To ediliaead @ 
 
 
 
 vA 
 lA 
 SOURCE MATERIA’. ON THE STUDY OF THE QUESTION 
 I. Statements from Authorities on International Lew. 
 A. Absolute Power of the State in International Indemnities . « » +» «+ » 2 
 Borchard: Diplomatic Protection of Citizens Abroad. 
 William M. Evarts. 
 William Howard Taft. 
 State Department Communication to Fordéign Missions Conference of N.A. 
 B. General Principles upon which Claims are Based. - +++ se tees 5 
 Borchard: Diplomatic Protection of Citizens Abroad. 
 Sikes we er ene CO Lame 6s ese WA se ee a eee 8 me ee 6 
 Secretary of State Hay. 
 II. Missionary Attitude toward Indemnities: 
 A. Opinion in Indemnities prior to the Boxer Uprising. .-+-+-+:*°* 9 
 Dr. S. L. Baldwin in Report of Foreign Missions Conference of N.A. 
 1896 
 B. After the Boxing Uprising in 1900; Opinion for and against Indemnities10 
 Dr. F. F. Sherwood. 
 Dr. C. F. Reid. 
 Bd. of Foreign Missions, Reformed Church in America, 1901. 
 Resolution of a Conference of American Missionary Societies 1901. 
 China Inland Mission. 
 Church Missionary Society & C.H.Z.M.S. 
 Bd. of Foreign Missions,Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A. 1906. 
 C. World Missionary Conference, Edinburgh, gh 2 Bo Cire ene wea olay ie Caan ak 14 
 Report of Commission ~ Seven. 
 CIEE REE ita Bk: CES SP ean an ee eC 17 
 Statement in Chinese Recorder, 1910. 
 Statement in China Mission Year Book 1924. 
 Statement by Dr. D. HE. Hoste, 1924. 
 Statement by T. C. Chao, 1924. 
 Dr. R. E. Speer; Report on Japan and China, 1926. 
 Dr. James L. Barton, 1924. 
 oe ee eee ee eee a addy OW Wega FA OD mE a ie a el od 24 
 ‘Bd. of Foreign Missions,Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A. 
 ¥. M, C. Ay 
 Bd. of Foreign Missions of the American Friends. 
 Conference of Missionary Societies of Great Britain and Ireland. 
 Pile eke Gee Ge Ge UONEIGSTOR 6 ada wn Wee we Ree ee OES ee 26 
 
 (Note: This paper is not intended to present any conclusions regarding the policy 
 
 that the missionary boards should adopt. Its purpose is only to make generally 
 
 available a considerable number of pertinent statements that may assist each 
 Board in determining for itself the policy that it will adopt. It may be that 
 this paper may serve as a basis for’ joint discussion of this subject, if that is 
 found desirable. Comments on the subject and answers to the suggested questions 
 are invited. 
 
 A. L. Warnshuis 
 New York City, May 6, 1927.) 
 
TEIMSGNTS OF AUTHORITIDS ON INTORNATIONAL LAW. 
 rom the legsl point of view the subject of indemnities, or clains made by 
 ‘ag citizens of one country for injuries to their persons or property in another 
 
 sountry is one of the most complicated problems in international law. 
 
 A. Absolute Power of the State in International Indemnities. 
 
 Under certain conditions an injury to an individual becomes a matter of 
 international negotiation. When this is so the government, claiming the indemnity, 
 acts as sovereign power, entirely independent of the person injured, in treating 
 with the government within whose borders the injury occurred. It is important that 
 this fact be fully appreciated in order to understand the situation in China today. 
 
 This right of the State to protect its citi,ens and their property is Nelad: 
 according to Dr. Edwin Borchard, on the theory formulated by Vattel: 
 
 " ‘Whoever uses a citizen ill, indirectly offends the state, which \ 
 is bound to protect this citizen; and the sovereign of the latter 
 should avenge his wrongs, punish the aggressor, and, if possible, 
 oblige him to make full reparation; since otherwise the citizen 
 would not obtain the great end of the civil association, which is, 
 safety.' (Vattel, Chitty-Inghrahem ed., Phila., 1855, Bk. II, ch.VL 
 Para. 71} The indirect injury which the state sustains by an injury to one 
 of its citizens warrats bringing into operation the state's protective machinery."* 
 
 In discussing this point further Borchard leaves no doubt as to the full power 
 of the Government in the protection of its citizens and their property and the 
 
 éxtent to which this power is used. He says, 
 
 "The discretionary power of the Executive in the presentation of diplomatic 
 claims, and in respect of the time, extent and means of pressure enables the 
 Department of State to exercise the fullest control over claims... Claims arising 
 out of certain torts, of an especially flagrant and serious nature, such as murder, 
 mob violence, etc., are usually pressed at once by the United States and other 
 governments, without requiring the exhaustion of local remedies. (E. G., Lienchou 
 riots in China, 1904; Grenada Massacre of Odtober 13, 1856). The Department, 
 
 ~ 
 
 *Borchard, Edwin MN. - The Diplomatic Protection of Citizens Abroad. 
 
