of the burning of the American legation, Mr. Pruyn was instructed to demand of the government of the Tycoon the prompt payment of an indemnity, the exertion of diligence to discover and punish the incendiaries, the permanent reestablishment and guaranteed safety of the legation at Yeddo, and the full observance of the treaties-between the two countries. He was to employ the naval forces at his command for the protection of the legation and of American citizens under all circumstances, and to inform the government of the Tycoon that additional forces would be sent, as occasion should arise, to maintain the demands of the United States. Mr. Harris, min. to Japan, to Mr. Seward, Sec. of State, No. 28, July 9, 1861, Dip. Cor. 1861, 421; Mr. Seward, Sec. of State, to Mr. Pruyn, No. 2, Nov. 15, 1861, Dip. Cor. 1862, 817; same to same, No. 42, June 29, 1863, Dip. Cor. 1863, II. 1033; same to same, No. 43, July 7, 1863, id. 1037; same to same, No. 45, July 10, 1863, id. 1039; same to same, No. 46, Sept. 1, 1863, id. 1057; same to same, No. 47, Sept. 9, 1863, id. 1059. See, also, Mr. Seward, Sec. of State, to Mr. Welles, Sec. of Navy, July 14, 1863, 61 MS. Dom. Let. 204. As to the attack on the American merchant ship Pembroke by the Prince of Nagato, see Mr. Seward, Sec. of State, to Mr. Pruyn, No. 50, Oct. 3, 1863, Dip. Cor. 1863, II. 1060, acknowledging the receipt of Mr. Pruyn's despatches Nos. 48 and 49, of July 24, and No. 50, of July 25, 1863, printed in the same volume. In this instruction Mr. Seward said: "You will, in all cases, hold the claims of this government and of citizens of the United States distinct and separate from those of other governments and subjects of other powers. But this separation will not be expected to restrain you from acting with your colleagues, and giving them your moral support; and when there is need, with reference to common defence, or to save a common right, or secure a common object, just and lawful in itself, the naval forces of the United States will be expected to cooperate with those of the other Western powers." See further, as to the case of the Pembroke, supra, § 1093. As to building ships of war for Japan, see S. Ex. Doc. 33, 37 Cong. 3 sess. 5. AFFAIR OF SHIMONOSEKI. As the treaties were made by the Tycoon's government, they were not recognized by the partisans of the Mikado. Chief among these was the Prince of Chosu, ruler of the provinces of Sueoo and Nagato. He had possession of the fortifications commanding the straits of Shimonoseki, and also had with him the person of the Mikado, and, refusing to recognize the validity of the treaties concluded by the Tycoon, he closed the passage to the inland sea. At the request of the Tycoon's government, naval forces of the United States, Great Britain, France, and the Netherlands jointly proceeded to open the straits by force. On the 4th to the 8th of September, inclusive, 1864, they destroyed the batteries commanding the straits, blew up the magazines, threw the shot and shell into the sea, carried away seventy cannon, and obtained the unconditional surrender of the prince, with an agreement on his part to pay the expenses of the expedition. The ratification of the treaties by the Mikado and the firm establishment of the foreign policy of the Tycoon speedily followed. The government of the Tycoon, preferring to assume the expenses of the expedition, entered into a convention October 22, 1864, and agreed to pay to the governments of the United States, Great Britain, France, and Holland the sum of $3,000,000. It so happened that no vessel in the naval service of the United States then in Japanese waters was in a condition to take part in the expedition, and the steamer Takiang was chartered for the service and was manned with a crew of eighteen persons from the U. S. S. Jamestown, who, with her own crew of forty, made a crew of fifty-eight in all. The mode of dividing the indemnity between the four participating powers was discussed at Paris in 1865, and it was finally decided that, to mark the high estimate placed upon the united action of all the powers then represented in Japan, the indemnity should be divided among the four governments in equal shares, without regard to the actual material force contributed by each to the expedition. The proceedings of the treaty powers in this instance were not intended nor considered as an act of interference in the political affairs of Japan. Their object was the enforcement of treaty rights, with the approval of the government that granted them; and the effect which the expedition may have had on the fortunes of parties in Japan was purely incidental. In the subsequent revolution which led to the fall of the Shogunate and the restoration of the imperial authority under the Mikado, the foreign powers declared their neutrality. The only wish of the United States was for the establishment and maintenance of a strong central government by which the treaties might be enforced and the native autonomy preserved. S. Ex. Doc. 58, 41 Cong. 2 sess.; Dip. Cor. 1864, III. 553, 579, 581, 584. the convention of October 22, 1864, amounted to $785,000. The The following documents relate to the Japanese indemnity: H. Ex. Docs. As to the neutrality of the foreign powers in the war between the Tycoon As to the case of the Pembroke, see Reprisals, infra, § 1093. As to the Monitor claim, and the refusal of the United States further to press it, see For. Rel. 1888, II. 1068, 1069. As to claims against Japan, see S. Mis. Doc. 52, 40 Cong. 2 sess. As to recent events in Japan, 1868, see S. Ex. Doc. 65, 40 Cong. 2 sess. The diplomatic representative of the United States in Japan was instructed to confer with the representatives of the other powers, and, while treating the Japanese government with perfect respect and conciliation, to press upon it, with the concurrence of his colleagues, an application for the abrogation of the law which prohibited Christianity