealing themselves in some-secret spot, watch their opportunity to catch unsuspecting children. Only by vigilance, search, and prompt arrest can we hope to rid ourselves of these malevolent, cruel demons, and restore peace to this locality.

Besides selecting constables of known ability to use their utmost endeavors to apprehend the kidnappers, we issue this proclamation for the information of the public.

The proclamation of the Che-hsien was of similar tenor.

The execution of these men, which, it would seem, was effected by the magistrate, under the orders of the prefect, and the proclamations have a bad look, which does not disappear on closer examination. There is no statement in either proclamation, nor elsewhere in any documents which have fallen under my view, that the magistrate had any further proofs of the guilt of the alleged kidnappers than the allegation of the arresting officer and their own confessions. Chinese officials should know how worthless such proofs are in a time of excitement, and when the criminal is under torture or the threat of it. On the other hand, we find Chung How, according to Monsieur Fontanier, condemning the magistrates in terms which show that he referred to their conduct in causing the execution and the issue of the proclamations; we find Tseng Kwo Fan (Blue Book, page 95) declaring that, “upon inquiry, it has been found that there was no instance, either in or out of the city, of people [Page 187] who had lost children having lodged a complaint to that effect;” and lastly, we find from the evidence of an intelligent Chinese (Blue Book, page 35) that, after the execution, and before the massacre, “several literary men began to prepare a memorial for presentation to the Fu, asking who these men were, where they came from, whose children they had seized, to whom they had sold the children for the purposes stated, and also demanding why, without first punishing those who had been in the habit of buying them, the officials had killed the men; the gist of the whole being a complaint against the mandarins for having acted upon suspicion.”

These facts are damnatory of the magistrates in this sense, they do not establish the existence of a conspiracy against foreigners, but they show that those officials, if not actually fomenting trouble, were countenancing beliefs which were likely to cause an outbreak; that if not actively guilty toward foreigners, they were such time-servers as to be willing to sacrifice two miserable wretches at the demand of an excited populace, without any sufficient warrant of law and fact.

I fear that this Pontius Pilate willingness to sacrifice the innocent, in obedience to a popular outcry, may characterize the Chinese. Unless, indeed, Ma Hsin-ye, the governor general at Nankin, had a better case for the execution of certain alleged kidnappers than is detailed in his dispatch reporting the facts, (Diplomatic Correspondence, 1870, page 366,) I fear that he must be set down as a time-server. That he had no animus against foreigners, or, if he had, that he thought it unwise to yield to it, is indicated by the fact that he succeeded in putting down an excitement which existed at the moment in Nankin, and in which foreigners were greatly endangered. A few weeks later the governor general died by the hand of an assassin, under circumstances which have never been cleared up. Is it impossible that some sufferer by the action of the governor general sought and obtained vengeance in this way? Upon Tseng Kewo Fan, a man whose character is in many respects admirable, rests the responsibility of having issued the general authority to deal with kidnappers by martial law, under which the regular course of procedure was suspended at Tien-tsin, and the execution of the two alleged kidnappers rendered possible.

Messrs. Lees and Hall go on to say:

II. We beg to say that the facts brought out in the evidence we have already had the honor to place in your hands prove that, whatever may now be said, the animosity of the mob, with rare exceptions, was far from being directed against the French alone. This is shown:

1. By the indiscriminate and consecutive destruction of all the Protestant chapels, eight in number, including the extensive premises of the American board, this destruction being as great as the bitterest rage could make it.

2. By the careful inquiry made for the missionaries, both at the chapels and at the London Mission Hospital.

3. By the ill treatment of many of our converts, all of whom seemed to have been marked men, and to have been persecuted, beaten, and plundered accordingly, while no less than eight or ten of the more well-to-do among them have had their houses pulled down and been robbed of all they possessed.

4. By the inability of the appeal made by unfortunate Russian victims on the ground of English nationality; and,

5. By the loudly expressed resolution of the mob, after they had completed their horrid work at the hospital of the Sisters of Charity, to come down to the settlement and burn the hongs, (mercantile establishments.)

