No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Alien Religious Property in China
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 12 April 2017
Extract
Foreign missionary activities, religious, educational, and philanthropic, play an important part in the international relations of China. Christian missionary rights have been conferred by many of the treaties concluded with China since 1842. The protection of missionary life and property has been one of the major activities of foreign legations in China since 1860. Christian mission workers have been accorded the right to acquire property in the interior of China, whereas commercial interests have been restricted by treaty to ports, foreign settlements and concessions. Foreign Christian missionaries constitute the largest class of aliens in China, and their property holdings bulk large in the foreign investment. These facts make pertinent a study of the legal status of alien religious property in China.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © American Society of International Law 1932
References
1 China Weekly Review (Shanghai), Deo. 26, 1925, p. 90; ibid., Sept. 17, 1927, p. 77.
2 Brinkley, F., China: Its History, Arts and Literature (Boston, 1902), Vol. X, p. 149.Google Scholar
3 Koo, V. K. W., The Status of Aliens in China (New York, 1912), p. 289.Google Scholar This view has been maintained in spite of Art. IV of the treaty with Japan of July 21,1896, which provided that Japanese subjects might at the ports and other places set aside for foreign residence “rent or lease land, and to build churches, cemeteries, and hospitals, enjoying in all respects the same privileges and immunities as are now or may hereafter be granted to the subjects or citizens of the most favored nation.” Maritime Customs Service, Treaties between China and Foreign States (2d ed., Shanghai, 1917), Vol. II, p. 606. Arts. II and VII of Group V of the Twenty-One Demands of 1915 would, if accepted, have given Japanese Buddhist missionaries, hospitals, schools, churches, and subjects the right to own land anywhere in China. See MacMurray, J. V. A., Treaties and Agreements with and Concerning China, (New York, 1921), Vol. II, pp. 1233-1234.Google Scholar On the other hand, Minister Denby maintained that if an American Buddhist, Mohammedan or Jew were to resort to China to preach his doctrine, he would undoubtedly receive at the hands of his country's representatives the same protection that is vouchsafed to the Christian. United States Foreign Relations, 1886, p. 98.
4 Several official and unofficial surveys have been attempted. See Manuel des Missions Catholiques, p. 574; Wolferstan, B., The Catholic Church in China from 1860 to 1907 (London, 1909), p. 417;Google Scholar Collection of Treaties and Official Documents, 2d Ser., 24th Chuang, p. 1. The results of two surveys of American alien religious property may be found in the State Department archives in the MS. Miscellaneous Letters for August, 1895, and August, 1900.
5 Williams, S. W., The Middle Kingdom (New York, 1904), Vol. II, p. 275;Google Scholar Brinkley, op. cit., Vol. X, p. 152; Latourette, K. S., A History of Christian Missions in China (New York, 1929), pp. 48-51.Google Scholar
6 S. W. Williams, op. cit., Vol. II, p. 275; Williams, E. T., China Yesterday and Today (4th ed., New York, 1929), p. 419 Google Scholar; Latourette, op. cit., pp. 51-57; Tobar, P. J., Résumé des Affaires Réligieuses, in No. 47, Variétés Sinologiques (Peking, 1917), p. 33 Google Scholar; Parker, E. H., Studies in Chinese Religion, p. 276.Google Scholar
7 S. W. Williams, op. cit., VoL II, p. 279; Brinkley, op. cit., Vol. X, p. 157; Parker, op. cit., p. 276; Latourette, op. cit., pp. 53-54.
8 Brinkley, op. cit., Vol. X, p. 157.
9 Latourette, op. cit., p. 68;, Hue, E. B., Christianity in China, Tartary and Thibet (London, 1858), Vol. II, p. 300 Google Scholar ff.; Schmidlin, J., Katolische Missionsgeschichte (Steyl, 1924), p. 179 Google Scholar, and footnote 3 on p. 187; S. W. Williams, op. cit., Vol. II, p. 287; Brinkley, op. cit., Vol. X, p. 161.
10 Brinkley, op. cit., Vol. X, p. 161; Schmidlin, op. cit., pp. 187, 189-190; Hue, op. cit., Vol. I, pp. 300, 406; Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, Jan. 1917, pp. 1-36; Hakluyt Society, Proceedings, 1866, Vol. I, pp. 224, 247.
11 Latourette, op. dt., p. 78.
12 S. W. Williams, op. cit., Vol. II, p. 289; Latourette, op. cit., pp. 110, 115; Hue, op. dt., Vol. Ill, pp. 202-203; Tobar, op. dt., pp. 4-5; Morse-MacNair, Far Eastern International Relations (Boston, 1931), p. 28.
