Frederick F. Low to Frederick F. Low, March 20, 1871

Mr. Low to Mr. Fish.

Sir: In my No. 52, of February 20, reference was made to a communication I had received from the Foreign Office in relation to the missionary question. I have now the honor to inclose a translation of that document, together with my reply. The memorandum was drawn up by Wantsiang, one of the oldest and by far the ablest of all the Chinese ministers. He has had more to do with, and therefore understands better, the actual relations of China with foreign nations, than any of his colleagues, and is, I feel sure, anxious to prevent disturbances that may lead to international troubles. That he is sincere in his professed anxiety about the future, no one well acquainted with the real condition of affairs here will question; although it is not impossible that his fears are overstated for the effect such declarations may exert upon the foreign legations, and thus tend to bring about some kind of a compromise which will be useful in the future management of the missionary matter. My opinion that these apprehensions of future danger are genuine, and that this paper is not put forth at this time simply to try and protect themselves against further demands that the French government may make in the treaty revision which is soon to take place, is confirmed by the fact that about two years ago, this same Chinese minister addressed a private note of a similar character to the British minister. A copy of that note I have just now obtained, a translation of which I beg to send herewith. The answer of Her Majesty’s minister to the note I am not able to give, as it was made verbally, and not in writing. A careful reading of the memorandum clearly proves that the great, if not only, cause of complaint against the missionaries, comes from the action of the Roman Catholic priests and the native Christians of that faith; although the rules proposed for the government of missionaries apply equally to Protestants and Catholics. What reply to make, in view of the complication of the question, and the circumstances with which it was surrounded, did not seem quite clear. I would have preferred to have taken the President’s instructions before sending an answer, could they have been obtained within any reasonable time. To simply acknowledge the receipt of their note, and say that instructions had been asked for, would involve a delay of four or five months, and this delay would perhaps raise a hope, which could not be otherwise than illusive, that some at least of their propositions would prove acceptable. To reply and admit what I really believe to be true, that the Chinese have some ground of complaint, without being able to suggest a practicable remedy, would only do harm, and render the situation still more insecure; to simply say that, as their complaints are against the Roman Catholics, it is a matter which concerns the French alone, with which other nations have nothing to do, would have the effect to defeat what the other treaty powers have been anxious to bring about, viz, that when the Chinese have difficulties with one foreign nation, which are likely to involve all in trouble, they should frankly state their case, to be judged of by all, and in this way bring the force of an enlightened public opinion to bear upon the action of any government that attempts to oppress or deal unfairly. After carefully considering the whole question in all its bearings, I deemed it my duty to reply, without waiting for specific instructions. This I have done at some length, reviewing somewhat in detail the several points presented, reasserting the intention of the Government of the United States to claim for all its citizens entire exemption from the operation of Chinese law, and disclaiming any intention of screening natives from the obligations which they are under to their own laws and officials, pointing out the impracticability of many of the proposed rules, and suggesting personal discussion of this as well as all other matters of dispute. Had they stated their complaints in brief, without circumlocution, and stripped of all useless verbiage, they would have charged that the Roman Catholic missionaries, when residing away from the open ports, claim to occupy a semi-official position, which places them on an equality with the provincial officer; that they deny the authority of the Chinese officials over native Christians, which practically removes this class from the jurisdiction of their own rulers; that their action in this regard shields the native Christians from the penalties of the law, and thus holds out inducements for the lawless to join the Catholic church, which is largely taken advantage of; that orphan asylums are filled with children, by the use of improper means, against the will of the people; and when parents, guardians, and friends visit these institutions for the purpose of reclaiming children, their requests for examination and restitution are denied; and lastly, that the French government, while it does not claim for its missionaries any rights of this nature by virtue of treaty, its agents and representatives wink at these unlawful acts, and secretly uphold the missionaries. If the opinions of the Chinese officials could be stated in a direct and courageous way, instead of proposing rules for the governance of missionaries, they would demand a revision of the treaties by which the right of exterritoriality would be withdrawn from missionaries when they go beyond the places open to trade where foreign consuls reside. This is really what they mean, although they do not state it specifically.