There can be no doubt that the mob, after their blood was up, were ready to proceed against persons of any nationality, and especially against foreign religionists. But all the circumstances observed in our consideration of the subject lead to the supposition that its animus was originally directed against the Romanists. This supposition is [Page 188] strengthened by the fact that while red-handed they spared several who were Russians so fortunate as to establish the fact that they were Russians, and not French.

Messrs. Lees and Hall then proceed to say:

III. We dare not conceal our conviction that these deplorable events have had official recognition, even if they have not had official authority. This conviction rests upon the following among other grounds:

1. The popular excitement must of course have been well known to the authorities, yet no steps were taken to quell it.

2. On the contrary the proclamations issued by the Fu and Hien, of which complaint was made before the massacre, were of the most incendiary character.

3. The presentation to the Fu, upon the issue of these proclamations, of testimonials consisting of a complimentary umbrella and a tablet with the inscription: “The peoples’ living Buddha,” and his acceptance of these, (so reported the testimonials have been seen by trustworthy natives.)

4. No notice was taken of your application for the issue of a counter-proclamation, protective of life and property.

5. The rioters have notoriously claimed openly the sympathy and approval of all the local officials, except his excellency Chung How, who from his supposed complicity with foreigners has become the object of intense popular hatred, being nicknamed “foreigner” and “Romanist,” and has had his proclamation insultingly defaced.

6. The language and conduct of the Chên-tai, as reported among the people.

7. The fact that, at least in some instances, as for examples in the demolition of the premises of the American Mission, and in several threatened attacks upon the London Mission Hospital, soldiers were the prominent actors.

8. The various fire-guilds and volunteer organizations all have as their heads literary men, whose names are enrolled in the yamêns, and it is impossible to believe that these men would venture to take an active part in a movement which they knew was opposed to the wishes of the officials.

9. Up to the present date, a fortnight after the riot, there is no reason to believe that one serious effort has been made to seize and punish any of the murderers, although a large number of foreign disciplined troops are in the pay of the Mandarins.

The first and second of these allegations are of course well taken, but they lose force when we remember the fact that, although Monsieur Fontanier, through the priests and their converts, and Mr. Lay, through the missionaries and their converts, should have been equally well informed as the native officials, they did not think it necessary to take action; the first until urged by the magistrates, the second until so late a moment as the day before the massacre; and that Monsieur Fontanier on the very morning of the massacre speaks slightingly of the trouble, while Mr. Lay writes at the same moment, (Blue Book, page 21,) that he has “no fear of actual danger to life.”

The third allegation is not significant, because it is indefinite, and the evidence upon the point equally so. In the absence of exact information it will be simply just to suppose that the people offered the testimonials believing that the Fu had well served the cause of law and order, while he declined them fearing to further countenance the excitement.

Touching the fourth allegation, it is to be said that the application for a counter-proclamation was not made until the day before the massacre, and that the magistrates had been several days preparing, in a practical way, to issue such.

The fifth allegation if quite correct; does no more than raise a presumption against the magistrates and in favor of Chung How.

The person named in the sixth allegation, the Chên-tai, is a military officer having command of police. The evidence shows that this officer has been confused with one Chen Kwo-jai. This man was formerly a rebel, and was rewarded for his change of allegiance with the title of Ti-tu, or General. He is a turbulent fellow, who leads a disreputable life, and wherever he goes foments hatred of foreigners. Some accounts indicate that he had been several weeks in Tien-tsin when the [Page 189] massacre occurred, but the better opinion is that he had only just reached there. To him is charged the closing of the bridge of boats, the opening of which, so as to prevent the passage of the mob toward the hospital and the foreign settlement, is credited indifferently to Chung How and to the district magistrate. He is also said to have used cries calculated to urge on the mob in their work of destruction. So far as I can judge, his guilt would not imply that of the local officers.

The seventh and eighth allegations are destitute of force, unless it can be shown that the soldiers, the members of the fire-guilds, and of the volunteer organizations, went into the massacre by companies and with their leaders. This is not the case, although it is true that in the first moments of the outbreak the fire-gongs and the gongs at the police-offices were beaten. But they appear to have been sounded, not as a signal for the outbreak, but in consequence of it.

