considered the worth of this quality during the past half-century, we might have less cause today for anxiety in contemplating the problems of the Far East.1

Mr. Burlingame's personal charm spelled good manners in any language spoken by civilised men. He, whose political experience at home was lightly flaunted by critics as his only recommendation for an appointment abroad, proved as soon as he entered upon his duties in China that it was precisely such training in the knowledge of human nature which, coupled with native ability and elevation of character, fitted him beyond his foreign coadjutors for success in dealing with unusual propositions in diplomacy. Being without prejudice, his generosity proved often to be a better guide than the circumspection of some of those about him who were technically trained in the profession. In Sir Frederick Bruce, the British minister, however, who had succeeded to the mission of his brother, Lord Elgin, in China, he found a man of his own cheerful temperament and breadth of view. Bruce had already reached the conclusion respecting the Tai-pings at which Burlingame had

1 "The root trouble with our relations with China, and more recently with Japan, is the contemptuous disregard of their point of view and the childish insistence upon our own." (A. H. Smith, "China and America To-day," New York, 1907, p. 178.)

arrived before reaching Peking. He approved of the plan of strengthening the hand of the government by encouraging the organisation of a volunteer military troop under foreign officers, begun by Ward's "Ever-Victorious Force," near Shanghai, considering any risk to be feared from the introduction of an improved military system into China "less serious than the danger, commercial and political, we incur from the unchecked growth of anarchy," and being also convinced "that we, who neither seek territory nor promote by arms religious conversion, have little to apprehend from any success that may attend our efforts to raise the Chinese executive out of its present helpless condition. . . . Nor do I consider," he adds, "that it will be a matter of regret or hostile to our interests that China should be encouraged, by a consciousness of her strength, to use bolder language in defence of her just rights. The weakness of China, rather than her strength, is likely to create a fresh Eastern question in these seas. In proportion, also, as the Chinese are obliged to resort to us for instruction, the policy of isolation and contempt for the outer world, from which our

1“... that the rebels must be disabused of the notion unfortunately instilled into them by missionaries and others that the sympathy of Western nations was enlisted in favour of this system of blasphemy, massacre, and pillage." (Bruce to Lord Russell, March 26, 1862.)

1

difficulties have mainly arisen, must be abandoned." Furthermore, the British minister was disposed to check as far as possible the aggressive attitude of his countrymen engaged in trade in China, being impressed by the diplomatic difficulties involved in their assumptions. A serious obstacle to restraining clandestine trading and illegal establishments set up by lawless foreigners was the reluctance of the Chinese Government to assert its own rights under the treaties.

The greater the progress [writes Bruce], the more essential it is that the Chinese Government should be roused from this apathy and compelled to act in defence of its rights. For it is quite impossible that this duty can be accomplished for them. On the other hand, it is a false position and very inconvenient that the foreign minister should be constantly urging the Chinese Government to act against his own people, or against other foreigners, in its own defence. This branch of their international education must be undertaken by competent persons in their own service if it is to be effectually done. . . . In a country like China commercial enterprise, if abandoned to its unchecked impulses,

1 Ibid., "Parliamentary Papers," "Further Papers Relating to the Rebellion in China," 1862, p. 9. The dispatch is written four months before Bruce and Burlingame met. His ideas were diametrically opposed to the opportunist programme of the merchants, who objected to his broad altruism for much the same reason that the moon disapproves of the sun's appearing at midnight in the classic of "The Walrus and the Carpenter."

will either lead to a suicidal catastrophe or become the herald of war.1

A few months' residence in Peking showed the new American minister that in this remote capital, inaccessible to steam and telegraphic communication, it was easy, in the absence of daily interpellation from interested parties, to cement friendships among the small coterie of foreigners thus inevitably thrown into intimate social relations. The diplomatic and missionary circles, constituting the only classes of foreigners resident in Peking, numbering less than fifty souls in all, were alike inspired by a real desire to benefit the Chinese by their presence and influence. In the wholesome detachment of such agreeable surroundings a man of Mr. Burlingame's temperament and ideals would naturally prefer a magnanimous attitude toward the Imperial Government as offering in the end the best chance for furthering the objects of his mission. Statesmen like Prince Kung and Wên-siang, as leaders of the only pro-foreign party in the em

1 Bruce to Earl Russell, October 13, 1862. ("Further Papers," presented 1863, p. 132.) In another dispatch he writes: "As far as I can judge from Mr. Burlingame's language, he entirely concurs in the two main principles which I think should guide us in our deliberations, namely, that our true interest consists in the suppression of rebellion and in the restoration of order, and that the opening of ports and the formation of settlements, without the presence of consular authority, will lead to quarrels and misunderstandings with the people and be ultimately disadvantageous to our position in China." (Ibid., p. 80.)

pire, whatever their secret sentiments toward the white races, were at least committed by this time to a course of honourable dealing with them. This fact had rather isolated these few men. They needed assistance against the reactionary party in the country, which was known or suspected to be awaiting a favourable opportunity to overthrow the reigning dynasty. To support them by reducing to a minimum causes of misunderstanding and complaint was obviously better for the foreigners than anything now to be secured from making common cause with the discredited Tai-pings, or to be expected from constraining those conservatives who preserved an attitude of unvarying hostility toward Western peoples. It cannot be alleged that the Prince and his followers were sincere, but unless the Christian world was prepared to undertake the conquest of China it is difficult to see how its representatives could advance their legitimate aims at this juncture better than by accepting their assurances and insisting in turn upon a policy of candour and truth for the future.1

On his way to Peking, Mr. Burlingame had written (June 2, 1862) to the secretary of state

1 Some account of Peking fifty years ago may be found in Dr. Rennie's "Pekin and the Pekinese," two vols., London, 1863, and in Michie's "The Englishman in China," vol. II.