We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 13 June 2018
The thematic horizon within which this article takes place is the colonial expansion of the Western powers in China between the nineteenth and the twentieth centuries. Focusing on the foundation of the British, French and American concessions in Tianjin, it aims to reconstruct the Western strategies of colonial governance and the role played by law in the process of production of a new social space. Opened as a treaty port in 1860, Tianjin is the only Chinese city where up to nine foreign concessions coexisted, becoming a complex, hybrid space (in)between East and West, defined by social practices, symbolic representations, and legal categories, which does not coincide simply with the area defined by the entity as a state, nation, or city.
Professor of Legal History and History of International Law, University of Salento (Lecce), Italy [[email protected]]. This article is part of a larger project, entitled Space, Time and Law in a Global City: Tianjin 1860–1945. It has been supported by the University of Salento/Fondazione Monte dei Paschi di Siena, New York University, European University Institute, Alexander von Humboldt Stiftung/Freie Universität Berlin.
1 The opening of the port of Tianjin was foreseen in Art. IV of the Beijing Convention, ratified with Britain on 24 October 1860, and in Art. VII of the homologous convention between France and China, ratified on the following day. The conventions ratified in Beijing by China, Britain and France are available at www.chinaforeignrelations.net. For general information, see Jones, F. Clifford, Shanghai and Tientsin: With Special Reference to Foreign Interests (1940), 120Google Scholar ff.; Rasmussen, O., Tientsin: An Illustrated Outline History (1925)Google Scholar. See also Singaravélou, P., Tianjin Cosmopolis. Une autre histoire de la mondialisation (2017)Google Scholar.
2 1901 Boxer Protocol, Peking, Art. IX, available at www.chinaforeignrelations.net.
3 Tieya, W., ‘International law in China: historical and contemporary perspectives’, (1990) 221 Recueil des cours, Collected Courses (1953) 69Google Scholar; Craven, M., ‘What Happened to the Unequal Treaties? The Continuities of Informal Empire’, (2005) 74 Nordic Journal of International Law 335–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See also Liu, L., The Clash of Empires. The Invention of China in Modern World Making, (2004Google Scholar); Svarverud, R., International Law as World Order in Late Imperial China: Translation, Reception and Discourse, (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Özsu, U., ‘Ottoman Empire’, in Fassbender, B. and Peters, A. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of the History of International Law (2012), 433–45Google Scholar.
4 Durkheim, É. and Mauss, M., ‘De quelques forme primitive de classification: Contribution à l’ètude des représentations collective’, (1903) 6 L'Anné sociologique 1–72Google Scholar. Pietro Costa has recently stressed the relevance of this article in a seminal work, Costa, P., ‘Uno spatial turn per la storia del diritto? Una rassegna tematica’, (2013) 7 Max Plank Institute for European Legal History Research paper Series 1–30Google Scholar.
5 Lefebvre, H., La production de l'espace (1974)Google Scholar; Lefebvre, H., De l’État (1976–1978)Google Scholar.
6 Foucault, M., ‘Des espaces autres’, in Defert, D. and Ewald, F. (eds.), Michael Foucault, Dits et écrits, Vol. 6, (1994), 752–62Google Scholar; Harvey, D., The Urban Experience (1989)Google Scholar; Soja, E., Postmodern Geographies: The Reassertion of Space in Critical Social Theory (1989)Google Scholar; Farinelli, F., La crisi della ragione cartografica (1999)Google Scholar.
7 Nuzzo, L., ‘Territory, Sovereignty and the Construction of the Colonial Space’, in Koskenniemi, M., Rech, W. and Fonseca, M. Jiménez (eds.), International Law and Empire (2017), 263–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
8 Jellinek, G., Ueber Staatsfragmente (1896), 11Google Scholar.
9 See respectively Art. 11 of the 1858 Treaty of Peace, Friendship, Commerce and Navigation between her Majesty the Queen of Great Britain and Ireland and the Emperor of China, in W.F. Mayers (ed.) Treaties between the Empire of China and the Foreign Powers together with regulations for the conduct of foreign trade, conventions, agreement, regulations (1877), (1903), and Art. 6 of the 1858 homologous treaty ratified with France (English version available at www.chinaforeignrelations.net/node/162).