 Naw York, 1916, p. 351 
 
PROSE es has tho right to prosacuts 2 claim against a foroign eovernment cithor 
 in its original form, to modify it, or to cficct a commromiso without the permis- 
 sion of the claimant, and without renduring itself responsible to the claimant 
 
 oy reason of tho oxercise of such diserctionery powers. In the protection of tho 
 citizon, the sovsrnment's authority and the powsrs aro plenary. The citizen 2s 
 bound by its action, and must accept the measuro of protection which the Executive 
 orficials in tho exerciso of their sound discretion deem it proper to afford."* 
 
 Again he says: 
 
 t, . . Ths government is the solo judge of what claims it will enforce, and 
 of the mannor, timo, moans and oxtant of enforcement. It may refuse to present 
 2 claim at all. After espousal of a claim, the government may abandon it, submit 
 it to arbitration or make any disposition thereof which it dcoms oxpedicnt in the 
 public interest, o.g., the govurnment may compromise it, or releaso it, without 
 componsation or for a consideration of benefit to tho goncral public." ** 
 
 In discussing tho point of sovercign authority Dr. Borchard specifically 
 mentions the rights of citizons to with@raw claims. Ho states that: 
 
 "Tho governmont may prosacuto 4 claim arising out of an injury to a citizen 
 notwithstanding the fact that the citizen doclines to make any complaint (This 
 happened in certain dascs of missionarios murdered in the Licnchou riots, 1904 } 
 or ronounces his right to an indemnity. (British Vico-Gousal Magee in 1874 cx- 
 pressly ronounced all indemnity for an outrage against him committed by 2 local 
 governor in Guatomala, on the ground that his personel intorests would suffer 
 therby. Notwithstanding the ronunciation, am a salute to the British fleg by 
 Guetomala, Great Britain pressod and collected a claim for L 10,000 indemnity. 
 
 65 Ste Pap. 875, at 900; Baty, 171). Nevertheless, unless the offense is partic- 
 ularly flagrant or may be doomed 2 national affront, the individual's waivor of 2 
 right to indemnity weakens the moral, if not tho logal, right of his government 
 to domand reparation, and tho eovornmont may well considor itsolf justified in 
 dosisting from pressing & claim waived by the {ndividueal who actually sustained 
 injury. Arbitral tribunals have rogarded a private waiver of a claim 2s 2 bar to 
 an internationel roclamation." *** 
 
 “dllian M. Evarts, former Secratary of State, omphetically states that 
 
 "The first duty of 2 rovernmentis to protect life ane property. This is 2 
 
 paramount obligation. For this governments ar: instituted, snd governmon ts 
 eae bs : Seip * x 
 neglecting or failing to perform it become worse thon useless."** 
 
 *Borchard pe 365° 
 **Borchard pe 36 
 **x*Borchard p. 371-3872 
 
 ««**The Nation, April 16, 1927, pe 3926 
 
witbes 
 President Taft said in December 1909: 
 
 "A gitizen cannot by contract or otherwise divest himself of the right, 
 nor can this government escape the obligation, of his protection in his persoanl 
 id property rights when these are unjustly infringed in a foreign country." * 
 
 Moreover, this principle of the absolute authority of the Gtate in matters 
 of the protection of its citizens has been expressly stated to the Foreign 
 Missions Conference of North America by the State Department. Dr. James L. 
 Barton, Chairman, Subcommittee on Missions and Governments, Regarding Privileges 
 Acoorded to and Responsibilities of American Missionaries, Under Existing Treaties 
 with China, has made known this communication. He says; 
 
 ", . » I have in my possession a statement that 1 understand is being 
 Girculated in China for signatures, in which the signers expressed their ‘earnest 
 desire that no form of military pressure be exerted to protect us or our 
 property; that in the event of our capture by lawless persons or our death 
 
 at their hands, no money be paid for our release, no punitive expedition 
 be sent out, no indemnity exacted. This statement virtually, for the 
 
 signers, abrogates their rights under the treaties existing between China and the 
 United States, giving extra-territorial privileges to all American citizens. 
 
 "T have taken up the matter with the State Vepartment and have received 
 from the Department a ruling in terms as follows; 
 
 " 'In general, American aitizens are not entitled to waive rights of 
 the character to which you refer. The treaties concluded between China 
 and the United States are contracts between two Governments. They 
 expressly provide that American citizens in China shall enjoy, with 
 respect to their person and property, the protection of the legal 
 authorities of government, and that they shall be exempted from the 
 processes of Chinese law. The observance of these provisions of the 
 treaties this government has a right to insist upon and doubtless 
 would insist upon irrespective of the wishes of particular individuals 
 who may be influenced by religious or other beliefs. It has been re- 
 peatedly held that a citizen cannot, by his individual act, control 
 the right of his government to intervene or afford protection in an 
 appropriate case. 
 
 "'with reference to the exercise of extra-territorial rights, Congress 
 has furthermore enacted legislation extending to American citizens in 
 China the laws of the United States. No American citizen in China, so 
 long as he remains such, can waive the application to his person or 
 property of such laws by the claim of a preference to be subect to the 
 laws of China. The surrender of such rights by a portion of the American 
 
 * Speer, Robert. Report on Japan and Uhina, 1926, p. 432. 
 
