Wells Williams to Mr. Sheppard, March 11, 1874
Mr. Williams to Mr. Sheppard.
Sir: I have received three dispatches from Mr. A. Cornabé, United States vice-consul at Chefoo, dated 12th January, 28th February, and 2d March, all of them relating to the attack on Rev. H. Corbett, at Chi-mi, on the southern side of Shantung promontory, and detailing the action he had taken in procuring redress for this violence, and compensation for the property destroyed; he also incloses copies of the communications which have passed between him and the Taotai upon this matter, from which it is plain that the latter is disinclined to prosecute the affair to a satisfactory conclusion.
Under these circumstances I wish you would proceed to Chefoo and see what further steps can be taken to bring the affair to a conclusion according to the obligations of the treaty and justice. It seems from the papers here that the messenger sent to Chi-mi from Chefoo, and the district magistrate of that place, have given in statements to their superiors of the affair which are plainly distorted and imperfect, and designed to shield him from all culpability.
You will therefore find it necessary to get the evidence of the persons best acquainted with all the circumstances of the affair, so as to counteract these ex-parte reports. In asking for redress, the arrest and punishment of the ringleaders should be demanded, as well for the future security of foreigners going there, as for the maintenance of order. A careful list of the property should be made out which was stolen or destroyed, with its actual value, and compensation made to Mr. Corbett for his losses. When these two points are obtained, the district magistrate may well be made to issue a proclamation setting forth the freedom guaranteed to Christians and their teachers by treaty and imperial decree, to practice their faith without molestation.
I do not think it best for you to ask for any compensation for the losses of the native Christians, and it will probably be best to limit your action to that which concerns Mr. Corbett alone, and let the redress which may be given to him be admonition enough for the security it may afford to his native converts. They cannot fail to be benefited if his wrongs are redressed, and we have no such liberty of action in this respect that we can properly interfere in any direct way for native Chinese, and it is better to say nothing.
In regard to this case, it seems, from what I now know, that this popular rising was of such dimensions as to alarm the district magistrate, who told Mr. Corbett that he could not protect him, as the power in his hands was too weak. There was no direct attack on Mr. Corbett, who, escaping by night with his children, happily avoided the violence of the mob, which vented itself on his rooms. It will be difficult, perhaps, in such a case to fix the guilt on any individual. It is a question to be decided by the evidence whether the district magistrate did what he could to warn or protect him but he seems not to have been altogether silent and not at all inimical. The violence of a Chinese mob soon gets beyond the control of their local officials, and it is a question for us to consider how much this point is to be weighed in this case, and what degree of protection we are to expect. The case at Chi-mi differs from that at Yu-chan, in December, 1871, when Mr. Pierson was attacked, in that the latter was a simple assault with robbery, in which the populace sympathized very little.
I hope you will succeed in attaining the object for which you go to Che Foo. The further action of Mr. Corbett must depend on himself in a manner, but no force can be regularly employed to protect an American anywhere in the interior.
I have, &c.,