Report of committee in the Great Northern Telegraph Company matter., September 10, 1873
Report of committee in the Great Northern Telegraph Company matter.
In pursuance of a resolution passed at a meeting of the consular body held at the United States consulate-general on the 27th of August, 1873, to the effect that Messrs. Seward, Johnson and Medhurst should seek an interview with the Taotai for the purpose of ascertaining his actual views in respect to the telegraphic communication lately opened between Woosung and Shanghai, Messrs. Seward and Mednurst called upon the Tautai on the 4th of September, 1873.
The Tautai was attended by Chăn, the mixed-court magistrate, who took an active part in the conversation.
Messrs. Seward and Medhurst directed their efforts toward discovering how far the objections raised by the Taotai in his official letter were positive as against the institution of telegraphs generally, or were only officially put forward with the object of setting himself right with his superiors in respect to the particular line objected to.
The Taotai disclaimed any desire to oppose telegraphy in general. He referred to the so-called agreement with Mr. Wade, and declared it to be the sole ground of his objection. He was bound, he said, in duty, as well as for his own sake, to see that the understanding come to by the Tsung-li Yamun was strictly acted upon; and if the consuls could only arrange so that the views of the telegraphic company were carried out in accordance therewith, he would be satisfied. He was even prepared, he said, to stretch a point, if the consuls would on their part defer to his objection.
He admitted the existence of other lines in the settlements, but he argued that these did not afford any precedents, seeing that they were within the boundaries allotted to foreigners, and had not been made the subject of agreement. It was urged that the line objected to was upon property owned by foreigners, and in no way prejudiced any rights, private or public. But he could or would not see how this affected the question; an understanding had been come to, and it could not be departed from by the one side without the consent of the other. It was then suggested that, as he had performed his duty by protesting, he might rest satisfied with the mere protest; but this he declined to admit. His duty, he pleaded, extended to seeing that his protest was effectual, otherwise he could not set himself right with his superiors. It was then argued that the understanding, if any, had long ago been broken through by previous Taotais; for, as a matter of fact, the line had been landed from the very first, and run into the company’s premises, in Nanking road. The breach of agreement having thus been condoned, it was too late now to raise objections. To this he replied, that any failure of duty on the part of his predecessors could afford no excuse for his following in their footsteps. The vast utility of telegraphy, as an institution, was also enlarged upon, but without effect; the Taotai entirely admitting its benefits to the public at large, but reverting to the necessity of keeping faith in the matter of the particular agreement entered into by the Tsung-li Yamun.
On the whole, Messrs. Seward and Medhurst were compelled to come to the conclusion that the Taotai had no personal objection to the innovations which have been ventured upon by the Great Northern Telegraph Company, but that he had been driven by the public attention which had been unfortunately drawn to the line to enter his protest against it. That to this protest the Tautai is likely to adhere pertinaciously, and that it can only be met by the consuls with an explanation, so prepared as to free the Tautai from responsibility, while it carries conviction to the superior authorities, to whom he is responsible.
With this impression the consuls for the United States, Denmark, and Great Britain have drafted a dispatch, which they propose should be addressed to the Tautai, in reply to his communication, and they recommend it for the adoption of their colleagues.
- W. M. MEDHURST.
- F. B. JOHNSON.
- G. F. SEWARD.