Be 
 
 community in China oven if by 2 very small number of ingividuals 
 
 would seriously impair tho whole system of tho trestics 2s de- 
 
 Signed for the protection of all classes of Amorican citizens in 
 
 that country.' This statemont sets forth tho attitude of tho Department of 
 Stcte with respect to this subjoct."* 
 
 B. Genoral Principles Upon Which Claims Are Based 
 
 the United States Government, therefore, being responsitle for the presenta- 
 tion of claims, tho amount claimed and thc mothod of pressing the claim, the 
 international law on tho subjoct automatically becomes tho problem of tho govern- 
 mont. Missions or individuals have no logal right to interforo. 
 
 The law on this subject is extromely complicated. Tho major casos fall 
 roughly into the following categories; claims for acts of individuals, brigandage, 
 
 mob violence, insurgents, successful revolutionists, and war claims. ‘Within those 
 
 categories thero are many varying degrees of liability, and many points of law to 
 be considsred. Although it would not be profitable to consider in eny dotail the 
 law on these points, it may be of intcrest to note horo Dr. Borchard's surming up 
 of the underlying principles upon which tnese claims are mado. He says: 
 
 "Private individuals aro in no sense authorities of the state. For this rea- 
 son, their acts do not involve the international responsibility of the state un- 
 less tho latter by some independent delinquency of its own may be charged with a 
 violation of its intcrnational obligations. Tho first of theso obligations in 
 so far as it affocts the present subject is to furnish legislative, administrativo 
 and judicial machinsry which normally would protect the alien against injurics 
 to his person or property by private individuals. (Grotius, II, ch.21, Sec. 2,; 
 VEttOly Civ wells Che Vby,. Soca sF1l-73 5 Otc, } This does not mean that the govern- 
 mental machinery of the state must be so officient as to prevent all injury to 
 alions - for this would mako of the state a guarantor of the security of aliens - 
 but simply thst its logislation, its police, and its courts, whatever the form of 
 government, must be so organized that a violent act by ono private individual upon 
 anotner is only a fortuitous event and that the judicial channels for legal re- 
 courso against tho wrong-doer are freely open. A second and subsidiary duty, a 
 default in which has ofton served to fasten responsibility upon the state, is the 
 use of due diligence to prevont the injury, and in a criminal caso tho oxortion of 
 all reasonable efforts to bring the offenders to justice. 
 
 *Lottor from Dr.James L. Barton to Mr. Fennol P. Turner, April 3, 1924 
 Sec also Chinese Recorder, Doc. 1924 
 
aye 
 
 "It is a fundamental principle thet the legislation of a state must be such 
 as to enable it to fulfill its international duties. Its law mist impose penal- 
 ties upon the violation by individuals - natives, residents or aliens - of the 
 “nuitional obligations Of the state. . ."* Under the heading Special Protection 
 
 : in Certain Ceses, he makes the statement that; 
 "She obligation to indemnify arising out of a treaty guaranty of special pro- 
 n, regardless of any delinquency of the authorities, is illustrated in the 
 243 O07 the Panama riot claims of 1856 against New Granada, which the latter coun- 
 try satisfied on account of having undertaken, by article 35 of the Treaty of 1646 
 wits tie United States, 'to preserve peace and good order along the transit route’. 
 wherever a government obligates itself to preserve order, as weak countries fre- 
 guentiy do, claims for injuries arising out of mob violence are usually rigorously 
 prosecuted. China, indesd, regardless of treaties, has in innumerable cases been 
 held to a segree of responsibility amounting actually to a guaranty of the security 
 of persons and property of aliens. (In fact, so frequent have been ths cases of 
 murder of missionaries by rioters in China that a ‘practice of the U.S. has grown 
 
 up fixing the sum of $5,000 as indemnity for a human life. Tho British and Freach 
 covernuments exact as heavy indemnities as possible, ard exemplary damages es well, 
 in flagrant cases. These cases in China are illustrated by the following incidents: 
 The Boxer movement, Moore's Dig. V, 476-533; the Lienchow indemnity, For.Rel.,1l90°, 
 146; other casos in For. Rel,etc.) ‘Turkey, Morocco and other countries wheres gov- 
 ernmental control is weak and civil disorders are not an abnormal condition are 
 hoid only to a slightly narrower degree of respdénsibility.''** 
 
 3. Method of Making Claims. 
 
 One other point must be considered; i.e., the method of presenting claims. 
 The following methods have at various times been followed; the method of the mis- 
 sionary presenting the claim directly to the local authority; of’ the missionary 
 prosentins the claim to the local consul who presents it to the loozl puchoritys 
 of the Missionary presenting it to the local constl who sends it to Wachi..»*or or 
 settlement with the central government; and finally of bi missionary s-° 
 Statement for individual claims to the lission: Board for the Board to forw.cn |) 
 the U.S.Government for settlement with the Chinese Government. In respect to local 
 
 Settioment of claims, Secretary Hay, in 1901, sent the following communication to 
 
 & consul in China expressing the offical attitude in the matter: 
 
 *Borchard, p. 213-214 
 **Borcherd ,(fe. Bee 
 
-7= 
 7 Af. Fo PORE , 
 Mr. Hay to i. Squiers. 
 
 "Department of State, 
 Washington, July 17, 1901 
 
 Sir: 
 
 "I have to acknowledge the receipt of your-despatch, No. 640 of May 28 last 
 reporting that the governor of Shantung, in his desire to appease the missionaries 
 has agreed to pay a claim presented by Messrs. Crawford & Hudson. 
 
