to, and it is confidently believed that the establishment of this consulate will also contribute to further develop American trade with this rich section of the Chinese Empire.” Report of Mr. Olney, Sec. of State, to the President, Dec. 7, 1896, For. August 23, 1896, the Tsung-li yamên notified Mr. Denby that, by virtue For the text of the treaty of peace between China and Japan, signed at Mr. Conger, in his No. 208, June 2, 1899, reported that Nanking had been (For. "The Department's instruction to you (No. 1502, of the 16th ultimo) acknowledged the receipt of your dispatch No. 2794, of the 30th of August last, concerning the right of an American citizen to establish business quarters in the city of Hangchow outside of the limits of foreign concessions, and acquiesced in your conclusion, that in view of the attitude of the other powers on the question you would refrain from further insistence upon such rights in behalf of American citizens unless the diplomatic body should unite in a demand for unrestricted residence in cities open to trade, or unless the right of residence should be exercised by citizens of other powers. "The circumstances of the question which had regard to the right of residence at Soochow and Hangchow, two of the cities recently opened to foreign residence under the treaty of Shimonoseki, of April 17, 1895 (printed in Foreign Relations, 1895, pp. 200–203), had been presented in your previous dispatches, Nos. 2785, 2787, and 2789, and were made the occasion of an exhaustive examination by the Solicitor of this Department, with the conclusion that the circumstances would not warrant insistence by this government upon a contention for the unrestricted residence of American citizens outside of those foreign concessions, unless the privilege claimed by them be claimed for and conceded to the subjects of Japan or of other nations, in which event this government would be in a position to claim it under the operation of the most-favored-nation clause." Mr. Sherman, Sec. of State, to Mr. Denby, min, to China, Nov. 30, 1897, "The purpose of the neutral powers is primarily the protection of their own interests at the several treaty ports. The foreign settlements at the open ports are singularly abnormal growths. Under no one flag, they are under the protection of all. In whatever concerns their trade, their shipping, and their vested interests, they are distinctively foreign to the administrative system of China. "Hence, as you have lately learned, when the possible closing of Canton by the Chinese as a measure of protection against threatened French aggression was seriously contemplated, the other treaty powers felt justified in expecting of France a formal declaration of purpose not to attack Canton. The view of the United States, as expressed to Great Britain, was that neither China nor France had the right to close the treaty ports, but that if they should be attacked by France, China could not be denied a right of defense, to be availed of in any manner legitimate to a state of war." Mr. Frelinghuysen, Sec. of State, to Mr. Young, No. 239, Mar. 21, 1884, See, to the same effect, same to same, Jan. 22, 1884, id. III. 530. During the war that ensued between France and China in 1884, the naval commanders of the neutral powers, acting in conformity with an arrangement made between those powers in 1883 with a view to protect their interests in the event of hostilities, cooperated for the protection of neutral interests in the treaty ports. To this end the naval commanders entered into a joint agreement as to the measures to be pursued. The agreement was a temporary expedient, and ceased on the return of peace. Mr. Frelinghuysen, Sec. of State, to Mr. West, British min., July 17, 1884, See Mr. Gresham, Sec. of State, to Sir J. Pauncefote, Dec. 19, 1894, MS. "In the summer of 1884 the French attacked and destroyed the Chinese fleet and the Maimoi arsenal at Pagoda anchorage, nine miles below Foochow, on the Min River, but the city was not occupied, the French forces leaving the river a few days after the fight. There are. however, on record several cases of occupation of treaty ports of China by foreign troops, notably the occupation of Canton by the Anglo-French forces from 1857 to 1861 and that of Shanghai by the British from 1860 to 1866." Mr. Uhl, Act. Sec. of State, to Sec, of Navy, May 24, 1895, 202 MS. Dom. "The attitude of the United States towards China, as towards the other countries of Eastern Asia, has been consistently a friendly one. We have not attempted to impose our views upon them by force, but have preferred to trust to frank and friendly argument, limiting our demands to what we might with justice ask, and supporting them with frank argument and appeals to the sense of justice of the imperial government; we have been met in a like amicable spirit, and it is believed that the result has been for the advantages of both the nations. As a result of this policy, citizens of the United States have established themselves in the open ports of China, have there engaged in legitimate and useful occupations, benefiting China no less than themselves, and the United States have there invested their capital and the fruits of their labor, and have done all this under the express protection of wise treaty provisions binding upon the imperial government and all Chinese officials. The United States can not assent at this late day to a return to the ancient exclusive system, which will involve destruction of the property of their citizens and abrogation of their vested rights." Mr. Frelinghuysen, Sec. of State, to Mr. Young, Feb. 26, 1883, MS. Inst. At the instance of the Tsung-li yamên, Mr. Denby in 1896 issued stringent By a note of Aug. 7, 1903, Prince Ch'ing informed the dean of the diplomatic corps that as Peking was not a treaty port, foreign merchants would not in future be permitted to buy property there for dwellings or to establish places of business there, the government thus returning to the old regulations, which, after the occupation of the city by the allies in 1900, were in certain cases not observed. The United States made no reply to the note, hoping thus to leave the matter open for discussion as events might require. For. Rel. 1903, 119-122. 