10 See supra note 1.
11 Ann. 7, Tien-Tsin, British Concession, in Lease Treaty Series N. 34 (1925), List of Treaties, &c., between Great Britain and China (1842-1922), including International Treaties, and Treaties between Great Britain and Foreign Powers relating to China (1925), 26.
12 Byron Brennan to Thomas G. Grosvenor, Tienstin, 15 February 1883, in the National Archives (thereafter TNA), FO 228/731. Brennan reported a despatch of 6 January 1877 by the British consul in Tianjin, James Mongan. The same statement is reported with no indication of the source in Ann. 7 Tien-Tsin, British Concession, supra note 11, at 26.
13 Ann. 7, ibid. ‘To annual rent for the year ending, paid to the Chinese Government for the British concession at Tien-tsin, known by the name of Tan Chu Lin, viz., 412 mou, 6t. 5m. Se. at 1,500 copper cash per mou=618,987 copper cash’. The mou is a Chinese unit of land measurement, commonly about 800 square yards.
14 Harry S. Parkes to James Bruce, Lord of Elgin, Tientsin, August, 26, 1860, in Correspondence respecting Affairs in China, 1859-1860 (1861), 127.
15 Harry S. Parkes, Land Memorandum, Tientsin, 25 November 1860, in TNA: FO, 674/1.
16 TNA: FO, MPKK 1/50/9.
17 James Mongan to Edmund Hornby, Tientsin 26 August 1873, in TNA: FO 656/44.
18 In the version enclosed with the letter of 1873 (TNA: FO 656/44) to Hornby, the Chinese village is no longer written with Chinese characters.
19 Parkes, Land Memorandum, in TNA: FO, 674/1.
20 Ibid.
21 If the British were exempted from paying the land tax to the Chinese government until the Chinese refused to leave their properties, they were not allowed to build new buildings.
22 Ann. 2, Hankow Lease (21 March 1861), in Lease Treaty Series N. 34 (1925), supra note 11, at 19.
23 Lord Elgin to Prince Gong, 4 December 1860, in TNA: FO 682/1993/93; Prince Gong to Lord Elgin, 8 December 1860, in TNA: FO 682/1993/97.
24 Mongan to Bruce, 4 April 1861, in TNA: FO, 674/1.
25 L. Oliphant, Narrative of the Earl of Elgin's Mission to China and Japan in the years 1857, 1858, 1859, Vol. 1 (1859), at 385, 399.
26 A large passage of Alexander Michie's book, published in 1886 in the Tientsin Express, is quoted by Rasmussen, supra note 1, at 37. See also the conference held at the China Society of London in 1917 by the former secretary to the British Municipal Council of Tianjin William McLeish, Life in China Outport (1917), 24.
27 Guide to Tientsin (1904), 1.
28 Mongan, Report, at 1459. See also the report of the US Liutenant J.t. Dickman, Pekin, 5 November 1900, in Report on Military Operations in South Africa and China (1901), 493–8.
29 S. Ye, ‘Interport Printing Enterprise: Macanese Printing Networks in Chinese Treaty Ports’, in R. Bickers and I. Jackson (eds.), Treaty Port in Modern China: Law, Land and Power (2016), 121–38.
30 H. Van de Ven, Breaking With the Past: The Maritime Customs Service and the Global Origins of Modernity in China (2014), 31; R. Bickers, ‘Good Work for China in every possible direction. The Foreign Inspectorate of Chinese Maritime Customs 1854-1950’, in B. Goodman and D.S.G. Goodmann (eds.), Twentieth-Century Colonialism and China: localities, the everyday and the world (2012), 25–37.
