[Untitled], March 2, 1868

[Untitled]

Taki Tensaboro, a retainer of Hiki Tatewaki, a retainer of Matsdaira Bizennokami, being an officer in command of armed troops in the service of his Majesty the Mikado of Japan, such detachment of troops numbering not less than one hundred and fifty, while marching through the foreign concession at Hiogo (Kobé) on the 4th day of February, 1868, wantonly and without provocation dismounted from his horse, and ordered his troops to fire with their rifles upon the unarmed, defenceless, and unsuspecting foreigners then in the streets, and upon the concession ground.

The order was immmediately obeyed, and without warning a rapid fire was opened by his men upon all the foreign residents and representatives, nearly fifty of whom were exposed to this savage and lawless attack for the space of five minutes and more. Two French marines were wounded by spears in the hands of Japanese, while an American sailor was struck down in the act of running from them, by a rifle bullet; two citizens, in attempting to remove this wounded man, were deliberately fired at several times at short range.

This was an indignity offered to the foreign powers, whose flags were floating in plain view, and at which some of the balls were evidently directed. It was a breach of international law—an infringement of the most sacred treaty obligations, first guaranteed by the Tycoon and then ratified by the Mikado, and a violation of the personal rights and privileges of those foreign representatives, citizens, and subjects who were exposed upon this occasion to the murderous attack.

All this was done by an officer in the service of the Mikado, the supreme power in Japan.

After mature deliberation, the foreign representatives unanimously demanded a reparation, which they believed to be only commensurate with the acts: an ample apology from the government of the Mikado to the respective governments who had thus been outraged, and the capital punishment of the officer who had directed it.

This demand was not made in a vindictive spirit, but with the object of impressing upon the Mikado, his government, and the whole people of Japan, the fact that it is no trifling matter to violate treaty obligations and international law, and that they could not with impunity thus insult the governments which were here represented.

The Mikado answered that the demand was reasonable and should be carried out.

No extenuating circumstances have been offered upon the part of Taki Zensaboro— he has expressed no regrets and tendered no apology.

The offender was ordered to Kioto, was judicially tried according to the laws of Japan, and by a court having competent jurisdiction, upon the evidence given, was found guilty, and properly sentenced to the punishment awarded to the offence of which he was so convicted.

There is no error in the proceedings, and there is no complaint that the punishment is excessive. On the other hand, we are officially informed that the judgment is warranted by the law and the evidence, that the sentence is just and right, and the punishment such as is usual for the commission of like offences. The time and place of the execution of that sentence is fixed, and the question now is, shall we request the Mikado to reprieve the man?

Were it a matter personal to myself, where my own feelings and interests were alone concerned, I should say yes. I do not desire, as an individual, this man’s execution. But I am not acting for myself alone. My government and my countrymen have rights, and I am here to protect them. What I believe to be a stern duty, compels me, after serious and careful deliberation, to say no.

I think it would be clemency thrown away, humanity wasted. From my limited knowledge of Japanese character, I believe such an application on our part would be looked upon by them as an indication of weakness and fear, and the motives which induced the act would not only be misunderstood, but misrepresented. Reprieve him, and on the next occasion of the passage of troops through this town, there may be a recurrence of the outrage.

It will be said and believed throughout Japan that the foreign representatives dare not require the punishment of a Japanese, awarded by their courts of justice, and the murder of foreigners will occur with impunity. The courts themselves, seeing what they will denominate our weakness and vacillation, will be remiss in their efforts to detect, try, and properly punish criminals of this character.

The same reasons which induced me to unite in the demand for the capital punishment of this offender are still active in my mind. It will demonstrate to us that the Mikado’s government is a reality, that it is a substantial government, that it can and will punish the infraction of treaty stipulations and breaches of international law, and that it desires to strengthen its friendly relations with the foreign treaty powers.

In my view, our only true safety consists in making just demands and standing to them. Japanese character is not that of a Christian country. In yielding one iota from what we believe to be right, and what has been pronounced reasonable by the Mikado, we lose our vantage ground, and we are again plunged into a new sea of difficulties.

Let us be just and firm.

Very respectfully,