11. LEASES TO EUROPEAN POWERS, § 807. March 9, 1898, Mr. Denby, United States minister at Peking, transmitted to this government a translation of a memorial of the Tsungli yamên to the Throne in relation to the demands made by Germany in connection with the killing of two German missionaries in the province of Shantung, and to the seizure of Kiaochou. The memorial concludes as follows: "Considering that there has never been any disagreement existing between China and Germany, and that the German government came to the assistance of China in securing the evacuation of the Liao-tung Peninsula by the Japanese for which she has never been recompensed; and further, as England, France, and Russia have taken maritime ports in the East, and as Germany has no port as a rendezvous for her vessels and for a coaling station, her position is not equal to the other great powers. Your memorialists have on several occasions received notes and telegrams from Hsu Ching Cheng, Chinese minister to Germany, stating that Kiaochou is the place that Germany has been longing for, hence in February of last year your memorialists asked the sanction of Your Majesty to the building of a dock there. The question of devising some arrangements was therefore taken in hand. In November last the missionary case occurred, and Your Majesty issued a decree ordering Li Ping Heng to cause the arrest of the murderers. That the Germans were planning to get a maritime port, Your Majesty had received due notice of. As a result of the murder of the two missionaries the German vessels of war seized Kiaochou and sent detachments of troops on shore. They went straight to the district city of Chi Mo for the purpose of making observations. The German Emperor has deputed his brother to come to China in command of some vessels of war, and it is impossible to ascertain his purpose. "The German minister submitted in connection with the missionary case six demands which he insisted should be complied with on the part of China, but he would not say a word as to whether Germany would evacuate Kiaochou. Your memorialists corresponded and argued the question with the German minister. He finally stated that Germany wished to lease Kiaochou and territory inland, extending 100 li, upon the same conditions as the settlements and concessions at the ports, the rent to be paid annually; that the territory should be self-governing, i. e., under Germany, but still belong to China. He sent a communication on the question of leasing this territory, containing five articles, which in the general had for their object the preservation of friendly relations between the two countries. Your memorialists, after due consideration of the terms proposed, decided that the territory should be leased for a period of ninety-nine years. the boundary line inland to be fixed by officials duly appointed for the purpose by the two governments, and to extend 100 li round on all sides. "Chinese vessels of war and merchant vessels can enter and leave Kiaochou at pleasure. "As there are dangerous sandbanks around the islands outside of Kiaochou, permission is granted Germany to lay bouys. No dues shall be levied on Chinese naval and merchant vessels on entering and leaving port. Should Germany wish to hand over Kiaochou to China, China agrees to pay Germany the money she has expended on the place and China will select another suitable port for Germany. This refers to Kiaochou being handed over to China before the expiry of the lease. It is understood that during the term of the lease Germany shall not interfere or remove any of the Chinese lekin stations now established; these shall remain where they are located. Germany is to withdraw her troops stationed outside of the 100-li limit. As to the amount of rent to be paid by Germany, your memorialists will consider this question with the German minister, so that there may be no misunderstanding. "Your memorialists submit the foregoing to Your Majesty and reverently await your decision in the premises. "Your memorialists would further state that they have written to the governor of Shantung, so that he may devise all necessary arrangements. Germany commenced all this trouble, and many of the foreign powers have shown a desire to interfere in the matter. "The Chinese and foreign papers and telegrams have all contained comments on it, and your memorialists decided that China and Germany should alone discuss and decide the questions at stake, and that foreign powers should not be allowed to mediate in the matter, as it is certainly known that foreign powers are not sincere in their purpose to come to China's assistance in the present emergency; it is in appearance only. "China has suffered a great deal, and there is just a possibility that foreign powers in their contest with each other are merely making China a battlefield, which renders it most difficult for her to do anything. "The present affairs should therefore be brought to a speedy termination." For. Rel. 1898, 187, 189. The convention between the German Empire and China, signed at Peking, March 6, 1898, in conformity with the foregoing memorial is given in Rockhill's Treaties and Conventions with and concerning China and Korea, 46, from Das Staatsarchiv, vol. 61, No. 11518. The convention declares that "the incidents connected with the mission in the prefecture of Tsao-chau-foo, in Shantung, being now closed, the Imperial Chinese Government consider it advisable to give a special proof of their grateful appreciation of the friendship shown to them by Germany." It then concedes, subject to China's "rights of sovereignty,” in “a zone of 50 kilom. (100 Chinese li) surrounding the Bay of Kiao-chau at high water," the "free passage of German troops" at any time. China also agrees "to abstain from taking any measures, or issuing any ordinances therein, without the previous consent of the German Government," while reserving "the right to station troops" there," in agreement with the German Government, and to take other military measures." China also "cedes to Ger |