31 Mongan to Bruce, Tientsin, 12 March 12 1861, in TNA: FO 674/3. Lay went back to China in May 1863 and was replaced by Hart in November 1863 following a clash with Prince Gong on the control, use and financing of the British fleet of warships known as the Lay-Osborne Flotilla. See Van de Ven, supra note 30; J. Gerson, Horatio Nelson Lay and Sino-British Relations, 1854-1864 (1972).
32 Mongan to Bruce, Tientsin, 12 March 1861, in TNA: FO 674/3. Bruce acknowledged receipt of the letter on 4 June 1861.
33 Mongan to Bruce, ibid.
34 Chung Hou to Mongan, Tienstin 19 April 1861, in TNA: FO 673/1.
35 Mongan to Hornby, Tientsin 26 August 1873, in TNA: FO 656/44. ‘The four lots situated on the Northern side of the settlement, adjoining the French concession, were afterwards given up by Mr. Gibson to Chung-hou, the Chinese Minister superintendent who had applied for some land in that position as a site for the Foreign Custom House’.
36 Mongan to Bruce, Tientsin 4 April 1861, in TNA: FO 674/1.
37 Chung hou to Mongan, 22 May 1861, in TNA: FO 673/1.
38 Mongan to Hornby, Tientsin, 26 August 1873, in TNA: FO 656/44. The receipt of 1865 became the official receipt and was edited in Ann. 7, Tien-Tsin, British Concession, in Lease Treaty Series N. 34 (1925), supra note 11, at 26.
39 A list of the first owners is in Foreign Office, Consulate of Tientsin, in TNA: FO 678/1292. For more information about the first Europeans living in Tianjin see Rasmussen, supra note 1, at 39–44.
40 1866 Tientsin Local Land Regulations and General Regulations (1866).
41 On the architectural transformations in the English settlement see D. Arnold, ‘Construire la modernité urbaine: la concession britannique à Tianjin, 1860-2013’, (2014) 382/383 Outre-Mers. Revue d'histoire 89–102.
42 British citizens also might lease land outside the settlement. The General Regulations following the Land Regulations also foresaw the possibility of a lease by Chinese citizens.
43 In 1873 Mongan, writing to Hornby, Tientsin, 26 August 1873, in TNA: FO 656/44, stressed the importance of a relaxed application of the prohibition to sell a lot of the British settlement to a Chinese: ‘the progress of events within the last six years (which period has been commercially characterized, first by the substitution of shipping agencies for the more purely mercantile agencies at this port, and secondly, by the establishment of a Chinese steamer company, which now competes with our steamer in the carrying trade), has rendered it still further expedient to relax the provision made in Rule IV against a Chinese subject being allowed to become a Land-Renter’. According to Mongan it would be sufficient that the Chinese obtain special permission from the British ambassador and agree to conform ‘to the same conditions of tenure as those under which land is now held in the settlement by other non-British subjects’.
44 The tax amounts to 1,500 copper cash per mou and had to be paid within 21 days after 30 September, every year (Art. 6).
45 Ludwig Loeper to Gustav Adolf Freiherr Schenck zu Schweinsberg, 7 August 1895, Promemoria betreffend die Gründung einer deutschen Niederlassung in Tientsin, in Auswärtiges Amt, Politisches Archiv (hereafter PA AA) RZ 9208 R 1040, B. 2, August 1895–October 1895, 55r–55v.
46 This map is attached to the Proclamation du Surintendant des trois ports du Nord à Tientsin, 29 May 1861, in Archives du Ministère des Affaires Étrangères (hereafter AMAE) (Paris), NS Chine, Vol. 286, Concession française de Tientsin 1861-1897 (148 CPCOM P/19231).
