Benj. P. Avery to His Imperial Highness Prince Kung, July 18, 1875

No. 171. Mr. Avery to Mr. Fish.

Sir: Under date of May 1 I received from Mr. R. M. Johnson, United States consul at Han-kow, a dispatch, with voluminous inclosures, detailing the circumstances of an attack upon two American citizens, Messrs. Strittmatter and Hykes, at Shui Chang, on the 3d of November last, and of a previous riotous assault on the American Methodist Episcopal Mission premises at the same place, and informing me of the failure of the local authorities to furnish any redress, despite the repeated and urgent efforts of our consular agent at the near port of Kiu-kiang, and of Consul Johnson at Han-kow, to induce them to do their duty; wherefore Mr. Johnson appealed the matter to me.

As the facts justified his appeal, I laid them at once before his highness Prince Kung. They will be found fully stated in the inclosed copy of my communication. While assuring Mr. Johnson that I should pursue the business to a just settlement, believing that such violence could not be left to go unredressed without danger of repeated and more serious trouble, I took occasion to express my regret at the lack of discretion exhibited by the missionaries, Strittmatter and Hykes, in their rather unceremonious effort to press an immediate interview on the magistrate at Shui Chang, which circumstance seems to have given the mob a pretext for attacking them.

Prince Kung replied to my communication briefly, informing me that he had forwarded a copy of it to the southern superintendent of trade, and had ordered the local authorities to examine and settle the case justly.

In my communication to Prince Kung I called his attention to the fact that the troubles between our missionaries and the people were caused by the falsehoods told about them; such as that they abduct and kill children, take out their eyes for medicine, &c., and by popular ignorance of the rights of foreigners under the treaties. I also suggested that were proclamations issued disabusing the minds of the people and stating what are the treaty-rights of foreigners, such a course would go far to prevent difficulties in future. I even suggested the propriety of friendly proclamations from the higher authorities. To all of this Prince Kung, as I expected, made no reply; but I attach some importance to the fact that he sent a copy of my dispatch, including these suggestions, to the southern superintendent, thus leaving him at liberty to act upon them. It would probably be impossible by mere suasion to induce the Chinese government to proclaim that it wishes to remain at peace and friendship with foreigners, for the ministers fear that such a proclamation would strengthen the opposition of the anti-foreign party 5 yet such a step would almost certainly have a good effect and save them much trouble.

I thought it proper to assure the prince that this legation would dissuade its nationals from urging themselves on any community manifestly hostile and violent; and I have written to some of our consuls, as the Department knows, in the spirit of this assurance, and have reason to believe our missionary citizens will be duly cautious in their movements.

Under date of May 12, Mr. Johnson advised me of another act of violence against American missionaries, this time at Kin-Kiang, consisting of the destruction by mob of the chapel and other buildings of the Methodist Episcopal Mission on the night of May 1. On being informed of the facts, by Mr. Acting Consular-Agent Cunningham, Mr. Johnson, on May 4, addressed the Taotai at Kiu-kiang, relating the particulars, and asking for redress in the terms set forth. I inclose a copy of this communication, which gives all the facts. Under date of May 11, Mr. Cunningham informed Mr. Johnson that the demands made by the missionaries for losses had been fully complied with by the authorities, and that the chapel-building and furniture would be restored as before. I inclose copy of the Taotai’s own statement, which shows that the difficulty originated in the refusal of the native door-keeper of the chapel, in the absence of the missionary, to open the door to a father whose son was inside, thereby exciting the unreasonable suspicions of the people on a point already referred to.

On the 9th of June I received from Prince Kung a communication covering a statement of the Kiu-kiang affair from the acting governor of Kiangsi, the province in which Kiu-kiang is situated. In this document the prince lays the blame for the occurrence on the missionary in a manner so unjust that I felt it a duty to correct his mistake, as per inclosure. In my dispatch I took occasion to lay down the doctrine that mob violence is not justifiable as a mode of redress for real or fancied wrongs at the hands of foreigners, and that if our citizens misbehave, they are to-be proceeded against legally, as provided in the treaty. Curiously enough, Prince Kung, in his reply to this suggestion, appears to hail it as something quite new; but I doubt not good will result from it, since the prince has “sent instructions to all the provinces to issue proclamations informing the people that hereafter, in case any missionary, or any of his subordinates, is guilty of improper conduct, in addition to making: complaint to the local authorities, and abstaining from all disturbances-themselves, they (the people) can make complaint to the consul at the nearest port, and in case he fails to adjust the case equitably, may appeal from him to the legation.” This is as near to telling the people that they must not assail our citizens, and that there is a peaceful remedy for any supposed wrong, as the central government can be expected to go.

In the same communication, Prince Kung informs me of the satisfactory settlement of the Kiu-kiang trouble. It is significant that he alludes to the presence of missionaries “throughout all the interior,” without a word or hint of objection. He also frankly admits that “the missionaries know and do their duty,” and that no blame attached to them in the Kiu-kiang affair.

In conclusion of this report, I inclose copy of my reply to the prince and of my dispatch to Mr. Johnson.

I have, &c.,