 "You say: ‘It seems to me unfortunate that the missionary, owing to his peculi- 
 ar status, Gan present and recover damages that an ordinary resident of the country 
 will be precluded from doing, under the rules recently adopted by the foreign rep- 
 resentatives. . . I have reference to Traveling expenses to and from the United 
 States, and extra living expenses while there.', and you add that the settlement 
 by missionaries of the claims of native Christians has caused no end of criticism 
 and ill feeling especially in the province of Chihli, ard among foreigners as 
 well as Chinese;* and that while it might be at times a source of great annoy- 
 ance and trouble to our consuls and the legation you think that in the end it 
 would prove to the best interests of the missionaries and their work if they were 
 rrecluded from any official intercourse whatever with the local officials on mat- 
 tars pertaining to these native Christians. | 
 
 "In reply I have to say that, while unable to apply coercion to American citi- 
 zens in the provinces to prevent their compromising their claims with ‘the local 
 authorities this Department has in its instructions to the consuls, uniformly dis- 
 couraged indenendent negotiations between individuals sufferers and the district 
 officers for the adjustment of alleged losses, and has injoined upon the consuls 
 non-intervention to bring about any such personal settlement of difficulties which, 
 sO far as this Government is concerned, are being settled in the course of the 
 Seneral negotiations at Pekin. 
 
 "On the 20th of December last an instruction in that sense was sent to the 
 consul at Amoy, which I quote for your information, as follows; 
 
 "tT have to acknowledge the receipt of your No. 49 of Nov. 7, 1900, reporting 
 thet you have adjusted all the claims for damages to American mission property 
 snd have received in settlement thereof the sum of $3,000 Mexican. 
 
 "'The good disposition of the local authorities is appreciated and if the 
 settlement affected by you is acceptable to the sufferers, the Department does 
 not oppose it. Such partial and scattered settlements can not, however, effect 
 this Government in dealing with the general question of a settlement with the 
 Chinese Government which shall secure deterrent and exe™; tary punishment and afford 
 sugsranties for future safety of our citizens. 
 
 "’The position maintained by this Government is that international indemnities 
 especially for Americans murdered are adjustable by the Pekin Treaty, and that 
 the negotiations can not be divided by separate local demands. If the local 
 
 *No. 355 (in House Documents 57th Cong. lst Session, 1901-02. 
 4268, pp. 98-99) 
 
ay 
 
 authorities offer to repair local losses by direct errangement with the sufferers, 
 officers of this Government are neither to support nor to object to them. 
 
 "tyYou will act accordingly in the future.! 
 
 "On the 2lst of the same month an instruction of similar tenor was sent to 
 the Consul at Fuchau. 
 
 "hile regarding these separate compositions of claims as unsanctioned and as 
 not involving any responsibility on the part of this Government to effect their 
 axecution, the Department must necessarily take equitabl3 cognizance of them as 
 matters of fact if for no other reason than to bar any duvlicate claim upon the 
 international indemnity by reason of the same losses. Hence they should, whenever 
 vossible, be reported to the Department, for its information by the legation or 
 the consuls.* 
 
 John Hay." 
 
 In a recent private communication from China it has been suggested that all 
 
 f-+ 
 
 ‘al 
 ) 
 
 aims be filed with the mission boards and if necessary be presented by the 
 
 mission boards to the government in order to secure as uniform a policy as possible. 
 
II wee 
 MISSIOVARY ATTITUDE TOWARD INDSMNITIES 
 
 Although missionary societies cannot legally force the government to 
 act, or to abstain from acting, nevertheless a certain latitude is allowed 
 to missionaries in relation to indemnities. ‘the government is unofficially 
 influenced by the expressed opinion of tha Societies. Moreover, missions 
 are free to determine their own attitude in relation to the accepting of 
 indemnity monay. from their government. 
 
 For this reason it is well to give careful consideration to the action 
 
 of tne Roards at various times. 
 
 
 
 A. Qvinion on Indemmities prior to the Boxer Jprising. 
 
 The Roxer Uprising brought the qua stion of indermities to a sharp 
 issue: Fefore that time missions had received the customary protection 
 and when damage was done had received -compensation- -@o be sura, some 
 question had been raised as to the duty .of the government to protect mis- 
 sionariss in the interior of China, it, Uae bees Low and Hey had been 
 prompt and effective in their aid to missionaries. Offenders we.e punished 
 and indemnities paid whenever occasion demanded. *In 1695 at The Forsign 
 Missions Confarence of North America, Dr. SeL- Baldwin in a paper on "The 
 
 Helaticns of Boards, Missionaries and Converts to Governnerts, Home and 
 
 a) 
 
 Forz:ign" had said: 
 
 "Tt is one of the functions of government to assure justice to the 
 sovermed, and to protect them in the exercise of their rights. Missionaries 
 may justly pani protection as citizens pursuing a lawful calling. Boards 
 may proverly ask that the Government shall give to them the same re- 
 
 Cogn 11t1i0n that is given to other corporations engaged in legitimate businesse 
 A misslonary dogs not cease to be a citizen when he becomes 4 foroi get 
 missionary, any more than’a merchant ceases to be a citizen when he goes 
 
 to establish himself in mercantile business in a foreign lands, or a traveller 
 when he gous abroad for purposes of pleasure or of GISCOVETY wessseeee 
 
 "yg must hold steadfastly to the rights of our missionaries as citizens 
 abroad, enguged in honorable accupations and entitléd to full protection of 
 their lives, persons and property « » « « « « 
 
 *Report of Comnittues of the House of Representatives. lst Session, 49th 
 Congress, 1885-86. Document na. 2044. Svries Noe P441, De 41-53. 
 
