Benj. P. Avery to His Imperial Highness Prince Kung, June 15, 1875

Mr. Avery to Prince Kung.

Sir: I have had the honor to receive the dispatch of your imperial highness, under date of June 9, inclosing copy of dispatch from the acting governor of Kiangsi, relating the circumstances of an attack on the American missionary premises at Kiu-kiang on the evening of May 1, and informing me that your imperial highness has sent stringent orders to the acting governor of Kiangsi to have the affair thoroughly investigated and the leading rioters punished, in order that the missionaries and people may be in mutual accord.

I beg leave to thank your imperial highness for this renewed proof of your friendly and just disposition, and to express my satisfaction with the prompt action of the local officials, who had already, as I mentioned in a late communication to your imperial highness, given the matter prompt attention, in marked contrast to the failure of such action at Shui Chang.

Referring especially to the Kiu-kiang case, your imperial highness observes: “It appears that the missionary Hart opened a chapel for the purpose of exhorting men to be virtuous. Why should he without cause shut up a young child in the chapel, and so arouse suspicions in the breasts of the populace, to the creating of disturbances V And you then remark that most of the disturbances between missionaries and the people spring from the suspicions of the latter, who fear their children will be abducted and misused; wherefore you ask me to have the missionary in charge of the chapel at Kiu-kiang warned to conduct himself discreetly.

In reply to this I beg leave respectfully to inform your imperial highness that the missionary Hart did not shut up a young child in the chapel, and knew nothing about the trouble until it was all over. The Taotai at Kiu-kiang, in a dispatch to Consul Johnson informing the latter of the facts and of his action in relation to the same, which dispatch is now before me, expressly says that, “at the time of the disturbance, the foreign missionary himself was not at the premises, and that therefore the people made an attack which certainly should not have been done.”

There was a boy in the chapel, as your highness says, but he had been there but a very short time with the native keeper, and without the knowledge of the missionary, who had left the premises; and the whole affair, including the detention of the boy, and the disturbance, occupied hardly more than an hour. The native keeper was to blame for quarreling with the boy’s father, and for not opening the chapel; but it is clear that no blame can justly attach to the missionary, and there has never been anything in the conduct of American missionaries anywhere to warrant the foolish suspicions of the people. They never constrain or misuse children, and ought not to be held accountable for the silly stories circulated about them by the ignorant or designing. I have cautioned them to be discreet and conciliatory, and shall not fail to urge them to avoid every occasion of trouble; but I beg leave to repeat what I have already said on this subject, that the local authorities should for their part be instructed to notify the people by proclamation that the citizens of the United States come among them for lawful purposes, under protection of treaty, and are not to be molested. If, in any instance, they do wrong, let complaint be made to the nearest consul, and if he does not do his duty, to this legation, and I can assure your imperial highness that the wrong-doer will not escape punishment.

I avail myself, &c.