13 S. W. Williams, op. dt., Vol. II, pp. 290, 293, 307; Hue, op. dt., Vol. II, pp. 55-58, 60, 263; ibid., Vol. Ill, pp. 220-221; Latourette, op. dt., pp. 107, 111, 128; Schmidlin, op. dt., p. 273; Lettres Edifiantes et Curieuses Concemant l'Asie, l'Afrique, et l'Amérigue (Paris, 1843), Vol. XVI, pp. 362, 370; ibid., Vol. XVII, pp. 161, 165, 169, 173; The China Review, Vol. XVIII, p. 163; Holcombe, C., The Real Chinese Question (New York, 1900), p. 160;Google Scholar Hering, H. W., “A Study of Roman Catholic Missions in China,” in New China Review, Vol. Ill, pp. 109-110 Google Scholar; Chinese Recorder, 1925, p. 708.
14 Treaties between China and Foreign States, Vol. I, pp. 16, 28-37; Brinkley, op. dt., Vol. X, p. 185.
15 Jametel, M., La Politique Réligieiuse de l'Occident en Chine (Paris, 1893), p. 27 Google Scholar; Latourette, op. cit., p. 93.
16 Jernigan, T. R., China in Law and Commerce (London, 1905), p. 133 Google Scholar; Jernigan, T. R., China's Business Methods and Policies (Shanghai, 1904), p. 28 Google Scholar; Alabaster, Notes on Chinese Criminal Law, p. 571; Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, Vol. XXIII, p. 60; Riasanovsky, , in China Weekly Review, Vol. XXXVII, p. 132.Google Scholar
17 Jernigan, , China in Law and Commerce, pp. 133 Google Scholar, 135; Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, Vol. XXIII, pp. 65, 152-154; Houang, P., Notions Techniques Sur La PropriiU en Chine, in VariMs Sinologiques, Vol. XI, Chap. V; Decisions of the Supreme Court of China, No. 63, 1913.
18 Houang, op. cit., p. 36; Jernigan, China in Law and Commerce, p. 136.
19 Huc, op. cit., Vol. II, pp. 244r-245; Latourette, op. dt., pp. 103, 159; Hering, op. cit., pp. 198, 200; Revue de I'Extreme Orient, Vol. II, pp. 54-55.
20 Latourette, op. cit., p. 160.
21 Art. II. Treaties between China and Foreign States, Vol. I, p. 352.
22 U. S. Treaties and Conventions (ed. by Malloy, 1910), Vol. I, p. 201. This privilege was confirmed in the French treaty of Oct. 24,1844, in Art. 22. See Treaties between China and Foreign States, Vol. I, p. 782.
23 Launay, A., Histoire des Missions de Chine. Mission de Kouy-Tcheou (Paris, 1907-08), Vol. II (1), p. 163;Google Scholar Schmidlin, op. cit., p. 465; Latourette, op. cit., p. 230; Morse, International Relations of the Chinese Empire, Vol. I, pp. 331-332, 691; Dennett, T., Americans in Eastern Asia (New York, 1922), p. 566 Google Scholar ff.
24 Launay, op. cit., Vol. II (1), pp. 159, 163, 168-169; Estes, C. S., Christian Missions in China (Baltimore, 1895), p. 29.Google Scholar
25 Morse, op. cit., Vol. I, pp. 332, 692; Latourette, op. cit., p. 230; S. W. Williams, op. cit., Vol. II, p. 313; Holcombe, The Real Chinese Question, p. 161; Tobar, op. cit., pp. 8-9; Chinese Repository, Vol. XV, p. 155.
26 Holcombe, op. cit., p. 161.
27 Latourette, op. cit., p. 271; Bau, M. J., The Foreign Relations of China (2d ed., N. Y., 1922), p. 10 Google Scholar; Thompson, R. W., Griffith John (London, 1908), p. 70.Google Scholar
28 Treaties between China and Foreign States, Vol. I, p. 89.
29 Williams, F. W., The Life and Letters of S. Wells Williams (New York, 1889), p. 270.Google Scholar
30 Art. 29. U. S. Treaties and Conventions, Vol. I, pp. 220-221; Treatiesbetween China and Foreign States, Vol. I, p. 726; see also 36 Congress, 1st Session, Sen. Exec. Doc. 30, p. 360; F. W. Williams, op. cit., pp. 270-271.