MA M4/ =) n -.i0— 
 
 "The missionary in a foreign land should always remember that he is a 
 guest. Imperious airs are not becoming. Requusts ars more in place than 
 demands. Much patience should be exercised. The fewer the calls he makes 
 upon the government the better. But, on the other hand, he should never 
 surrender his rights as a citizen of his country; and when necessity arises 
 he can stand firmly on those rights, and ask the government to protect his 
 ‘life and save his property from destruction. In most cases a firm and 
 steady demand by the representative of his governmont will sscure ail that 
 is newded. ‘I aman American citizen" ought to bs fully as offuctive to-day 
 as *I am a Roman citizen' was in tho centurics that are gone. Thess principles 
 aro elementary, inherent in tho vory relation of the government 2nd the citizen 
 to each other. They are seldom daniod br any reprosentative of our own 
 government or by the authorities of forsign nations." 
 
 Tho view expressos in this papsor found hearty ondorsement in the 
 resolutions of tho Conforencese 
 in 1900: Opinion for and against Indgmnitios. 
 
 Be After tho Boxor Uprisin 
 
 
 
 Shortty after this tho Boxer Robolliion occurred. Ths first roaction to 
 these atrocitios was one of horror. Somos missions called for punitive measures 
 as indosd the govarnnsnt did. Some accept id only indemnity for iives and 
 property loste Somo rofusod indomnity for lives lost, accopting only a vory 
 modgrate indemity for damages to proportya In the 1901 Report of the Foreign 
 Missions Conference of North America, Dr. F.Fs« Ellinwood put the case very 
 strongly in favor of indemmities. He said; 
 
 "We have thus far dealt with this question from the standpoint of the 
 governments or of the foreign communities in general or of the citizens of ths 
 commonwealth at home. It remains to inquire what should be the attitude of 
 the missionaries themselvese Shali they demand protection of their rights, 
 and, if so, when and how far? We have considered citizenship as one aud the 
 same everywhere, at home and abroad. It follows that if religious beliefs 
 or employments 2re to excludes any class from protection in a foreign land, 
 the same distinctions should exclude them here at home. Unless strong reasons 
 can be shown to the contrary, missionari¢s in China should be included in the 
 Same category with the pastors of the churches, theological professors, or 
 missionary secretaries engaged in religious work at home. Dogs thy fact of 
 engaging in Christian work, in itself, whether in this country or in any other, 
 invalidate the claim for protection? It can not be a mattsr of geography. If 
 a clergyman's house has been looted and destroyed by a mob of drunkon soldiors, 
 or with the instigation or connivance of publiec officials here in the common- 
 “ealth of Now York, should the homelass family waive ali clai.s for indomnity? 
 Or if ho wore a home missionary, ought his board of socisty to mast the loss? 
 It is difficult for us, who dwoll safoly in our Christian homs under onlight- 
 ensd governments, to judge of ths situation as missionariss havo viswod it 
 from their standpoint of dangere No doubt there would ba ong opinion, and 
 only one, in regard to the course which should be pursuod if a mob in this 
 country were to loot the property and take tho lives of mombors of any law-abXing 
 
ap fe 
 
 roligious sociuty. Wo on. would ciaim that their roligious buliafs ought to 
 arrest the exccution of justics, oithur in rogard to the property destroyed, 
 or to tho punishmunt of tho assassins. 
 
 "There has -boun an unwarrantable outburst of criticism aguinst missionarics 
 
 at Psking for the strong ground which they took in rogard to tho nocessity of 
 punishment for the Boxurs and guilty officials. They mado this plea not for 
 thamsalvas - for they woru safo ~ but for ths sscurity of missionarios glsowhore, 
 and in all tho futuro. While we would encourago moderation in the demands of 
 the Governments for punishmont, ovon though as a safoguard for tha futuro, wo 
 would still remind citizons of tho Unitod States or tho British Hmpiro that tho 
 position of the missionariss is precisely that which evorybody without sxcaption 
 “ould take wore such atrocities to braak out here at homo. It would be folt 
 that the very foundations of order and public scacurity wors at stake. Thera is 
 no justices, thorufore, in branding thu missionarias as "bloodthirsty" whon, 
 with the impression of outrage and dangor which has been madg upon them by 
 displays of unparallelod atrocity, thoy advocated the terrors of tho law as 
 
 tha only mans of futuro safetye They wore doubtless convinced that this 
 necessity, instvad of being weaker in China than undor the same circumstances 
 
 in Amorica, is stronger, from the very nature of the peoplo with whom thcy 
 have to dgale 
 
 "The qusstion, how far missionzri¢s may waivo thoir claims is a complox 
 question, and distincticns should be mado, first between the claims of an 
 individual missionary for personal indemity, and the claims of the mission 
 or tha missionary socisty which he renresents; and we should also consider 
 tha bearing of his action upon ths safety of other citizens of forcign 
 ceuntrics according to the principles of which we hava spckon abovce New 
 Testament oxanples may throw some lignt upon this pointe A distinction, 
 Sinilar to that hare suggustud, was obscrvod by Paule He folt at liborty to 
 submit to indignity and crucl porsscution at Lystra and Iconium, while at the 
 sam; time, hs does not appoar to have felt that he had any right to waive his 
 claim as a Roman citizen whon arraignod before public officials at Philippi. 
 He was insistent not only upon his psrsonal liburty¢g but avon upon a formal and 
 official recognition of it, feeling, doubtless, that groat principles wore at. 
 stak6 which he had no right to disregard . ..« , "* 
 