47 On the French presence in Tianjin see P. Singaravélou, ‘Dix empires en un mouchoir de poche, le territoire de Tienstin à l’épreuve de phénomène concessionaire (années 1860–1920)’, in H. Blais, F. Deprest and P. Singaravélou (eds.), Territoires impériaux: Une histoire spatiale du fait colonial (2011), 271–95; Singaravélou, supra note 1.
48 Proclamation du Surintendant des trois ports du Nord à Tien-Tsin, 29 May 1861, supra note 46.
49 The regulation is attached to a letter from the French consul at Tianjin, Charles Dillon, to the French ambassador in Peking, Fréderic Albert Bourée, Tientsin July 1881, in AMAE (Nantes), Ambassade de France en Pekin 513po/1/262, Concession de Tientsin, dossier 36.
50 1858 Treaty of Peace, Friendship, Commerce and Navigation, Art. XII. ‘British subjects, whether at the Ports or at other places, desiring to build or open Houses, Warehouses, Churches, Hospitals, or Burial-grounds, shall make their agreement for the land or buildings they require, at the rates prevailing among the people, equitably and without exaction on either side’; 1858 Traité d'amitié, de commerce et de navigation conclu à Tien-Tsin, in L. de Reinach (ed.), Recueil des Traités conclus par la France en Extréme Orient (1684–1902) (1902), 52–3.
51 Proclamation 16 December 1862, in AMAE, Ambassade de France en Pekin 513po/1/262, Concession de Tientsin dossier 42/1862.
52 Ibid.
53 Henry-Viktor Fontanier a Michael Kleczkowski, December 1862, in AMAE, Nantes, Ambassade de France en Pekin 513po/1/262.
54 Charles Dillon a Fréderic Albert Bourée, Tientsin July 1881, in AMAE, Ambassade de France en Pekin 513po/A/262, Concession de Tientsin, dossier 42/1862.
55 ‘… dans le cas de vente ulterieur de nos droits d'affermage de ces terrains nous nous engageons expressèment a né pas les vendre à des chinois … et nous nous engageons à en observer toutes les obligations – notamment elle de ne transfer nous droit à aucun etranger, sans l'autorisation du consul de France et à la condition par l'acquireur etranger de sa sommetre formellement à la jurisdiction consulaire française’. The application form to buy land within the French Concession of Tianjin, dated 1862, is in AMAE, Ambassade de France en Pekin 513po/A/262, Concession de Tientsin, dossier 42/1862.
56 The Chinese were able to continue to build but would not receive any compensation for new buildings (Réglement, cit., Art. V).
57 Gabriel Deveria to James Mongan, Tientsin, 7 January 1865, in AMAE, Consulate de Tientsin, 691/po/1/180.
58 Charles Dillon to Luis de Geofroy, Tientsin, 18 February 1874, in AMAE, Consulate de Tientsin, 691/po/1/173. The application of the Portuguese citizen De Castro is dated 18 February 1874.
59 Geofroy's letter of 13 July 1872, was addressed to Dillon and reported by Dillon himself.
60 Charles Dillon to Luis de Geofroy, Tientsin, 18 February 1874, in AMAE, Consulate de Tientsin, 691/po/1/173.
61 Concession française de Tientsin, Règlements municipaux, 1894, Pékin 1900.
62 Still useful is the classic work by T. Dennett, Americans in Eastern Asia: A Critical Study of the Policy of the United States with Reference to China, Japan and Korea in the 19th Century (1922); see also J. King Fairbanks, Trade and Diplomacy on the China Coast: The Opening of the Treaty Ports, 1842–1854, 2 vols. (1953). With closer reference to the legal aspect, the recent book by T. Ruskola, Legal Orientalism (2013); also J. Kroncke, The Futility of Law and Development: China and the Danger of Exporting American Law (2016).
63 C. Denby, The American Concession at Tientsin, 4 (enclosure 1 to Charles Denby's letter to Richard Olney, 3 August 1895), in National Archives and Records Administration at College Park MD (hereafter NARA), Microfilm Publications, Despatches from US Ministers to China (1843–1906), M 92, R 99.
