The other two conspirators condemned to death await their execution in prison, carefully guarded, which will be carried out, according to Chinese customs, early in the autumn, the exact date of which will be notified to me by the taotai. I have, etc., A. C. JONES. No. 91.] Mr. Rockhill to Mr. Jones. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, SIR: In acknowledging the receipt of your dispatch No. 277, of August 29 last, relative to the Kiangyin riot, you are informed that the Department expects that you will see that the magistrate at Kiangyin is dismissed promptly from office as promised and that a proclamation is posted throughout Kiangyin stating the grounds of his dismissal. You should ascertain that this has actually been done, not relying upon any vague rumor. I am, etc., W. W. ROCKHILL, No. 2613.] Mr. Denby to Mr. Olney. LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES, Peking, October 13, 1896. (Received Nov. 30.) SIR: I have the honor to make the following report touching the case of one Chiang Hsu-chu: This man was one of the persons who was charged with exhuming a dead body and reburying it in the American missionary premises at Kiangyin. This act caused the riot at that place last spring. The missionaries claim that Chiang is innocent, and that the confession made by him of his guilt was wrested by torture, and individual missionaries and the Presbyterian convention assembled at Shanghai have asked this legation to intercede in the man's favor. His guilt or innocence has no particular bearing on the matter now presented to your consideration, but it is proper to state that the Chinese magistrate who tried Chiang denies utterly that he was tortured, and eports officially that his confession was voluntary. Chiang was tried at Kiangyin and found guilty and sentenced to be strangled to death. The 4th instant I received from the consul-general the following telegram: Chiang (written Tsiang) now being held before criminal judge Soochow, in my district. Should I ask to be present? I answered as follows the 4th instant: If Tsiang's trial concerns outrage on American, attend it. Subsequent telegrams from the consul-general asked that orders be issued delaying the trial until he could arrive, and directing the provincial judge to allow him to be present. I addressed the Yamên in writing on the subject, and on the 9th instant had a personal interview with them of nearly three hours' duration, in which the whole matter was discussed. I claimed that under the third clause of section 3 of the Chefoo convention I had the right to be represented at the trial of Chiang. This clause reads as follows: It is agreed that whenever a crime is committed affecting the person or property of a British subject, whether in the interior or at the open ports, the British minister shall be free to send officers to the spot to be present at the investigation. The Yamên claimed that Chiang's case went before the provincial judge for revision simply; that from him it would go to the board of punishments and thence to the Throne; that the "investigation" was had at Kiangyin; that Chiang was tried for the commission of a erime against Chinese law, and the Americans had no interest in the proposed revision; and they refused to allow the consul-general to be present. I inclose a translation of a communication presenting the views of the Yamên more in detail. * I have, etc., CHARLES DENBY. [Inclosure in No. 2613.-Translation.] The Tsung-li Yamên to Mr. Denby. PEKING, October 10, 1896. YOUR EXCELLENCY: At the interview your excellency had at the Yamên on the 8th instant, you stated that under the Chefoo convention the United States consul-general had a right to go to Soochow to be present at the trial of the Kiangyin missionary case. The case was thoroughly discussed, but the Yamên could not carry out your excellency's views. Your excellency held to the views you had expressed. The Yamên now begs to explain to your excellency the reason why your request can not be entertained. The Chefoo convention reads: It is further understood that so long as the laws of the two countries differ from each other, there can be but one principle to guide judicial proceedings in mixed cases in China, namely, that the case is tried by the official of the defendant's nationality merely attending to watch the proceedings in the interest of justice. If the officer so attending be dissatisfied with the proceedings, it will be in his power to protest against them in detail. The law administered will be the law of the nationality of the officer trying the case. The intent of the above clause is to provide that in international cases the officials of both the plaintiffs' and defendants' nationality may attend court to watch the proceedings; but in this case Chiang Hsu-chu and the other criminals were guilty of exhuming a corpse, which they buried in the missionary premises for the purpose of causing trouble. The local officials have pronounced judgment upon them in accordance with the statutes of China, and have not shown any bias or been ungrateful to the missionaries. The indemnity claimed has also been paid and the missionaries have agreed that the case be closed. The consul has also considered the case as settled and has made no objection to the terms of the settlement. It must be borne in mind that the judgment rendered has been in accordance with the laws of China. The request of the missionaries that clemency be shown to Mr. Chiang can not be entertained by the Yamên. Mr. Chiang was a neighbor of the missionaries, and he, in league with Huan Chi-yao, arranged the plot to exhume the corpse of the female child of the family of Yuan and bury it in the rear courtyard of Mr. Haden's missionary premises, their idea being to extort money from FR 96-6 him. Their action resulted in the plundering and destruction of the missionary premises. It may be observed that there are cases of an international nature where the punishment of criminals would have been more severe, i. e., by decapitation. The local officials have decided this case in accordance with the statutes of China. According to the statutes of China, the principal offender guilty of exhuming a corpse suffers the death penalty by decapitation; an accessory by strangulation. Chiang Hsu-chu admitted that he had arranged a plot to injure the missionaries by burying the corpse in their compound, and the punishment pronounced that he should suffer death by strangulation is just and proper. The missionaries now come forward and, relying upon one-sided statements made by the women of Chiang's family, say that the magistrate had decided the case unjustly. The taotai at Chinkiang, Mr. Lu, tried the case and the prisoner admitted his guilt, as he did in the lower court. Judgment has therefore been pronounced upon him, and the urgent request that the consul-general should attend court and watch the proceedings is one which the Yamên can not comply with. This case being sent to the provincial judge merely means that that officer is to look over the evidence. It does not necessarily mean that a new trial is to take place. It is for the board of punishments to decide at the autumnal assize as to the real facts of the case and as to whether there should be a postponement of the execution. The provincial judge can not determine this question. It makes no difference what may be the nature of a Chinese case, it must be determined by Chinese law, and there is no need for a consul to watch the proceedings. There would be no advantage to be derived from it. Hence, the Yamên sees no reason why the consul-general should be present to watch the proceedings. The Yamên would observe that the best relations have always existed between the United States and China. The fourth article of the supplemental treaty between the United States and China is clear and explicit as to the question of mixed cases. It does not therefore appear necessary to quote the treaty between China and Great Britain. The Yamên finds it difficult to comply with your excellency's request and begs that you will inform the consul-general and the missionaries of its decision. No. 279.] Mr. Jones to Mr. Rockhill. CONSULATE OF THE UNITED STATES, Chinkiang, October 24, 1896. (Received Nov. 30.) SIR: I have the honor, in compliance with the Department instructions No. 88, of September 9, 1896, the receipt of which on the 23d instant is hereby acknowledged, to forward herewith copies of the itemized statements of the actual losses of the two missionaries, Messrs. Haden and Little, at the Kiangyin riots, and also copies of all correspondence held with the local authorities in this matter.' The cor respondence, it will be seen, is inconsiderable, as the greater part of the business was conducted in personal interviews. It is proper that I should inform the Department that immediately following the preliminary examination held at Kiangyin by order of the taotai, the magistrate, the prisoners, and the witnesses were brought Inclosures not printed. to Chinkiang, where a more formal and searching examination was held by the taotai sitting as judge with the deputies who were present at the preliminary proceedings at Kiangyin. I did not go to Kiangyin, for the reason that it was understood that the examination would be held at Chinkiang. And when it was held I took every precaution that none of those guilty or responsible for the outrage should escape punishment, and none did escape. The U. S. S. Boston did not proceed to Kiangyin in the first instance, as originally intended, for the reason, on careful thought, that the pres ence of a war ship at such a time would have the effect of frightening away everyone connected with the riot, and that it would be difficult, if not impossible, to find them again. My action as to the amount of the indemnity demanded was not submitted to the legation for sanction, for the reason that I was not aware that this was required. The legation was informed of the occurrence of the riot and that an adjustment was going forward, but offered no advice as to the indemnity. The consul-general did advise me to make the indemnity liberal, and it was made liberal accordingly. The right to purchase property is fully understood. In this case the missionaries had leased their property. They had before this made an attempt to purchase, and did, in fact, purchase, but their deed was defective, inasmuch as the middleman of the missionaries having himself signed the principal names to the deed without the consent or knowledge of the parties in interest, one of the owners making a protest in writing citing this fact, and objecting to any sale. The deed was of course thrown out and canceled. It was at the instance of the missionaries that I made the demand that the officials be required to secure them in the possession of a suitable property for the mission. Property has now been secured, not that which they had heretofore leased, but other and more suitable property, of much greater extent, selected by themselves, and the transfer has been made, signed, witnessed, and stamped in all due legal form. So that part of the business has been satisfactorily settled. The culpability of the magistrate was fully recognized by the provincial authorities, and by order of the governor he was dismissed from the service. This action came so promptly that the taotai appealed to me to consent to his temporary reinstatement, until the indemnity be paid by the magistrate. Otherwise, that he, the taotai, would be obliged to shoulder the burden of the payment, and the magistrate escape this portion of his punishment. I have, etc., A. C. JONES, Consul. No. 282.] Mr. Jones to Mr. Rockhill. CONSULATE OF THE UNITED STATES, Chinkiang, November 24, 1896. (Received Dec. 22.) SIR: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt by mail on the 18th instant of Department instructions No. 91, dated October 12, 1896, sent direct, in which I am informed that it is expected that I will see that the magistrate at Kiangyin is dismissed promptly from office, as promised, and that a proclamation is posted throughout Kiangyin stating the ground of his dismissal. The Department can be assured that this will receive my earnest attention in all particulars in compliance with instructions. I have, etc., A. C. JONES, Consul. No. 2549.] MISSIONARY TROUBLES AT HUNAN. Mr. Denby, chargé, to Mr. Olney. LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES, Peking, June 19, 1896. (Received July 25.) SIR: I have the honor to inform you that on the 9th instant I received a letter from Mr. W. H. Lingle, of the American Presbyterian Mission at Lien Chou, in northern Kwang-tung, stating that at Lam Mo, in southern Hunan, mission property had been destroyed and native Christians made the victims of oppression. Mr. Lingle stated that his mission had been established in that vicinity for six years and numbered 100 converts against whom a sort of crusade has latterly been inaugurated. They have been beaten, robbed, driven from home, deprived of lands and houses. Proclamations have been issued forbidding them to buy or lease property and forbidding their intermarriage with other people. Mr. Lingle was himself mobbed and insulted, his workmen were driven away, and the materials for a chapel which he had prepared were carried away before his face. Do stated that the local authorities refused to entertain his complaints and he appealed to this legation for redress. On the 16th instant I presented this case to the Yamên in a personal interview and I was favorably heard. While I was still present at the Yamên telegraphic orders were sent the viceroys at Hankow and at Canton to command the Hunan officials to afford protection and redress. Hunan being in the consular jurisdiction of the consul at Hankow it was agreed between the Yamên and myself that further representations in this case, if necessary, should be addressed by Mr. Child to the viceroy. I have written Mr. Child instructing him to this effect. CHAS. DENBY, Jr., Chargé d'Affaires ad interim. Mr. Denby to Mr. Olney. No. 2598.] LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES, Peking, September 10, 1896. (Received October 24.) SIR: I have the honor to inclose herewith a translation of a dispatch from the Tsung-li Yamên, detailing the action taken in the case of Mr. Lingle, an American missionary, who lost property at the hands of disorderly characters at Lin Wu, in Hunan. The representations made to the Yamên in this case by this legation were reported to you in dispatch No. 2549, of June 19 last. The Yamên's dispatch indicates that the case was properly dealt with and this is confirmed by correspondence with the viceroy, copies of which were recently received from Hankow. I have, etc., [Inclosure in No. 2598.] CHARLES DENBY. The Tsung-li Yamên to Mr. Denby. YOUR EXCELLENCY: At the interview the chargé d'affaires of the United States had at the Yamên some time since, he represented that at a place called Lin Wu, in Hunan, not far from Lien Chou, on the |