to take no prisoners, but, imitating the example of Attila and the Huns, to excite a terror in East Asia which would last for a thousand years." He added, "May the blessing of God attend your flags and may this war have the blessed result that Christianity shall make its way into China."1

Contrasting sharply with this spirit stands the benevolent helpfulness of the President of the United States, who consistently held to the principle that northern China was in a state of anarchy; that the powers had intervened only to save their own citizens; that this purpose accomplished, it was incumbent upon all to rehabilitate the Chinese Government and assist in the restoration of peace. To the demand of the German Government that all persons responsible for the outrages should be delivered into the hands of the powers for summary punishment, as a prerequisite to any negotiations, the Administration replied, through the acting Secretary of State:

SIR:

September 22, 1900.

In response to your inquiry of the 18th instant as to the attitude of the Government of the United States in regard to the exemplary punishment of the

1 From an article in the Zukunft, by Maximilian Harden.

notable leaders in the crimes committed in Peking against international law, I have the honor to make the following statement:

The Government of the United States has from the outset proclaimed its purpose to hold to the uttermost accountability the responsible authors of any wrongs done in China to citizens of the United States and their interests, as was stated in the Government's circular communication to the powers of July 3 last. These wrongs have been committed not alone in Peking, but in many parts of the Empire, and their punishment is believed to be an essential element of any effective settlement which shall prevent a recurrence of such outrages and bring about permanent safety and peace in China. It is thought, however, that no punitive measures can be so effective by way of reparation for wrongs suffered and as deterrent examples for the future as the degradation and punishment of the responsible authors by the supreme imperial authority itself; and it seems only just to China that she should be afforded in the first instance an opportunity to do this and thus rehabilitate herself before the world. Believing thus, and without abating in any wise its deliberate purpose to exact the fullest accountability from the responsible authors of the wrongs we have suffered in China, the Government of the United States is not

disposed, as a preliminary condition to entering into diplomatic negotiations with the Chinese Government, to join in a demand that said Government surrender to the powers such persons as, according to the determination of the powers themselves, may be held to be the first and real perpetrators of those wrongs. On the other hand, this Government is disposed to hold that the punishment of the high responsible authors of these wrongs, not only in Peking, but throughout China, is essentially a condition to be embraced and provided for in the negotiations for a final settlement. It is the purpose of this Government, at the earliest practicable moment, to name its plenipotentiaries for negotiating a settlement with China, and in the mean time to authorize its Minister in Peking to enter forthwith into conference with the duly authorized representatives of the Chinese Government with a view to bringing about a preliminary agreement whereby the full exercise of the imperial power for the preservation of order and the protection of foreign life and property throughout China, pending final negotiations with the powers, shall be assured.

HILL, Acting.

Some of the difficulties of the diplomatic situation may be gathered from the following letter of Mr.

Hay to Mr. Adee, which the latter transmitted to the President with the comment, "I received this morning a characteristic, hard-hitting, and sensible but somewhat despondent letter from Colonel Hay," etc. The enclosure reads:

DEAR ADEE:

NEWBURY, N.H., Sept. 14, 1900.

I read every day the Tribune, Times, and Boston Herald. The Tribune stands by us. The Times and B. Herald, while civil enough, tell us plainly that if we leave Peking we shall be forever infamous. They also say that if we do not take the lead and keep it, dragging the other powers after us in chains, we are n.g. and McKinley will be beaten in November. It never seems to occur to them that the other powers may not like the feel of a rope around their necks, and may even want to say something about their interests in China. It all sums up to this: we shall get no credit whatever we do; our friends will take it as a matter of course, and our critics will kick us all 'round the lot. Nothing was clearer than that the whole country would have risen in uproar if we had formed an alliance with England against Russia and Germany. And now that we seem to be agreeing with Russia, "following her lead" as the papers say, they are kicking like steers. If it turns out that we

are not led by Russia, we shall be abused as wobbling and vacillating. So there is nothing for it but to do as near right as we can, and leave the consequences to the newspapers.

The dilemma is clear enough. We want to get out at the earliest possible moment. We do not want to have the appearance of being forced out or frightened out, and we must not lose our proper influence in the final arrangement. If we leave Germany and England in Peking, and retire with Russia, who has unquestionably made her bargain already with China, we not only will seem to have been beaten, but we run a serious risk of being really frozen out. Germany and England will feel resentful and will take no care of our interests, and Russia will sell us out without winking. You have, it seems, grave suspicion of the attitude of Japan. There is, therefore, not a single power we can rely on, for our policy of abstention from plunder and the Open Door. If we try to deal separately with China, she will say to us, as she said last year, "We are not free agents. We are not able without the permission of the other powers, to fulfill any engagements we might make with you." When I tried to get them to agree not to grant any privileges to other powers which should not be equally granted to us, they said precisely that

"If they use force against us we cannot resist.