The ninth allegation refers to the delay in the arrest of persons who took part in the massacre. I shall have occasion to deal with this point at a later moment.

Messrs. Lees and Hall proceed again, as follows:

IV. The share taken by the literati in these atrocities may be inferred:

1. From the positive admission made by one of their number to a native, whose evidence you already have, that some days before the riot a deputation of this class waited upon the mandarin in charge of the Weu Hsue, and presented a paper to him having reference to the rumors.

2. From the fact that the proclamations of the magistrates and the general closure of the schools, which added so much to the excitement, soon followed.

3. From the internal connection existing between the literati and the fire-guilds and volunteer companies, consequent upon those bodies having graduates at their head, it being inconceivable that these organizations could act with such evident unity of purpose unless their leaders had so willed, and equally inconceivable that their leaders would have ventured upon such action unless they had known that their literary brethren generally sympathized with them.

The evidence does not show whether the paper mentioned in the first of these allegations called for, or was calculated to effect, the issue of the proclamations and the closure of the schools. For all we know, it may have been the memorial touching the execution of the alleged kidnappers mentioned in an earlier part of this dispatch.

Touching the third allegation, I remark again, that, so far as I can learn, the members of the fire-guilds and the volunteer companies did not turn out until after the outbreak had occurred.

The class of the Literati of China embraces all persons who have succeeded in passing one or more of the government examinations. There are no lawyers in the empire; priests are seldom graduates, medical men almost never. Then it happens that students, as a rule, have no end in view but to obtain official employment. All civil officers are graduates and belong to the literary class, but when the literati are spoken of, those not in office are generally meant. Foreigners are, I find, universally suspicious of the literati. They believe that they are active in stirring up among the masses dislike of the foreigner and in planning outbreaks. If badly-disposed, their superior intelligence, their ability to write, their hold upon the officials and the government, and their general standing and influence in the empire, would render them an element of a dangerous character.

So far as the evidence shows, we might rest in the conclusion that the literati were free from blame. I am not prepared to believe that this was the case. There is too much reason to believe that the literati are not free from the superstitions which enthrall the masses, and that they are bitterly opposed to foreign intercourse. But I confess that I experienced a sense of satisfaction when I completed the perusal of the [Page 190] argument under review, having found no more direct and telling predications against them than the three just quoted.

It is with the literary class, speaking generally, that we must expect to find the studious proclivities of the Chinese and their broadest intellectual development. As a consequence, we must expect that the members of that class will be first among the Chinese to appreciate the learning and morals of the West, our attainments in the sciences and the practical arts. There ought to be, therefore, no repelling of the literati with cold suspicion. The missionaries may set diplomatists a lesson in this respect. Profiting by the lessons of the past, they have at last dropped the universal battle which they formerly waged against the literati, and are now using the structure which Chinese sages have raised in order to build upon it the more exalted edifice of Christianity.

The ensuing section of the argument under review is forcible:

V. Not less important are the evidences continually accumulating that the entire affair was no sudden outbreak, but deliberately planned. Among these we may name:

1. The mob was summoned to its bloody work by the gongs of the fire-guilds, and when the principal acts of violence were accomplished, the guilds were in like manner ordered to disperse by the usual recall.

2. On the sounding of the fire-gongs, in place of the members of these guilds seizing their fire-buckets, &c., as would usually he the case on the giving of such a signal, there was a universal rush to arms, and spears, swords, and sticks were everywhere seen.

3. It is known that on the Tuesday and Monday previous to the massacre the guilds were assembled in various districts, and especially upon the east of the river, in eager debate, and threats loud and hitter were uttered that all foreigners should be slain.

4. Several foreigners were expressly warned, in one or two cases the statement having been made of the form in which the riot was to break out, viz: the burning of the French cathedral and hospital. As you may remember, you yourself informed us of this rumor early on Tuesday morning. A still more curious indication of the popular knowledge of the plot is afforded by the experience of an English gentleman living near the hospital, who was astonished to find, on Monday evening, that his landlord, who lived next door, had suddenly bricked up a communication formerly existing between the two houses, and which was intended for use in case of fire.