31 Dennett, op. cit., p. 561; Williams, F. W., op. cit., pp. 270-271.
32 Art. VIII. Treaties between China and Foreign States, Vol. I, p. 407; British and Foreign State Papers, Vol. XCV, p. 39 ff.; Michie, H., The Englishman in China (London, 1900), Vol. I, p. 332 Google Scholar; ibid., Vol. II, pp. 226-227; F. W. Williams, op. cit., p. 271.
33 Italics inserted by author.
34 Thompson, op. cit., p. 79; Hinckley, F. E., American Consular Jurisdiction in the Orient (Washington, 1906), p. 126 Google Scholar; U. S. For. Rel., 1881, pp. 282,316. The Chinese version is said to render “at other places” as “at all places.” Chinese Recorder, 1889, p. 422.
35 Br. and For. St. Pap., 4097, China No. 2 (1869), p. 77 ibid., C 89, China No. 9 (1870), pp. 2,4,14; Parliamentary Debates, 3rd Ser., Vol. CXCIV, March 9,1869 (House of Lords), p. 936; Willoughby, W. W., Foreign Rights and Interests in China (Baltimore, 1920), p. 193 Google Scholar; Hinckley, op. cit., p. 126. The American Government held the same view. See State Department MS. Domestic Letters, Vol. 169, July 17,1888; U. S. For. Rel., 1881, pp. 282, 316; ibid., 1888, p. 272; Tyau, M. T. Z., Legal Obligations Arising Out of Treaty Relations Between China and Other States (Shanghai, 1917), p. 140 Google Scholar; Chinese Recorder, 1897, p. 424.
36 This clause of the British treaty was copied by Portugal, Denmark, Spain, and Italy in subsequent treaties. See respectively Treaties between China and Foreign States, Vol. II, p. 258 (Art. 13); Vol. II, p. 318 (Art. 12); Vol. II, p. 362 (Art. 8); Vol. II, p. 407 (Art. 12). A treaty with Holland provided (Art. 4) that Christian missionaries propagating the gospel in the interior should enjoy the full protection of the Chinese authorities. ibid., Vol. II, p. 342.
37 Art. 13. ibid., Vol. I, pp. 814, 821.
38 A sample missionary passport may be found in Cordier, H., Histoire des Relations de la Chine avec les Puissances Ocddentales, 1860-1900 (Paris, 1901-1902), Vol. I, p. 62.
39 Bau, op. cit., p. 447; E. T. Williams, op. cit., p. 447; Morse, op. cit., Vol. I, pp. 578, 593-607; bivre Jaune de Baron Grog, Negotiations entre la France et la Chine en 1860 (Paris, 1861), p. 126 ff.; Oliphant, L., Narrative of the Earl of Elgin's Mission (London, 1860), Vol. II,Google Scholar “The 1860 Expedition.”
40 Treaties between China and Foreign States, Vol. I, pp. 885, 888; Clercq,, A. J. H., Re- cueil de Traitis de la France (Paris, 1864-1872), Vol. VIII, p. 135 Google Scholar Lime Jaune de Baron Gros, p. 172.
41 Launay, op. cit., Vol. II (2), p. 9; Brinkley, op. cit., Vol. XII, pp. 43-44; Morse, op. cit., Vol. I, p. 616.
42 Morse, op. cit., Vol. I, p. 616 ff.; Launay, op. cit., Vol. II (2), p. 9; Michie, , The Englishmans China, Vol. II, pp. 229-230 Google Scholar; Brinkley, op. cit., Vol. XII, pp. 42-44; Holcombe, op. cit., p. 159; Martin, W. A. P., A Cycle of Cathay (New York, 1896), p. 441 Google Scholar; Latourette, op. cit., p. 276; Favier, A., PeTdn, Histoire et Description (Lille, 1900), Vol. II, p. 227 Google Scholar; Gaillard, L. in 18 VariiUs Sinologiques, pp. 162-172.
43 Martin, op. cit., pp. 441-442. See Moore, J. B., Digest of International Law, Vol. V, p. 253. It is not known whether Baron Gros himself was aware of the difference. The author has examined all published French documents connected with the convention and with Baron Gros. No text other than that forwarded by Baron Gros appears.
