Benj. P. Avery to W. Raasloff , Danish, June 10, 1875

Mr. Avery to General Raasloff.

Dear Sir and Colleague: I have had the honor to receive your communication of the 26th ultimo, identical with one addressed to my colleagues of Great Britain, Russia, Germany, and France, on the subject of our common action for the protection of submarine cables on this coast, and requesting us to acquaint you with the reports of our consuls in response to our instructions to them, conformably to the protocol of January 27, on the strength of which reports you purpose to suggest such further measures as may seem necessary to insure efficacious protection for the telegraphic communications between China and the rest of the world.

Although the signatories of the protocol have replied to you in a joint note, expressing their willingness to co-operate in such further measures as may be thought practicable and within the limit of their powers, I desire to address you separately, for the purpose of making the following statements and suggestions: Under the same date as the protocol mentioned, I addressed a circular to our consuls at all ports contiguous to the cables of the Great Northern Telegraph Company in China, namely, to George F. Seward, consul-general at Shanghai; to Joseph J. Henderson, consul at Amoy; to Edward C. Lord, at Ning-po; Robert M. Tindall, Canton; M. M. De Lano, Foo-chow; and Joseph C. A. Wingate, Swatow. These officers were furnished with the Chinese text of the Tsung li Yamen promise, conveyed in the last paragraph of their note of January 12, to instruct the high officers of the seaboard provinces to take measures for the protection of the cable; and were instructed to communicate with and counsel the local officials relative to the matter in question, to procure the issuance of protective proclamations, &c. In addition to sending the above circular, I wrote personally to his excellency Li-Hung-Chang, the influential and able governor-general of Chihli, who replied with an assurance of his friendly disposition to the cables, although they are not strictly within his jurisdiction. All the consuls of the United States who were addressed on this subject responded promptly, declaring their readiness to do all in their power to promote the end ill view, and several of them have reported the success of their active intervention to procure the punishment of depredators on the cables, and of their efforts to procure the issuance of friendly proclamations from the native authorities. I need not remind you that Consul-General Seward, Consul Lord, and Consul De Lano, had all exerted themselves on various occasions, before our common action at Peking, to have the cables protected, as previously to insure their being laid and landed. The particulars of Mr. Lord’s success in a recent case, resulting in the posting of two very friendly proclamations by lower and higher officials, are already in your possession. You have also been furnished with the very gratifying correspondence between Mr. De Lano and the governor-general of Fuh-Kien, from which it appears that the instructions from the Tsung li Yamen were of a nature to impress the provincial authorities with the belief that the central government has now very friendly sentiments towards telegraphs. Mr. Henderson makes the very sensible suggestion, in a letter of which you have a copy, that “some regulations should be made for the protection of the cables from foreign vessels also,” and remarks that it may be difficult to get the Chinese authorities, who have just issued friendly proclamations, to punish their people for an offense that foreigners may commit with impunity. So far as the consuls of the United States are concerned, I am of opinion that they would be justified by our Government in proceeding against their nationals who commit trespasses upon the cables, when within their jurisdiction, as they proceed against them for trespasses on any other kind of property, where heedlessness or malice can be proved. And, as a matter of justice and sound policy, I am inclined to believe that authority in the same direction would not be refused to the consuls of other treaty-powers in China, if applied for by the different representatives. Considering the truly international character and uses of the cables, it is difficult to see why there should be any refusal on the part of foreign governments to accord the same measure of protection which they have instructed their minister here to demand of the Chinese. The Government of the United States has heretofore invited consideration to a project for an international convention for the protection of all cable-lines, as well as to encourage the future construction of new ones, and is still desirous to see this project carried out, believing that it will finally develop the most substantial results. Considering the peculiar circumstances of foreign representation and residence in China, and the identity in a large measure of all foreign interests here, we would, in my opinion, be acting wisely to co-operate in the spirit of the above invitation, not with a view to obtaining any exceptional advantages for any country or scheme, but to provide for the general protection and encouragement of all cables in Chinese waters.

With this view, it appears to me that it would be advisable to invite the co-operation, with the signatories of the protocol of January 27, of the representatives of all other nations having treaty relations with China, one of which, Japan, has an extensive system of land and submarine cables connecting with the lines of the Chinese coast, while others have connections through their colonies off the southern coast of this continent. To some extent it will naturally devolve upon the companies owning cables along the shores of China, and particularly the Great Northern Company, to take the initiative in measures for the protection of their property against foreign trespassers. They can test the willingness or the power of consuls to move in the matter by bringing formal complaints before them for any injurious acts committed by their respective nationals. Some precautionary and preventive measures could also be devised by cable-owners. It might be well, for instance, as Mr. Henderson has suggested to the superintendent of the Great Northern Telegraph Company at Amoy, to have those places where a cable is most exposed to accidents from vessels marked by lines of buoys indicating its locality. Should it be decided to take action on this suggestion, the Chinese authorities should be informed thereof, and if it appears that the general proclamations expected in pursuance of the Yam en’s instructions have not been issued in all the seaboard provinces, we should remind the Yamen of the omissions, and ask to have them supplied, failing the success of local applications by our consuls, which should first be made. It would have been better had the various consuls at each port conferred and acted jointly in this matter heretofore, and I would suggest that they be asked to do so hereafter whenever practicable. A joint consular application to a governor-general or other high official, to issue a friendly proclamation in a province where none has yet been posted, would hardly be denied. In conclusion, I would remark that, while the action of the Tsungli Yamen and of the provincial authorities, so far as reported, has been more favorable than, we expected at the outset, the policy initiated needs to be nursed and developed, and I am convinced that something like the measures suggested in this letter would be most useful.

Be pleased to receive, my dear colleague, the assurance of my high regard.