5. A catechist, belonging to the London Mission, who had been spending some time in the country, returned on the evening of Thursday, the 23d June. Mr. Lees saw him on Friday morning. He reported that at Hsing-chi, a market town on the Grand canal, about 200 li from Tien-tsin, he had been arrested by the people, who told him that there were proclamations out at Tsang-chên, which spoke of trouble with foreigners at Tien-tsin, and required the people to bring all suspected Romanists to the yamêns for examination, as being concerned in kidnapping. The man got away through the intervention of friendly shopkeepers in the neighborhood; but the incident is suggestive, as it is hard to see how news of events of Tuesday could have reached this district the succeeding day.

6. Yet more to the purpose, and especially when taken together with the above, is the evidence already in your possession, that in a district of Shantung, distant only 180 li from Chi-nan-fu, and at least five days’ ordinary travel from Tien-tsin, there was a statement current among the people in the middle of the week, that there was to be an attack upon foreigners at Tien-tsin on the 23d and the 26th of the native months. It is remarkable not only that the attack was spoken of as to be made, but also that the story made no distinction of nationalities; and, moreover, that two dates were given, with the assertion, that on the 23d (June 21st) those in the city were to be murdered, while the 26th was to be the fatal day upon the settlement. And here we may be permitted to suggest the question whether the knowledge of such an arrangement, supposing it to have existed, may not have had more to do with the escape of the settlement on the Tuesday than the reported official influence, and also to remind you that during the whole of Friday heavy rain fell.

The first of these allegations is a repetion of a statement already several times put forward. I repeat that it is not supported by the evidence, and that, in my opinion, the collision came first, the sounding of gongs, &c., at a later moment.

The pertinency of the second allegation, for aught that we have yet seen, rests upon our conclusion as to the first. If the gongs sounded before the collision, the fact that the members of the various organizations [Page 191] seized arms and not the appropriate instruments or insignia of their crafts would be evidence that they were moving to a preconcerted slaughter; but if the gongs were sounded after the collision, the fact of a collision with foreigners would have become known, and would, in view of the temper of the people, explain why they rushed to arms.

To the third allegation we may give ready credence. The evidence on which it is based (Blue Book, page 105) indicates that for a few days before the massacre the threats against foreigners were frequent and outspoken.

The fourth and fifth allegations are more positive in form. The supporting evidence has, however, not become available to me.

The sixth allegation is positive and perfectly supported by the evidence. It is contained in a memorandum from the pen of Mr. Hall, and may be found at page 106 of the Blue Book.

The Reverend N. B. Hodge has been residing for some weeks at Chu-Chiatsai, in the northeastern part of the province of Shantung. In a letter received from him a few days ago, and dated June 26, I find the following paragraph:

We had heard, not only from Tien-tsin friends, but likewise through widely circulated rumors in this district, that there was no small disturbance in Tien-tsin, owing to the damaging reports in circulation concerning Roman Catholics. On Friday last Hu returned from San Lin-chia, and heard that on the 23d of the Chinese month (last Tuesday) there was to be a grand struggle with the foreigners, to be succeeded by a second on the 26th, (Friday.)

With regard to the foregoing extract from Mr. Hodge’s letter, I would remark that the man, Mr. Hodge’s informant, is one of our native assistants, and is considered to be a cautious, reliable person. San Lin-chia, the place where he heard the rumor which he reported to Mr. Hodge, is a large village, situated in the northeastern portion of the province of Shan-tung. and distant from Chi-nan-fu about 160 li. We regard it five days’ journey from Tein-tsin, by rapid traveling and long stages: I suppose it might be reached in four days. He could leave this place early on Friday morning, in order to join Mr. Hodge at Chu-Chia on that day. This leaves only two days between the tragical occurrences at Tein-tsin, on the Tuesday, and Hu’s departure from San Lin-chia on the Friday. It is thus all but impossible that the news of the actual events at Tein-tsin on Tuesday could have arrived at San Lin-chia before Hu’s departure on Friday. Moreover, the tenor of Mr. Hodge’s letter is, that the struggle with the foreigners was spoken of not as an accomplished fact, but as an event which was expected to transpire in virtue of some premeditated and publicly announced scheme. This fact, taken in connection with other similar intimations from widely-separated points, seems to possess considerable significance.

Two other witnesses, Chinese resident at Tien-tsin, speak of having heard that on the 21st of June there would be a massacre of foreigners. Their evidence may be found on pages 112 and 113 of the Blue Book.

I am satisfied that, prior to the 21st of June, an effort was made at Tein-tsin to bring about a massacre on that date. I believe this, because just such efforts are made in China, from time to time, now at one point, now at another, and because the evidence leads us to the conclusion.

The fact that the massacre occurred on the proposed day, raises a strong presumption that it was brought about by the conspirators.

Days for the extermination of this or that community of foreigners, as I have said, have been frequently fixed upon in China. The missionaries resident at Tung Chow, a city on the Gulf of Pechili, have been specially aimed at in this way; but in each case the day has passed by safely, as with demonstrations falling short of those threatened.

This fact should make us hesitate to believe that these rumors have their foundation in positive and practical undertakings to the end. They are often circulated to frighten foreigners, doubtless often with a malicious intent. They have so frequently failed to come true that, up to the moment of the massacre, those prevalent at Tien-tsin were generally laughed at by foreigners, as little credence has been given to those from time to time put in circulation at other points.

[Page 192]

In the examination which I have made of the circumstances of the massacre, down to this point, I have found no evidence of a positive character to show that it resulted in consequence of a preconcerted arrangement. Let me now question the probabilities in regard to the evidence of Mr. Hodge, and of the two Chinese witnesses resident at Tien-tsin, by whom the report which reached him is confirmed.

Mr. Hodge’s residence was five days distant from Tien-tsin. Peking is two days from Tien-tsin. So far as is known, no rumors of a proposed massacre reached the capital. None reached Che-foo, New Chwang, or Shanghai. Everywhere it was known that there was more or less excitement existing among the Tien-tsinese, but nothing to show a conspiracy.

Evidence in regard to the massacre has flowed in from many diverse and distant sources. From Mr. Hodge and from the two Chinese witnesses only have we evidence of a conspiracy. Their statements are, that before the massacre they learned that foreigners at Tien-tsin were to be murdered on the Tuesday. Is it probable that a conspiracy, the aim of which had become known before the massacre, should not be clearly exposed when, after the massacre, eager attention is directed to all the facts?

While disposed to reject the conclusion that the massacre was deliberately planned and executed, that it was a second St. Bartholomew’s, I am not disposed to say that the men who sought to bring it about did not precipitate the event. Given a populace in a fever-heat of excitement, given a congregation of their number such as that which occurred in front of the cathedral and consulate, given exasperating circumstances such as the failure of the mandarins to find the man against whom the anger of the mob was so thoroughly aroused, and the closed gates of the establishments, and a slight accident might bring about disaster. The cries of a fanatic, the throwing of a stone, the surging of the crowd, one error of temper or of judgment, might bring about the fray. To give this last coup de grace, and even to have somewhat prepared the events which led up to it, may very well have been the work of the would-be conspirators.

My conclusion, then, is, that the massacre may have been premeditated in certain quarters, and may have been precipitated in consequence of the efforts of badly-disposed persons, but was not preconcerted in a general way. Such a conspiracy as may have existed is not a salient feature of the massacre. It can be elevated to no higher place than a leading incident. I speak always in view of the evidence. But of course further information might change my opinion.

I have dwelt at length on Messrs. Lees and Hall’s memorandum, a document which was intended to be suggestive only, because, as I have said, I consider it the most forcible exposition which has fallen under my eyes, of the views of those who are disposed to see in the massacre proof that the official and literary classes in China, and perhaps the government, are bitterly hostile to foreigners, and constantly endeavoring to do them harm. It was due to the Department to deferentially consider these views, and I may say that it was due also to those in China who have not time to sift facts for themselves.