 In the discussion of this paper Dr. C.F. Reid, of tho Mothodist Episcopal 
 Church, South, said: 
 
 "In reference to the indemity to be demanded of China for the crimes 
 against porson or property, it is parfectly proper and just that tho per- 
 patrators should be punished according to their crimese But as to compsnsa- 
 tion for the lives of missionarios, I am authorized to say that our board 
 dces not bslieva that any demand should be made by the boardse Wo boaliove 
 that it will be a far bettsr policy for the boards to trsat those who may be 
 dspondent upon thoss who wera killed as is customary in other cusaSe 
 
 * Ellinwood, Rov. F.F. Rolaticns of Missicns and Missionariss to Govornmonts 
 (in Report of tha Forvign Missions Confurenco of North America, 1901,p.93-95. 
 
wtoe 
 
 "We feel also that it would be very unfortunate for the missionaries to 
 make any demand for comper.sation in the case of proparty destroyed that should 
 be in the least imnoderate; thit cunmensution should be very moderate, and 
 every bill for losses should be most carefully gone over, to see that no 
 6xtravagart charges are 21ad3 . « « « « 
 
 "T believes that if the missionaries join in the hue and cry for compensa— 
 tion thay will icse in the estimation of the Chinese the churacter for unszlfish 
 éxfort, wWaich for 100 years they have begn at such great pains to build up. 
 
 "Another wees The Chinese have a way, whenever indeamity is claimed for 
 a wrong purvstrated in any given spot, of not making those who perpetrated 
 tha crime bear tho Sbumiar of the indemnity. The central governmant claiis to 
 de this, but practically they demand that tho locai gentry and mon of mjans pay 
 tho till without roferinoo to whether they had any part in tho perpetration of 
 the criua or not. Now, it so happons that in a city like Foo Chor, there are 
 a great many peopls who havs beun very friendly to our missions thera. They 
 havs subscribad somsthing lixe $20,000 to educational ostablishments in that 
 section within the last yoare Suvpose we had lost some property thyre and an 
 indemnity had to bo paid. Tho officials wouid say that thsse mon who had beon 
 most friondly to us would bo ths vory ones who would havo to buar tha grovator 
 part of ths burdon.' 
 
 Tno sum) attitude was adopted by ths Reformed Church in Amorica, as may b3 
 sosn by th: following oxtract from their 1901 Report: 
 
 "Dumazgo was dons to tho nowly crectod chapel at Lengooa, and smallor 
 hapvels in thro othsr outSstations connoct:d with tho Chiang—chiu fiolde 
 ta ths. lcssos ampla though moderate reparation was made by tha Taotai 
 through tha officisnt intarvontion of tho consul. ‘Exemplary dumages’ collcctod 
 by hiss, and offercd to tho mission on cortain conditions were declirod by 
 Girsetion of the Exscutive Committos." 
 
 In the autwon of 1901 a confceronco was held of representatives of the 
 different missionary boards and societiss, and it was agreed: 
 
 "Pirst, that as far as possible a uniform policy should be adopted by the 
 Boards and Societies represented. Second, that no agressive claims should be 
 mada for loss of property, but that in response to specific requests of the 
 State Department, 411 such losses should be reported."* 
 
 [he China Inland Mission held a more extreme view. In "The Jubilee Story 
 of the China Inland Mission," p.256-257, we find the following statement; 
 
 j 
 
 * The Sixty-Fourth Annual Revort of the Board of Foreign Missions of the 
 Presbyterian Churcen in the U.SeA., 1901, p. 12. 
 
ah Se 
 
 "In the task of reorganization, ong problem in particular had to be 
 carefully and prayerfully considered, and that was the Missions’ attitude 
 toward compensation. Lon tefors the gunsral cuestion arose, it had been 
 raised locally by tha Governor of Chykiang, wne wus anxious without delay to 
 make what reparation was possible for the massacres at Chuchowfue Mr. Taylor, 
 vho had been approached on this subject, hid advised the Mission 'To claim 
 
 for nothing, but to accept, where offered, compensation 
 
 for destroyed Mission promises and proporty;' 1is I fevsl, ho wrote, 
 "yo hold these on trust for God's work ..«e. For injury or loss 
 
 of life to rofuseo all compensationse® .« « « « » 
 
 "These decisions, however, were subsequently modified in the light of 
 
 giisr lmowiedge and further ccnsideratione Thousands of Chinese, many of 
 
 219m as innocent as the missionaries, had been ruined and robbed of their 
 all, and someti.ies slain through the action of the allied troops, whose conduct 
 was not always beyond reproach. The importance of making clear to the Chinese 
 the distinction between ths principles which govern the action of missionaries, 
 as witnesses to Christ and the Gospel, and those of the temporal power, as 
 entrusted with the vindication of lav and order, was more and more recognized 
 as the aaah: of the losses and sufferings inflicted upon the Chinese became 
 knowvne It was felt that an admirable opportunity presented itself of showing 
 to the enn. in a way that they could readily appreciate, ‘the meskmess and 
 guntioness of Christ, and thorefore it was finally dacided not only not to ontor 
 any Claim against tha Chinsse government, but to refrain from accepting 
 domponsation oven if offered. Though the damage to property amounted to many 
 thousunds of pounds, it was bolicved that if the policy adopted were glorifyirg 
 to God, He would provide what was nocossarye" 
 
