right of way over land, consented that if a line should be laid in the sea it might be landed at the ports. This assent is attested by two interpreters, Dr. W. A. P. Martin and Dr. Williams, eminent sinologues. By the favored-nation clause in the treaties with China, what is granted to one is granted to all, so that the connection you propose by the way of Possiet with Shanghai may be securely made. Yours, &c., ANSON BURLINGAME. No. 194. Mr. Fish to Mr. Hegermann. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, January 22, 1874. SIR: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your note of the 7th instant. Under instructions from your government you invite this Government to instruct its legation in China to lend its aid in inducing the Chinese government to recognize and appreciate the great advan tages of the ulterior development of telegraphic communication in that country. Your government has also been pleased to instruct you to ask that the minister of the United States at Yedo may be directed to use his good offices for the purpose of inducing the government of the Mikado to exert its influence at Peking in favor of the Great Northern Telegraph Company at Copenhagen. And you inform me, under instructions from your government, that it would be of great importance to that company to receive from commanders of squadrons and vessels stationed in Chinese waters, so far as it might be consistent with their duties, protection against violent acts. The President will take much pleasure in directing the diplomatic representatives of the United States at Yedo and at Peking to report upou the necessity and upon the expediency of any such action by this Government in order to enable him to determine whether, in the absence of a reciprocal treaty in respect to submarine cables, the facts would warrant this Government in actively interfering in the manner requested by your government. I take the liberty in this connection of reminding you that, as long ago as the 23d of November, 1869, this Government invited that of Denmark to join with it in measures for the protection of submarine cables, and that no reply to these suggestions has been received. The President is still of the opinion that the most efficacious protection would be afforded by means of a joint convention, as then suggested. May I ask you to kindly recall this matter to the attention of your government? SIR Referring to your note of the 7th of January last, I have the honor to inclose herewith, for your information, a copy of a dispatch of the 9th of February, 1874, No. 19,* and of its accompaniments, from Mr. Williams, chargé d'affaires, ad interim, of the United States at Peking, relating to the protest made by the Chinese authorities against the action of the Great Northern Telegraph Company in that country. Accept, &c., HAMILTON FISH. No. 196. Mr. Hegermann to Mr. Fish. [Translation.] LEGATION OF DENMARK, Washington, May 3, 1874. (Received May 5.) SIR: In having the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your note of 27th ultimo, I beg you to accept my sincere thanks for the documents which accompanied it, relative to the conflict which has occurred between the Great Northern Telegraph Company and the Chinese authori ties, with regard to the establishment of a telegraphic line between Woosung and Shanghai. The government of the King, to which I shall not fail to transmit the contents of your aforesaid note and its inclosures, will be highly grati fied by the kind and efficient aid which the minister and the consul of the United States in China were pleased to lend to the Danish company on that occasion. Be pleased to accept, &c. HEGERMANN LINDENCRONE. No. 197. Mr. Hegermann to Mr. Fish. [Translation.] LEGATION OF DENMARK, Washington, June 14, 1874. SIR: In the note which you did me the honor to address me under date of the 22d of January last, you expressed a desire to be informed of the views of the government of the King in regard to the draft of an international convention for the protection of submarine cables, which was transmitted to it in the month of December, 1869, by the minister res ident of the United States at Copenhagen. In the month of May, 1870, the royal ministry of foreign affairs sent this legation a communication, with instructions to transmit it to the Government of the United States in relation to said draft. That communi. cation never reached its destination, and it is owing to this unfortunate circumstance that the reply of the King's government has not been laid before you, Mr. Secretary of State, before this. The views of the government of the King in the matter in question *For this correspondence, see under "China," having undergone no modification since that time, I have received orders to communicate to the Government of the United States the following observations, which were contained in the instructions sent to this lega tion in 1870: In articles 1 and 2, it is stipulated that the privilege of laying and working submarine cables can be granted only in pursuance of an agreement between the two countries to be connected by the cables. The government of the King has no objections to advance against this principle, which, on previous occasions, it has usually followed itself; but it is of opinion that, in order to put it in practice, some easier way, and one better suited to the end than the one proposed in the draft, might be adopted. Instead of requiring direct conferences between the gov ernments of two countries very distant, perhaps, from each other, the right might be given to each one of the two countries, by itself, to graut the privilege, with the proviso, however, that it should not be valid unless granted by the other country likewise. It would then become the business of the party receiving the privilege himself to obtain this indispensable requisite; the enterprise would still retain its private character, and would be carried out more rapidly if pushed by the interested party himself, who would, moreover, be better able to obtain satisfactory conditions therefor. The proposition made in article 3 of the draft, viz, that the gov ernments are to abstain from exercising any control over telegrams sent by international cables, is not in harmony with articles 20 and 21, compared with article 66 of the telegraphic convention concluded July 21, 1866, by the majority