Mr. Denby to Mr. Foster.
Peking, November 3, 1892. (Received December 19.)
Sir: I have the honor to inform you that I had an interview at Tientsin, the 25th ultimo, with the Viceroy Li Hung-chang. I had no special business with him, but being at Tientsin I deemed it prudent to pay my respects to him.
After the usual inquiries about my family, as to my age, and other pleasant matters, he informed me that he would like to talk to me about public affairs. He then said that the United States had violated the treaty by passing the exclusion act. I asked him to designate wherein we had violated the treaty. He was unprepared for this question and could give no answer. I stated that China, by the treaty of 1880, had consented that the United States might regulate the residence of Chinese laborers in its territory and might, if it deemed necessary, exclude them. He had nothing to say except that the American commissioners had pulled the wool over the eyes of the yamên. I said it was rather late to make that objection. He said he wanted reciprocity and would treat the Americans as we treated the Chinese. I said that if he gave us reciprocal treatment, Americans would be able to go anywhere in China, to engage in all species of business, and would be as free as air; that there were 110,000 Chinese in the United States and but 1,250 [Page 135] Americans in China, and that any maltreatment of Americans in China would not conduce to the interest of the Chinese in America.
He desired me to ask you to have the exclusion act repealed. I said that the legislation of the United States was enacted by the two Houses of Congress, and that the Secretary of State could not control the members of these Houses, and as an executive officer I had no right to dictate to Congress what it should do. I said to him that he well knew that it was our settled policy to exclude Chinese laborers, and that we were following the example of China during all her history. I asked him what would happen if one hundred thousand American laborers were to go to Canton and were to propose to work for 10 or 15 cents a day, would China allow them to land?
The viceroy did not answer this question. He always passes by in silence what he can not reply to satisfactorily. He turned the subject by saying to me that if I went to Canton I would be insulted. I said I had been to Canton three times and nobody had ever insulted me. He said I was a very brave man. I said I had never injured a Chinaman, and I did not see why a Chinaman should want to injure me.
I then asked him why he did not people Manchuria and Mongolia and other outlying Chinese territory with his redundant population, instead of trying to force them on people who did not want them. He said that the Chinese emigrants went from the southern provinces where it was warm, and that northern climates did not suit them. I said that many of them went to Canada and to some of the Northern and Western States, where the weather was cold.
I said to the viceroy that the exclusion act was not well understood in China; that it was warranted by the treaty with China, and in its actual operation would be found to be beneficial to the Chinese laborer; that once possessed of a certificate the laborer could go where he pleased in our vast country, could engage in any kind of business, and would never be molested. The viceroy was not satisfied with this discussion, or refused to admit that he was.
I took pains to impress on him that in spite of our exclusion acts we were the best friends of China, and this fact was realized by the Government at Peking; that we have never made war on China; did not covet any of its territory; that all we wanted was peaceful and honorable trade and protection for our people in China, and there was no real reason why the relations between the two countries should not remain of the most friendly character.
I then took up the subject of the Chicago Exposition, and advised him to send a fleet to Hampton Roads in order to show the world the great progress that China had lately made in the creation of a modern navy. I found, however, that it was useless to argue this subject with him. He said he would not send a fleet, and that China would have no exhibition at Chicago, I expressed my regret at this irrational conclusion and used some argument to make him recede from it, but without avail.
He said, by way of excuse for his plainness of speech, that he and I were good friends; that he was anxious for me to remain in China, and that if we had not been so friendly he would not have spoken to me so freely.
The railways in China are under the control of an intelligent American, Mr. W. N. Pethick, and without intervention from me Americans are receiving and will continue to receive a fair share of employments and contracts.
I have, etc.,