 Fey; ch = 
 
 Ths same attituds was taken by the Church Missionary Society and tho 
 Ce Ee Ze Me Se In "The History of tho Church Missionary Socicty" Eugens stock 
 Says: 
 
 ", . « Ond other thing tho British Governmont could doe It could demand 
 of China compensation for outragizs. This is legitimate in the cuso of property, 
 28 when Stavart's Colloge was dostroyod in 1876. But whon Lord Salisbury 
 enquired of tha CeM.S. and CoHe%eMeSe, what compsnsation he was to pross for 
 On acccunt of the Hwasang (Kuchong) massacre, both Socictios repliod that they 
 would accept nonge Any money paid might have boen regarded in Chin& as an 
 indemnity for tha livas of ths missionitrias; and both Committees woro anxious 
 to avoid evan the appearance of vindictivon«ss. In due course, Lord Salisbury 
 wrete tc thes CoM.S. that tho Chinese authorities were mich imprgssed by the 
 "high-mindsd attituds’ of the Socicties. Ths Tsungli-yamen (Chingse Foreign 
 Oftice} informed Sir Claude Macdonald, tha British Minister at Poking, that 
 
 ‘the refusal to accept compensation commanded the Yamon's 
 profcund respect and estcom,’ and that overy offortwould bo made to 
 prevent future disturbances .« » ."* 
 
 *Stock, Hugone, History of tho Church Missionary Socisty, Londcen,Vol-III,n.587. 
 
 
 
we Be 
 In 1906 the Board of Forsign Missions of the pray tartan Church, fol- 
 lowing out their policy already sstablished, voted formally to take no 
 indemnity for the lives of its missionaries and no punitive indemity whatever.* 
 
 C. World Missionary Conference, Hdinburgh, 1910. 
 
 
 
 Opinion on the Boxer indemnities found well considered and widely represon- 
 tative sxpression in the Findings of the Commission VII of the ‘Yorld Missionary 
 Conferences, Edinburgh, 1910. Their statement on the question of compensation 
 in China is quoted here in full: 
 
 "When persecution has broken out in violent form, and there has been loss 
 of property and life, should compensation be sought from the Chinese Government? 
 This question has been fuily answered by many representative missionariess 
 There are a few who think that full legal rights should be exacted from the 
 Chinese Government, a few also, on the other hand, who hold that a Mission in 
 China should never make any claim. The majority, however, occupy a middle 
 position. 
 
 "There is almost entire unanimity in the attitude taken towards compensa- 
 tion for loss of life. Martyr lives are things for which no compensation 
 should be asked or even received by any Mission... Nor should the relatives of 
 the deceased missionary bo encouraged to ask for it, it being understood that 
 the Mission concerned itself makes reasonable provision for the family dependent 
 on hime Chinese Christians, having a different kind of claim upon the Chinese 
 Government, may not fall under this rule; and no consensus of opinion can be 
 affirmed as to their casee 
 
 "Most missionaries take up a different position in respect of compensation 
 for buildings,»etc., destroyed, and other pecuniary losses. A money equivalent 
 can be stated and is justly due. But should it be demanded? some hold that it 
 should, on the ground that, not treaty rights alone, but the very Chinese sense 
 of fairness, make it advisable in the interests of order and justice. Others 
 consider that it may be received if offered, but that it should not be demanded, 
 for Christian Missions in China should not stand upon their legal rights. But 
 nearly all are agreed in saying that there are circumstances under which com- 
 pensation should be declined or returned. The compensation may be made by 
 an assessment, oppressive, corrupt, and irritating, upon the town or district, 
 which enriches the officials and casts odium upon the Christian namo. Or there 
 may be other circumstances which make.it a matter of Christian expediency to 
 bear the loss. ; 
 
 "In any case, it is agreed, nothing more than the bare equivalent for the 
 damage should be taken, - nothing but what a fair-minded Chinese would himself 
 
 *Bulletin No. 10 of the Board of Foreign Missions of the Presbyterian Church; 
 Sse The Nation, Auge 2, 1906, p. 96-97. 
 
~lh- 
 
 recognize as just. Missions should have nothing whatever to do with sums 
 levied as a punitive msasure upon the Chinese. 
 
 "In the case of private losses of missionaries and Chiness Christians, the 
 auestion of compensation must be left to themselves, except where the Mission 
 ta3s upon itself the duty of compensation and the right of applying, if found 
 3ypadient, to the Government for private as well as Mission claims. Elsewhere 
 te Missions can only ask their people to waight the possible effect of patient 
 “.durance and forgiveness, against the possible effect of increasing lawlessness 
 
 the surrender of a just and isgal claim. 
 