throughout the empire. Mr. Seward, Sec. of State, to Mr. Van Valkenburgh, No. 32, Oct. 7, 1867, See, also, same to same, No. 83, Oct. 5, 1868, Dip. Cor. 1868, I. 827. See, further, For Rel. 1870, 453-486, as to persecution of native 6. CONVENTION OF 1866, AND TREATY REVISION. § 850. On June 25, 1866, the representatives of the United States, France, Great Britain, and Holland signed with the Japanese government a convention for the modification of the tariff of import and export duties contained in the trade regulations annexed to the treaties of 1858. The new convention, which went into operation July 1, 1866, substituted specific for ad valorem duties. The plenipotentiaries acted on the assumption that the treaty, before going into effect, need not be ratified by their respective governments, but it was afterwards. laid before the United States Senate, which advised its ratification June 17, 1868. On February 29, 1872, an embassy from Japan arrived in Washington. Arrangements were made for its reception by the President at noon on Monday the 4th of March. The embassy afterwards visited Europe. Its principal object was to secure the revision of existing treaties. In this it was unsuccessful. September 2, 1874, Mr. Fish wrote: "The President is impressed with the importance of continued concert between the treaty powers in Japan, at least until after the revision of the treaties, and until the government of Japan shall have exhibited a degree of power and capacity to adopt and to enforce a system of jurisprudence, and of judicial administration, in harmony with that of the Christian powers, equal to their evident desire to be relieved from the enforced duties of exterritoriality." Mr. Fish, Sec. of State, to Mr. Nicholas Fish, chargé at Berlin, No. 703, A similar instruction was sent to the American minister at St. Peters- As to the reception of the Japanese embassy by the President in 1872, see Mr. Fish, Sec. of State, to Mr. Mori, March 2, 1872, MS. Notes to Japan, I. 13. The efforts of Japan to secure the revision of the treaties continued. According to the despatches of Mr. Bingham, American minister at Tokio, the chief desire of Japan from 1874 to 1878 was to regain control of her revenues. To that end Mr. Bingham always urged independent action on the part of the United States, and in proof of his contention that the United States should not deem itself precluded by the joint agreement of 1866 from so acting, he transmitted to the Department of State, in his No. 276 of October 8, 1875, a copy of a protocol entered into by the British and German governments with that of Japan in 1874 to settle the meaning of the term "iron, manufactured," in the agreement of 1866. Mr. Fish, who was then Secretary of State, took, however, a different view of the matter. In an instruction to Mr. Bingham, of March 9, 1876, he said: "It has been the inviolable policy of the United States to act in all oriental affairs in concert with the European powers. Nothing in the present case appears to call for an abandonment of that policy. On the contrary, in a matter so grave and important as the revision of all existing treaties with Japan, it would seem to be of the utmost importance that there should be earnest and hearty cooperation of all the treaty powers." He also thought that the English-German protocol did not alter the meaning of the agreement of 1866, and consequently was not relevant to the pending question. Mr. Evarts, Mr. Fish's successor, took a somewhat different view, both of the effect of the protocol and of the question of cooperation, and suggested independent negotiations with the Japanese minister at Washington. Subsequently, under instructions of the Department of State, Mr. Bingham signed on July 25, 1878, a commercial convention with Japan. By this convention, the ratifications of which were duly exchanged, the convention of June 25, 1866, was to be annulled and the stipulations of the treaty of 1858 pertaining to customs and trade were to cease to operate. It was provided, however, that the new convention should take effect only when Japan had concluded with all the other treaty powers new agreements of similar purport. As such agreements were not concluded, the convention of July 25, 1878, though designed to secure the recognition of Japan's autonomy in matters of trade and commerce, remained inoperative. Mr. Fish, Sec. of State, to Mr. Bingham, min. to Japan, No. 228, May 15, See the following despatches from Mr. Bingham: No. 276, Oct. 8, 1875; In his No. 973, Sept. 20, 1879, Mr. Bingham transmitted a confidential As to the exchange of the ratifications of the convention of May 17, 1880, A conference for the revision of the treaties met at Tokio in March, 1882. It was called to order by Sir Harry S. Parkes, British minister, who, in his opening speech, said that he begged to "welcome the minister of the United States and to assure him of the pleasure it afforded them to see him join their meeting, not only on account of the high regard they entertain for him personally, but also because his presence denoted, as they believed, the friendly desire of his government to act in concert with the powers." Mr. Bingham replied that he had been authorized to "participate in the deliberations of the conference, but in no wise to thereby commit the government of the United States to any action that may be taken." The Japanese government proposed to the conference not only the subject of tariff autonomy, but also that of judicial autonomy. The proposals on the latter subject embraced the idea of a probationary period. The conference reached no decisive result. One of its most striking aspects was the change in the situation that had occurred since the formation of the joint tariff convention of 1866. As has been seen, the signatories of that convention were the United States, France, Great Britain, and the Netherlands. Since that time, H. Doc. 551-vol 5-48 |