44 Art. III. “Les communications officielles des Agents diplomatiques et consulaires Frangais avec les autorit^s Chinoises seront 6crites en frangais, mais seront accompagn^es, pour faciliter le service, d'une traduction Chinoise aussi exacte que possible, jusqu'au moment oil le Gouvemement Imperial de P6kin, ayant des interpr&tes pour parler et 6crire correctement le Frangais, la correspondence diplomatique aura lieu dans cette langue pour les Agents Frangais, et en chinois pour les fonctionnaires de 1'Empire. II est convenu que jusqu'l&, et en cas de dissidence dans l'interpr^tation 4 donner au texte Frangais et au texte Chinois, au sujet des clauses arret^es d'avance dans les Conventions faites de commun accord, ce sera le texte frangais qui devra pr6valoir. Cette disposition est applicable au present Traits.” Treaties between China and Foreign States, Vol. I, p. 816.
45 Pitt, Cobbett, Leading Cases on International Law (4th ed. by Bellot, London, 1922), Vol. I, p. 331.Google Scholar
46 Koo, op. cit., p. 320; Brinkley, op. cit., Vol. XII, p. 141.
47 Couvrer, S., Choix de Documents, Lettres Officiels, Proclamations, Edits, Memoriaux et Rescripts (Hokien Fou, 1894), p. 5.Google Scholar Source is not mentioned. More abbreviated versions may be found in Launay, op. cit., Vol. I, p. 178; Cordier, op. cit., Vol. I, p. 70; Archives Diplo- matigues, Vol. LXVI, p. 305.
48 Cordier, op. cit., Vol. I, pp. 71-72.
49 Tobar, Rlsumi des Affaires Riligieuses, p. 73; Cordier, op. cit., Vol. I, p. 71; VariStes Sinologiques, Vol. XLVII (1917), “Tcheou-Fou, ‘Kiao-ou Ki-Lio”; Launay, op. cit., Vol. I, p. 179; Koo, op. cit., p. 318.
50 Gerard, M., Ma Mission en Chine (Paris, 1899), p. xxii.
51 Cordier, op. cit., Vol. I, pp. 74-75.
52 ibid., Vol. I, pp. 75-76; Gerard, op. cit., p. 83; Reinach, Recueil des Traites, pp. 325-326. The Chinese loyally carried out, to the best of their ability the restoration provided for in the 1846 edict and the 1860 treaty, although the restoration caused great hardship to the Chinese property holders. Frequently the finest property in towns was demanded as having been former Catholic property. Demands were enforced with French gunboats and diplomatic notes. Compensation was frequently not paid. Minister Alcock of Britain likened the situation to what would take place in England if France demanded the restoration of all Catholic property confiscated by Henry VIII. Brinkley, op. cit., Vol. XII, pp. 113, 115, 148. The Chinese protested in a lengthy circular dispatched to the Powers in 1871, which, however, caused hardly a ripple on the political surface. See Brinkley, op. cit., Vol. XII, p. 146#
53 State Dept. MS. Misc. Letters, Oct. 13, 1894 (Cook to Sec. of State); ibid., June 20, 1895 (Presbyterian Board to Sec. of State); ibid., Aug. 23,1895 (S. L. Gracey to Sec. of State); ibid., Aug. 30, 1895 (Am. Bapt. May. Union to Sec. of State); ibid., Sept. 9,1895 (Petition of Missionaries in China to Sec. of State); U. S. For. Rel., 1906, Pt. I, p. 278; Dennett, op. cit., pp. 572-573; Koo, op. cit., p. 320; Chinese Recorder, 1894, p. 510.
54 Morse in his International Relations of the Chinese Empire, Vol. I, p. 616, and Holcombe in The Real Chinese Question, p. 160, assert that neither British nor American missionaries ever took advantage of the French agreements or pressed their governments to secure the same privileges. In the light of the evidence cited in note 53, supra, these statements are quite incorrect.
55 Dennett, op. cit., pp. 572-573; U. S. For. Rel., 1875, Pt. I, pp. 338-339; ibid., 1882, p. 139.
56 Dennett, op. cit., pp. 572-573; U. S. For. Rel., 1875, Pt. I, p. 339; ibid., 1882, pp. 139, 142.
57 State Dept. MS. Dom. Let., Vol. 169, p. 173 (Sec. of State to G. Reid, July 17, 1888). See also W. S. Speer to Sec. of State, May 13, 1881, MS. Misc. Let., May, 1881; Payson (3rd Asst. Sec. of State) to W. S. Speer, May 25,1881, MS. Dom. Let., Vol. 137, p. 536; I. T. Tichenor to Sec. of State, June 7, 1880, MS. Misc. Let., June 1880; U. S. For. Rel., 1875, Pt. I, pp. 334-335; Michie, A., Missionaries in China (London, 1891), p. 14.