I can now review the case in order to state “the special circumstances of an exciting character, which were present and active at Tien-tsin.

If I am not mistaken these were—

1. An epidemic and numerous deaths among the children in the hospital of the Sisters of Charity.

2. The burial of several children—two in a coffin.

[Page 193]

3. Rumors of kidnapping and the mutilation of bodies, strengthened by the facts that the Sisters received and recruited children, and that many of them had died, but more by the time-serving, perhaps malicious, action of the magistrates in executing two alleged kidnappers and in putting out proclamations likely to direct suspicion to foreigners.

4. The evidence of Wu-Lan-Chên, which directly charged upon the Roman Catholics the malpractices already credited to them.

5. The failure of the officials to see the drift of the excitement, or if they saw it to take action at an early moment.

6. The examination of the Romanists’ cathedral and attached premises, on the morning of the day of the massacre. This brought together an excited crowd, and prepared matters for an outbreak.

7. The efforts of persons disposed to make trouble.

It has been my intention to consider further the measures taken by the foreign ministers and the government, in consequence of the massacre. But my dispatch has reached unusual length, and I am warned by the fact to desist from further writing. I shall, therefore, close it with the following remarks:

We have seen that there are various forcible reasons why the Chinese distrust and dislike foreigners.

We have seen that their intellectual condition is low, and that they believe, in a superstitious way, that foreigners are given to various horrible practices.

We conclude that the general conditions existing at Tien-tsin prior to the massacre may be repeated elsewhere in the empire, and that other massacres may be expected.

I so far rest in this conclusion that I advise caution and the use of precautionary measures. A strong effort should be made through the government at Peking to disprove the false stories about foreigners which are so prevalent among the people. The excitements among the people, which recur summer after summer, should be met and combatted promptly and vigorously. A considerable naval force should be maintained in Chinese waters. It should be authorized to strike in defense of any foreign community when attacked, or if necessary to avert an attack.

All this is likely to be done. The communities, their representatives, and the several governments know the Chinese to-day better than they did two years ago. They will take great care that another outbreak shall not occur.

Moreover, the efforts of the government of China and of its officials will be put forward in the cause of peace. The dynasty is Tartar. It has only a forlorn following of its nationals. It holds the throne by a slight tenure. It wants no controversy with foreign states. It has discovered that it may draw strength from the presence of foreigners, and that if opposed unjustly they may cause its downfall.

We are less sure of the support of the officials. But the temper of the government is likely to be the index of theirs. Chinese officials are, as a rule, the veriest time-servers in the world. If the government requires them to keep the peace under penalty of disgrace, they will look well to the allotted task. The Tien-tsin officials have escaped easily, but their fate will still be a warning to others.

The people, low as they are in the intellectual grade, prone to superstitions, saturated with stories of the malevolence of foreigners, are yet what all the world in a general way believes them to be, industrious, peaceful, easily governed. While I write, information comes to me of the usual summer-time plots against foreigners. They come not unexpected, [Page 194] but the expectation remains that each returning summer will find the practical observing Chinaman more accustomed to foreigners, and more unwilling to accept unquestioned the stories against them. One difficulty is the vast extent and population of the empire.

I have said that it was my intention to consider the measures taken by the Chinese government in consequence of the massacre.

Under ordinary circumstances the examination of this part of the case would have been most instructive. But I am persuaded that the more useful part of my task has now been completed. There was no open trial of the offenders. We have no minutes of the evidence adduced. We could do no more under these circumstances than state what redress has been granted, and conjecture whether it was determined in a fair and candid way.

I have the honor, &c.,

GEORGE F. SEWARD.
  1. The use of the word kidnappers by the translator is not justified by the text; the actual expression is, “recruiteurs de petits enfants.”
  2. Monsieur Fontanier had been interpreter to the French legation at Peking, and it is said was relieved because he had been repeatedly violent at the foreign office. Wan-Saang, one of the most prominent members of the foreign office, was so displeased at the conduct of Monsieur Fontanier that he declared to one of the foreign ministers his unwillingness to allow him to act as interpreter. I have other evidence that the consul was a man of an ungovernable temper.