James Burrill Angell to Walker Blaine, August 18, 1881

No. 173. Mr. Angell to Mr. Blaine.

Sir: In my No. 186, I inclosed a copy of a communication to Prince Kung, stating, in compliance with the request of the ministers of the foreign office, my objections to the proposed concessions to the Northern Telegraph Company. That communication was sent in on July 17.

Having occasion to visit the foreign office on July 29 on other business, I took occasion to ask if they had received from the viceroy any reply to my communication which they had forwarded to him. They said they had, and that there was no intention of preventing the landing of a cable from America. When I asked whether there would be any obstacle to landing a cable which should touch at Japan, they hesitated, but expressed the opinion that the viceroy would arrange for that in some way. They promised to send me a paper upon the subject.

After waiting more than a week, I sent Mr. Taylor, acting interpreter, to inquire when I could expect the promised paper and to explain my desire for it by assuring them of the profound interest my government feels on the subject. The next day I received the communication, a copy of which I inclose.

I think you, will agree with me in the opinion that it is a feeble, shuffling evasive, and entirely unsatisfactory document. Nothing could be more unworthy of the viceroy’s vigorous mind than the passage extracted from his letter.

I may properly say in this connection that while awaiting this reply from the Tsung-li Yamên, I had the statement from one of the telegraph company’s officers that the Tsung-li Yamên assented to the monopoly scheme before the viceroy entered into it. They assured me at the outset that the viceroy made the arrangement without consulting them. I am sorry to believe that there has been a deal of prevarication somewhere in this business.

Deeming it desirable to commit the ministers on paper to whatever they are willing to promise, I addressed to Prince Kung a series of questions, which I inclose. A reply, which I inclose, was sent me on the 14th inst.

The whole agreement for which I had asked was not sent to me, but only the second article, which the viceroy said he feared had been mistranslated. When I say that the article was exactly as I had it in my copy, further comment on this part of the transaction seems unnecessary.

My question whether the agreement has received imperial sanction is evaded, but I am informed that the viceroy has sanctioned it.

The answers to my third and fourth questions amount to this, that when an American company wishes to lay a line from America to China, “an arrangement” can be made for the line, but the foreign office cannot inform me what that arrangement is to be.

My question as to whether if the viceroy Li promises to make an arrangement for the American cable, his successor will be bound by the promise in case of the viceroy’s death—a question which the prince criticises—was asked because all through our interviews and correspondence the ministers have carried the idea that Li Hung Chang had managed the business with the Northern Telegraph Company, and would see to it in some way that a door was left open for an American cable to enter China. As the language used about “an arrangement” has been so vague, it is quite possible that a successor of Li Hung Chang might not consider himself so bound by these indefinite promises as to overcome any special difficulties in order to accommodate us.

On a visit to the Tsung-li Yamên on the 16th, I asked whether the “arrangement,” which was to be made for the American cable, contemplated the payment of money to the Northern Telegraph Company. The ministers (their excellencies Mao, Wang, Ch’ung Li, and Hsia being present) very emphatically assured me that it did not. They reiterated the assurance that the viceroy would complete the arrangement whenever the American company should be ready.

I told them that the plan was a less generous one than I had expected from this govermnent, but that without pursuing the discussion of the subject further at present, I should report to my government.

In this interview, as in previous interviews, the ministers sought to convey the impression that the whole of this telegraph business is in the hands of the viceroy, Li Hung Chang. No doubt this is substantially true, and although the present adjustment (if it can be so called) of the question is not what we could wish, it is probable that when an American company is ready to lay a cable the viceroy will enable the company to land and work the wire without too onerous conditions.

Though the results of my labors on this subject are far from satisfactory, I trust it will prove that my efforts have not been altogether in vain, and that my course will meet the approval of the Department.

I have, &c.,