58 Br. and For. St. Pap., C 89, China No. 9 (1870), pp. 2-4. Minister Alcock, in a letter to Lord Stanley, Sept. 11, 1868, held that British missionaries had a perfect right to avail themselves of the rights of the French Catholics conferred by Art. VI of the 1860 convention. Br. and For. St. Pap., 4097, China No. 2 (1869).
59 State Dept. MS. Misc. Let., May 24, 1888 (G. Reid to Sec. of State).
60 ibid., Sept. 9, 1895 (Petition of Missionaries in China to Sec. of State).
61 U. S. For. Rel., 1896, pp. Ixv, lxvi, 63; ibid., 1897, pp. 60-63.
62 A fully documented account of the negotiation of the treaty, written by the author, may be found in the Chinese Recorder, July, 1930.
63 State Dept. MS. Misc. Let., Sept. 12, 1902 (Goodnow to Sec. of State).
64 ibid., Sept. 26, 1902 (Chinese Treaty Revision Commission to Sec. of State).
65 ibid., Oct. 25, 1902 (Chinese Treaty Revision Commission to Sec. of State).
66 U. S. Treaties and Conventions, Vol. I, pp. 268-269; MacMurray, Treaties and Agreements with and Concerning China, Vol. I, pp. 430-131; Treaties between China and Foreign States, Vol. I, p. 755. Art. 12 of the treaty of 1908 between Sweden and China copied the American article. See MacMurray, , op. cit., Vol. I, pp. 745-746.Google Scholar
67 State Dept. MS. Misc. Let., Oct. 25, 1902 (Chinese Treaty Revision Commission to Sec. of State).
68 U. S. For. Rel., 1906, Pt. I, pp. 276, 277-278.
69 Chinese Government Official War Documents, No. 123, p. 112; MacMurray, , op. cit., Vol. II, p. 1371.Google Scholar
70 MacMurray, , op. cit., Vol. II, pp. 1361-1362.Google Scholar
71 ibid., Vol. II, pp. 1380, 1381.
72 Far Eastern Political Science Review, Jan. 1920, p. 69.
73 Art. VIII. Chinese Social and Political Science Review, Vol. V, p. 180.
74 Art. I. This Journal, Vol. 21 (1927), Supplement, p. 53; League of Nations Treaty Seiies, Vol. LV, p. 19; Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Pamphlet No. 50, Treaties and Agreements with and Concerning China 1919-1929 (Washington, 1929), pp. 165-169.
75 League of Nations Treaty Series, Vol. XXXVII, No. 955, p. 175.
76 Publications of the Permanent Court of International Justice, Series A, No. 8, pp. 4-5.
77 ibid., p. 5.
78 Publications of the Permanent Court of International Justice, Series A, No. 8, p. 7.
79 ibid., p. 9.
80 ibid., p. 11.
81 ibid., No. 18, p. 7.
82 Treaties and Agreements with and Concerning China 1919-1929, pp. 240-241.
83 ibid., p. 242. A declaration accepted by both parties affirmed the acceptance of the rules of private international law to govern the actions of citizens of both parties in the country of the other.
84 ibid., pp. 243-246.
85 ibid., pp. 246-249.
86 "Ibid., pp. 252-255.
87 ibid., pp. 270-273.
88 Mimeographed letter from State Department to the Secretary of the International Missionary Council, Sept. 6,1928. A different version, transmitted through French sources, is to be found in Current History Magazine, Vol. XXIX, p. 577.
89 Personal letter from Secretary of the International Missionary Council to the author, Sept. 19,1931.
90 Statement of State Department in letter of transmission to the Secretary of the International Missionary Council, Sept. 6, 1928.
91 China Christian Yearbook, 1926, p. 92; U. S. For. Rel., 1897, pp. 105-107; Michie, Missionaries in China, p. 53.
92 U. S. For. Rel., 1897, p. 106.
93 Personal letter from the Secretary of the International Missionary Council to the author, Sept. 19, 1931.
94 Ibid.
95 Moore, op. cit., Vol. V, sec. 774; Oppenheim, International Law (2nd ed., London, 1912), Vol. I, pp. 578-579; Hall, International Law (8th ed. by Higgins, London, 1924), pp. 406409, 412-416; Fauchille, TraiU de Droit International Public (8th ed., Paris, 1921-1926), Pt. I, secs. 853-854. China has not raised the question of rebus sic stantibus in connection with her desire to alter existing missionary rights.