of the countries of Europe. The government of the King cannot deprive itself of a right of control which, especially in case of war, might be of great importance to the security of the state. It has reason to believe that other European states share its views on this subject. Article 5 of the draught must doubtless be understood in this sense, that while an order from the proper authorities might, in the case mentioned under No. 4, exempt the persons in question from punishment, such an order would be without effect in the cases specified under Nos. 1, 2, and 3. In the opinion of the government of the King, it would be more natural to draw up a clause of this importance as an obligation binding upon the governments to issue no orders for the cutting of cables, than to choose the indirect method of saying that the governments engage to punish the guilty parties, whether these have acted in obedience to the orders of their own government or not. Article 5 of the draft stipulates that the destruction or mutilation of a cable shall be punished as an act of piracy; according to the Danish penal code, the guilty party would, in that case, be condemned to hard labor for life. Such a punishment seems to the government of the King to be excessively severe, and it could not impose, for the crime in question, any penalty more severe than confinement in a house of correction. Articles 7 and 8 contain stipulations which are not in accordance with the penal code now in force in Denmark, and would consequently require changes for which the government of the King would have to ask the consent of the legislative branch. In making this formal reservation, the government of the King would not hesitate to adhere to the clauses of the article in question, the modifications to be made in the penal code not being very essential. It is only as regards article 7 that it is necessary to observe that if the government of the King were eventually to engage to punish a non-Danish subject who, having committed the crime in question on the high seas and on board of a vessel carrying a foreign flag, should afterward be found in Deumark, this obligation could evidently concern only the subjects of the states that should have acceded to the convention. It would be in violation of all international law to extend the jurisdiction of a country, in the case of crimes committed on the high seas, to persons sailing under the flag of a state which had not adhered to the convention. It is only with these modifications and reservations that the government of the King will be able to conclude a convention for the protection of submarine cables on the basis of the draft presented by the Government of the United States. I avail myself, &c., J. HEGERMANN LINDENCRONE. No. 198. Mr. Cadwalader to Mr. Hegermann. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, SIR: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your note of July 7, in reference to the report of the chargé d'affaires of the United States at Peking upon the question of the protest of the Chinese authorities against the telegraphic line between Woosung and Shanghai, and referring to the services of the American consul-general at Shanghai in that matter, and to say that it affords this Department great pleasure to learn that the efforts of the representatives of the United States have been of value to the interests of the kingdom of Denmark. Accept, &c., JOHN L. CADWALADER, No. 310.] ECUADOR. No. 199. Mr. Wing to Mr. Fish. UNITED STATES LEGATION, Quito, Ecuador, May 15, 1873. (Received June 9.) SIR: In answer to Circular No. 38 from the State Department, I have the honor to report that I have to-day addressed a note to this government asking for the desired information, and have also made known the change in the American estimate of the English pound sterling for the future, involving an increase of two cents and six and one-half mills (.0265) on former valuation. The assays and reports made by my predecessor, Hon. Charles R. Buckalew, fully cover this matter as it stands to-day. No visible improvement has been made in the current circulating coin of Ecuador beyond the recent introduction of a small percentage of our own silver, and a few thousand Peruvian "soles." The major portion of the coin in use is worn out, and full of holes. Its real intrinsic value is far below the face standard. As this government is now bent upon raising the standard and introducing a better type of current coin, it has impressed me that it may perhaps be advisable to wait a few months, or a year, until the old money is withdrawn, and the new issue substituted before making a fixed report to the Director of the Mint. The government of Chili has consented to coin $1,000,000 for Ecuador, and I sincerely hope that our own Government will be finally able to bestow a similar service, as per my dispatch No. 281. I will report the answer of this government, however, upon its receipt. I have, &c., No. 200. RUMSEY WING. No. 321.] Mr. Wing to Mr. Fish. UNITED STATES LEGATION, Quito, Ecuador, August 11, 1873. (Received September 17.) SIR: I have the honor to report that the Ecuadorian Congress was convened yesterday, after certain very imposing religious and military displays. Per this mail, I shall have the honor to forward a copy of the Presi dent's message to the Congress. According thereto, the financial outlook of Ecuador is on the ascending scale; and the material development of the country quite promising. It will be observed that in the course of the message the President recommends the remission of all duties on machinery imported from the United States. I have, &c., No. 201. RUMSEY WING. No. 326.] Mr. Wing to Mr. Fish. UNITED STATES LEGATION, Quito, Ecuador, August 28, 1873. (Received October 2.) SIR Referring to my dispatch 319, concerning the death of William C. Doval, I desire to make the following statement: Upon my return from Guayaquil, while lying ill in Ambato, I received a copy of a publication made by certain American citizens resident in Quito, offering a reward of $100 for the detection of the author of a shameful outrage upon the grave of the said Mr. Doval. I inclose a copy and translation, Nos. 1 and 2, of this document. So soon after my arrival in Quito as I was able to dictate a note, I addressed a communication (No. 3) on this subject to the government of Ecuador. |