 "he foregoing remarks do not, of course, apply to claims made by the 
 Ministsr or Consul for wrongs done to the ‘nationals’ under his protection, and 
 the insult or injury to his country which is involved. Missionaries generally 
 recognize that the diplomatic agents have distinct principles of action, and 
 may even demand punitive measurese But they hold that Missions should not profit 
 by them.'tt* 
 
 . ‘ =f . 
 a 
 
 It is of intersst to nots here what the peinbarg Confgrence reports for 
 areas other than China, and the general Bonaivet Gee: drawn from these reports. 
 
 Japan Bg 5 
 
 umhe Governmnent of Japan, as a highly ‘Giri eed Power, recognises its duty 
 both to its own subjects and to law-abiding citizens of ena. Powers residing 
 ~ithin its torders.e Missionaries, like merchants Gr travellers, confidently 
 look to it to prevent lawlessness, threatening dingér to life or destruction to 
 srovertye And compensation would "doubtless be looxéd. upon as a just claim. 
 Nevertheless, in the most advanced non-Christian land, Christian Missions have 
 to consider the result of claiming their legal rights upon the temper of the 
 people. When in Tokyo a riot, caused by dissatisfaction with the terms of peace 
 at the close of the war with Russia, led to the damaging of some mission property, 
 most if not all of the Missions affected thought it inadvisable to ask for com- 
 pensation from the Government. Contributions made hy Christians, Shintoists, 
 and Buddhists compensated for a part of the damage »'"** 
 
 Duteh Bast Indies 
 
 ‘ . 
 
 i, &8 occasionalir has happened, mission property has beon apnea or 
 sotroyen, the missionaries have refused to accept. any compensation which was 
 levied from tres popuiaticn by special. fines." ok 
 
 Murkey © 
 
 yh ; 5 adh te 
 " , . » missionaries in Turkey are tolerably unanimous in maintaining the 
 
 * World Missionary Conference, 1910, Report of Commission VII: Missions and 
 Governments, pe 17-18. 
 
 «*vorld Missionary Conference, 1910; Report of Commission VII: Missions and 
 Govermments, pe 5b. 
 
 *** Tdem, pe 39. 
 
3 
 
 need for claiming thoir treaty rights. Kor wrongs done of an illegal nature 
 
 (if they are of any importance) redress is usually sought through the Consul 
 
 or Ambassador, generally with satisfactory rasults. Such intervention does 
 
 not irritate the people, who gensrally heave considerable regard for the mis- 
 sionaries; nor does it seem to annoy the officials, except the person against 
 whose action protest is made. One missionary affirms that the officials rather 
 fac1 it due to their dignity that tho Consul should take the matter in hand; but 
 .cst of them find that a direct appeal to the Turkish Officials is more pleasing 
 to the latter, and more quickly successful to themselvese'* 
 
 Abyssinia 
 
 " . » « He (the representative of the Swedish Mission} is an adwocate of 
 missionarios using their full rights in such a country, as submission to injustice 
 and oppression is merely looked upon as an invitation to further insults and 
 injurieset!** 
 
 In conclusion the Comaission reported; 
 
 "In general we think that the propriety of acceptance of indemnity by a 
 Mission is in large degree a question as to the stage of advancement reached by 
 & people by whom wrong to the Mission has been conmitteds In savago islands, 
 while acceptance of voluntary restitution of losses and endeavour to promotes 
 the disposition to offer this might be justifiable and commendable, it is plain 
 that the invoking of foreign aid in the interests for redress for wrong would be 
 indefensible. On the other hand, in countries in which freedom of belief and 
 religious sffort is protected by guarantees representative of a preponderating 
 wublic sentiment, cocperation with Government in its requirement of just reprisal 
 for wrong is a dutye The practical issue to be met by Missionary Societ#os 
 relates to the time when, in any given land or locality, such conditions have been 
 reached that the balance of obligation inclines to the side of cooperation in 
 support of just principles of national and international law. We are inclined 
 to hold the general position that, in casas in which freedom of action by 
 Missionary Societies in respect to the receipt of indemnities is conceded by 
 their own Government, a large permanent good will result if these Societies follow 
 a practice of returning indemnities in cases in which these do not represent a 
 geniinely fres action of the authorities, EPR aaa in a reasonable degree by 2 
 favorable public sentiment. 
 
 "Mhe practice of forbearance should not be followed irrespective of its 
 bearing on the interests of otherse Duty to the commnity may rightly cause a 
 missionary to hold an attitude with regard to wrongs suffered by him different 
 from that which he would hold if the issue concerned only hims#if. ‘The law of 
 service obviously involves the promotion of social order, and thus invloves loyal 
 support of Government in the maintenance of a just administration. Givilised 
 Governments recognise this obligation in provision for compulsory testimony of 
 witnesses in courts of justice, and in the requirement that all citisens shall, 
 upon call, assist officers of the law in making arrests. Whereever a local 
 Government is sincerely committed by its own ideals and by a supporting public 
 
 *Idem, p. 47-46. 
 **Tdem, pe 58 
 
~Li- 
 
 sentisent to requirement of indemnity for wrongdoing, we think that the mis- 
 Sionary and the Missionary Society are under obligation to cooperate with the 
 Government in its efforts tnus to serve the true interests of its people. 
 One things, however, seems to us to be plaine Any appaarance of self-interest, 
 of personal exaction or resentment, is to be scrupulously avoided. As a rule, 
 initiative may well be left to tha Government, acceptance of indemnity being 
 *reatly preferable to a demand for it. