We have now published the principal among the documents regarding the Tientsin Massacre, contributed by the U. S. Minister to the last volume of Diplomatic Correspondence. Others of iis despatches cover papers which hare appeared in the local Press—notably the letters by Mr. Stanley, by Messrs. Lees and Hall, and by the Tungchow Missionaries, and the various Imperial and Officiel edicts that were published during the period of excitement that followed the events of the 21st June. Excepting, perhaps, the letter from M. Fontauier to Count de Rochechouart, which will be found on another page, we cannotsny that the whole correspondence adds much to our previous knowledge of the circumstances. It would seem, in fact, that the local press furnished to its readers very nearly as fall evidence upon which to form an opinion, as was assessed at Poking. That the opin-fons formed show some divergence, is Fights by which this evidence was read.
rebably attributable to the different
Residents at the outports, hearing and seeing the sympathetic excitement caused by the news of the Tientsin outbreak, judged by the practical light of circumstances. Mr. Low, in communication with the ''sung-li Yamen, who would of course try to make the least of the affair, drew less serious inferences, which, however, he modified as he went on, till he arrived in the end at conclusions very similar to those which the Press drew from the commencement. It is for the ligh shed upon the views held by our presentatives, that the correspondence is chiccly valuable; and we have reprinted it with this view, as well as to complete our record of documents relating to an occurrence which will have historical importance. We are glad also to infer, that our information regarding the views held at Peking was little less accurate, though of course less complete, than our information regarding the' circumstances of the outbreak. We do not purpose to weary our readers with a precis of correspondence which they have, now, the opportunity to peruse at length. But reference to one or two points is necessary, to show Mr. Low's progressive appreciation of the gravity of the case, Passing by the first despatch of June 27th, which merely describes the massacre and its assumed causes; on August 24th, Mr. Low proceeds to ridicule, in a caustic straly, the comments of the Press upon the origin and probable results of the riot. "Much pains have been taken to ascertain whether it was local in its origin or whether it was Most foreigners at the ports were quite art of a wide-spread conspiracy.
willing to accept the latter view, and the newspapers so far as I have seen adopted the same cry." An unfair and exaggerated summary follows, of views which the Press is alleged to have uttered; and Mr. Low states that his own "opinion from the first has been that the disturbance was local, confined to Tientsin and its vicin nity though that some ground for the apprehension of further danger exists, is admitted, while the expressions of apprehension are ridiculed. We will not repeat the evidence we have already given, that the excitement was far other than local; the previous but nearly simultaneous disturbances at Nanking, Yangchow and other places far away, the testimony of men who heard what was brewing at distant places, the circnlation of the pamphlet "A Death-blow to Corrnpt Doctrines," and the remarkable coincidence of the popular charges against missionaries with its contents, are fresh in the minds of our readers. But we will quote Mr. Low's own assertion to Prince Kung, in a despatch dated three weeks Later (Sept. 13th), that "it seems scarcely possible such opinions can be entertained by the common people upon any other hypothesis than that the local officials and persons of rank and distinction are bringing influence to bear to render foreigners distasteful in the eyes of the people, and inciting hostility which will, unless checked promptly, be likely to bring on a collision." This is precisely the uatureof the conspiracy which the Pros has alleged to exist; and of which we maintain that ample proof has been farnished. The late Viceroy of Nav-king, writing to the Foreign Office shortly before his death, in regard to the excitement which had arisen in that city, said "I have received nothing in writing from the Chekeavg province, to show whether anything of this sort has happened there or not, but I have heard that some cases of beguiling and kidnapping did occur in May, the province of—Anhwey. The excitement in Tientsin began in that month, but i is beyond my comprehension how there should hare Leen movements in several provinces North and South, so identical in time and purpose." It would be difficult to find more direct confirmation of the view we have always upheld, than this caus tious official hint. It is satisfactory to find that Mr. Low at last admits a similar idea, in his despatch to the Regent. verdict on Peking diplomacy was that Mr. Low and Mr. Wade urged the Government, no doubt strongly and often, to repair the crime of its subjects; but that their tone Incked the ring of determination necessary to secure this end; that they failed to appreciate at the outset (he gravity of the case, bat saw the extent of the danger more clearly as time wore on. The correspondence we have published seems to us to completely bear out this view, at any rate in the instance before us; and Mr. Fish's comment on Mr. Low's despatch to Prince Kung, clenches our argument—Your assurance that a flagrant violation of the rights and privileges of our citizens by the people, and the failure of the Imperial Government to apply the proper remedy promptly, are the only circumstances which will cause a departure from the traditional policy of the United States in their intercourse with China, is considered to be too strong an expression of forbearance; and it would-be perhaps well that Prince Kung should understand that any violation of the rights of our citizens and any flagrant violation of treaty stipulations of other powers, may cause a change." Anyone who knows the Chinese, knows how much they would regard a demand, to which the complainant added a gratuitous announcement that he would not enforce it, in case of refusal.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.