96 Moore, op. cit., Vol. II, p. 33; Hall, op. cit., p. 58; Lawrence, T. J., The Principles of International Law (7th ed., Boston, 1923 Google Scholar), sec. 99; Wheaton, H., Elements of International Law (8th ed. by Dana, 1866), secs. 78, 81; Vattel, E., Law of Nations (Translated from the French, with Notes by J. Chitty and E. D. Ingraham, Philadelphia, 1859), Bk. 2, Chap. 8, Sec. 103; Twiss, T., Law of Nations (London, 1884), p. 265; Halleck, H. W., Elements of International Law (4th ed., London, 1908), Vol. I, p. 199 Google Scholar; Story, J., Commentaries on the Conflict of Laws (8th ed., Boston, 1883), sec. 424; Wharton, F., Conflict of Laws (3rd ed., Rochester, 1905), pp. 136-137; Foelix, J. J. G., TraiU du Droit Internationale Privi (4th ed., Paris, 1866), p. 216; Westlake, J., A Treatise on Private International Law (5th ed., London, 1912), sec. 87; Burge, W., Commentaries on Colonial and Foreign Laws Generally … (New ed. by Renton and Phillimore, London, 1907-1914), Vol. II, p. 840.Google Scholar
97 Lobingier, C. S., Extraterritorial Cases (Manila, 1920), Vol. I, p. 72.Google Scholar
98 Lobingier, C. S., Extraterritorial Cases (Manila, 1920), Vol. I, p. 83.Google Scholar
99 136 U. S. 1, 53.
100 “Wu Shih Shan Case,” North China Herald, Vol. XXIII, p. 90. A report of this case was published in pamphlet form by the Hongkong Daily Press, 1879. See also Doong Nyi Benevolent Association v. Henry S. Grew, Millard's Review, Vol. XVI, p. 270; Tam Wa v. Atkinson and Dallas, China Weekly Review, Vol. XIV, p. 735.
101 Decisions of the Supreme Court of China, No. 63, 1913; ibid., No. 739, 1915.
102 Jernigan, China in Law and Commerce, pp. 134—135; Jernigan, China's Business Methods and Policy, p. 29; Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, Vol. XXIII, p. 148; Riasanovsky, op. cit., p. 134.
103 Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, Vol. XXIII, pp. 65, 152-154; Jernigan, China in Law and Commerce, p. 174.
104 Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, Vol. XXIII, p. 68.
105 Jernigan, , China in Law and Commerce, pp. 136-140; Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, Vol. XXIII, pp. 68-71,152-154 Google Scholar; Alabaster, op. cit., pp. 573-574; Jernigan, China's Business Methods and Policy, pp. 31-33; Houang, op. cit., secs. 1-67, 80-99; Riasanovsky, op. cit., pp. 138-139.
106 Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, Vol. XXIII, pp. 70-71; U. S. Bureau of Foreign and Domestic Commerce, Trade Promotion Series, No. 38, “China, A Commercial and Industrial Handbook,” pp. 517-519; Jernigan, China in Law and Commerce, p. 140; Willoughby, op. cit., p. 196; Tyau, op. cit., pp. 150-151; U. S. For. Rel., 1888, Pt. I, p. 272.
107 Houang, op. cit., p. 146; Broomhall, The Chinese Empire—General and Missionary Survey, pp. 50, 184; U. S. For. Rel., 1888, Pt. I, p. 270 ff.; Cordier, op. cit., pp. 63-66.
108 Houang, op. cit., pp. 7, 106,119.
109 ibid., pp. 7,101,112-113,116-117; Chinese Recorder, 1889, p. 455.
110 Hinckley, op. cit., p. 121; Tyau, op. cit., pp. 152-155; Houang, op. cit., secs. 80-83.
111 Willoughby, op. cit., p. 203; U. S. For. Rel., 1873, p. 121; Koo, op. cit., p. 319; Hinckley, op. cit., p. 126; Chinese Recorder, 1925, p. 725; Richards, , in Harvard Law Review, Vol. XV (1901), p. 195.Google Scholar
112 Report of American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions, 1907, pp. 15, 24, 29; Chinese Recorder, 1925, p. 714; ibid., 1927, p. 811.
113 Civil Code of Japan, Articles 34 and 35.
114 While the stand taken by the American missionaries recently in seeking to forego diplomatic protection and intervention on behalf of their persons and property is related to the question discussed here, it forms too large a topic in itself for treatment within the confines of this paper.