I do not believe, and therefore I cannot affirm, that all the complaints made against Catholic missionaries are founded in truth, reason, or justice; at the same time, I believe that there is foundation for some of their charges. My opinions, as expressed in former dispatches touching this matter, are confirmed by further investigation. But while I see clearly the difficulties and dangers, candor compels me to say that the remedy seems to lie outside and beyond the scope of affirmative diplomatic action. Neither will sound policy, nor the moral and religious sentiments of Christian nations, sanction any retrogression, although trade and commerce might be promoted thereby; nor will the dictates of humanity permit the renunciation of the right for all foreigners that they shall be governed and punished by their own laws. But while insisting firmly upon these rights, all foreign governments should see to it that no claim be made by their officers, agents, or subjects, for an extension of their laws over the Chinese. They should also see that their treaties are honestly and fairly construed, claiming no rights which come of fraud, and conceding nothing that a just construction will grant. That a strict non-interference between native Christians and their rulers will subject the former to persecutions is possible, and even probable; but whether this course will not in the end subserve the cause the missionaries are laboring to promote better than the opposite one, is the question. I think it will. One has the sanction of treaty and law; the other is in violation of both. The remedy, so far as it lies in the power of foreign governments, is with France alone; and it behooves that power, for the sake of its own interests, as well as for the welfare of all foreign residents, to remove all just causes of complaint of the Chinese. Whether this can reasonably be expected depends upon the form and composition of the new government of France, and also upon the character of the representative which that government may send here.

Trusting that my action, as herein detailed, may meet with the approval of the President,

I have, &c.,

[Inclosures.]

No. 1. Note and memorandum from Wân-tsiang and Shin-kwei-fan to Frederick F. Low, February 13, 1871.

No. 2. Mr. Low’s reply.

No. 3. Note from Wân-tsiang to Sir Rutherford Alcock, late British Minister to China, June 26, 1869.

[Inclosure No. 3.—Dispatch No. 56.]

The writer again addresses. [Sir R. Alcock.]

The object of foreigners who enter the interior to propagate their doctrines is the exhortation of men to virtue. But among their converts there are evil-disposed and well-disposed. [The latter,] relying on their creed as a sort of magic spell which shall protect them, by their conduct bring the preaching of Christianity into such discredit that [the people] are unwilling to allow the missionary to remain in any place that he goes to. Add to this that the missionary only thinks of the number of converts he can make; he makes no inquiry into private character, but receives and enrols all [who come.] Having entered the [Christian] society, the good are bent, no doubt, on being good; but on the other hand, the evil make [their religion] a pretext for defrauding and oppressing unoffending people, till, by degrees, indignation and rage reach a point at which the relations of the two parties become as those of fire and water. At the present time, as the British minister must doubtless be well aware, case after case of murder has occurred, the consequence of feuds between Christians and non-Christians. Although the creeds of the various foreign countries differ in their origin and development from each other, the natives of China are unable to see the distinction between them. In their eyes all [teachers of religion] are “missionaries from the west,” and directly they hear a lying story [about any of these missionaries,] without making further and minute inquiry [into its truth] they rise in a body to molest him.

The Yang-chow affair is plain evidence or this. Now, if no preventive measures be taken, some great catastrophe will inevitably arise.

Regulations ought, therefore, to be drawn up with such care as shall enable them to protect native Christians from making their religion a pretext for extorting money from honest people, or the non-Christians from taking advantage of their numerical superiority to defraud and oppress the Christians, which shall, besides, bring missionaries, even as the priests of the Buddhist and Taoist sects, under the jurisdiction of the local authorities.

Seeing that missionaries wish to reside in China, and that their doctrines may gradually be propagated far and wide, they cannot wish the Chinese to look upon them as differing from themselves. They ought, therefore, to put themselves on the same footing as Chinese subjects. Buddhism is also a creed of western origin, but the reason why its followers have so long been at peace with the Chinese, each party adhering to his own religion, is this: that although there is a difference of religion, the propagators of this creed are, as well as the others, under the control of the local authorities; and so in Confucianism, the system most esteemed in China, when such men as Chin-Shih and Hau-lin, (those who have taken the highest degrees,) after having filled official positions, return home or become the heads of schools, they become subordinate, as they were before [they took office,] to the local authorities. This is always the rule. At the present time foreign missionaries as a general rule adopt the Chinese dress, but they do not [at the same time] submit to Chinese law. They thus begin by holding themselves as outside, [the pale of the law,] and show to others that they are not to be treated as ordinary people; and the native Christians go further. They defraud and oppress ordinary subjects of the country, or withstand and disobey the authorities. [Such being the case,] it is not to be wondered at that men become indignant, and that surprise is everywhere manifested.

But let only this change be made, viz, that [missionaries] be placed under the control of the local authorities, (who must not be allowed to be vexatious in their treatment of them,) and the result will be that Christians and non-Christians will be placed on a just level vis-à-vis each other, and no trouble will arise from unexpected sources.

The missionary question moreover gravely affects the whole question of commercial relations. Such measures must, therefore, be devised in time that shall insure the maintenance of everlasting and sincere friendship.

The writer hopes for a reply.