64 C. Denby, supra note 63, at 5–6. The first consular representative of the United States was actually a simple American citizen, Meadows, living in Tientsin who in 1866 ‘was appointed acting U.S. consul’. On the role of Burlingame see Schrecker, J., ‘“For the Equality of Men – for the Equality of Nations”: Anson Burlingame and China's First Embassy to the United States, 1868’, (2010) 17 Journal of American-East Asian Relations 9–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
65 The US settlement extended over an area of 23 acres, from the river to Taku Road and from the southern part of the British concession to the cemetery, see Denby, supra note 63, at 4. See also short notes in Rasmussen, supra note 1, at 36; Clifford Jones, supra note 1, at 129–30; L. Bernstein, A History of Tianjin in the Early Modern Times, 1800-1900 (1988).
66 Denby, supra note 63, at 8.
67 The map of the American Concession is enclosed with a letter written by the US ambassador in Beijing, Edwin H. Conger, to the Secretary of State John Hay, 21 January 1902 (1843–1906), in Nara, Microfilm Publications, Despatches from U.S. Ministers to China (1843–1906), M 92, R 116. It has also been published by Vaicbourdt, N., ‘De la «me too policy» aux ambitions contradictoires: la brève histoire de la concession amèricaine de Tianjin, 1860-1902’, (2014) 382/383 Outre-Mers. Revue d'histoire 27Google Scholar, at 33.
68 William N. Pethick to James Zuck, 8 September 1883, in Nara, Microfilm Publications, Despatches from U.S. Ministers to China (1868–1906), M 114 R 5.
69 Ibid., at 8.
70 Ibid., at 9.
71 Ibid., at 8.
72 Denby to the Zongli Yamen, 31 July 1895, at 3 (enclosure 3, Denby's letter to Olney, 3 August 1895), supra note 63.
73 S. Paine, The Sino-Japanese War of 1894–1895: Power, Perceptions, and Primacy (2003).
74 Denby to His Excellency the Viceroy (enclosure 2 to Denby's letter to Olney, 3 August 1895). On the lines of Denby's diplomat policy see David Anderson, Imperialism and Idealism: American Diplomats in China 1861–1898 (1985), 144 ff.
75 Richard Olney to Charles Denby, Washington 18 October 1895, in Nara, Microfilm Publications, Diplomatic Instructions of the Department of State (1801–1899), M 77 R 42, 265–8.
76 Denby received Olney's letter at the beginning of December 1895. His answer is dated 25 January 1896, in Nara, Microfilm Publications, Despatches from U.S. Ministers to China (1843–1906), M 92 R 100, 1–4.
77 The official answer of the German consul in Tianjin to Denby's request is enclosed in the letter addressed to Olney dated 25 January 1896, also in Nara, Microfilm Publications, Despatches from the U.S. Ministers to China, M 92 R 100 (1895–1896).
78 Charles Denby to Richard Olney, Peking, 2 April 1896, ibid., at 2.
79 Prenzler, J. (ed.), Die Reden Kaiser Wilhelms in den Jahren 1896-1900, B. 2, Leipzig, Reclan, 1904, at 209–12Google Scholar.
80 G. Jellinek, China und das Völkkerecht (1898) in Id. Ausgewählte Schriften und Reden, B. 2 (1911), 491. On Jellinek's article, see also S. Kroll, Normgenese durch Re-Interpretation China und das europäische Völkerrecht in 19. und 20. Jahrhundert (2012), 44–5
81 Jellinek, ibid., at 492.
82 L. Nuzzo, Origini di una scienza. Diritto internazionale e colonialismo nel XIX secolo (2012), 77–86, 202–21.
83 N. Luhmann, Die Gesellschaft der Gesellschaft (1997), B. 1, 92.
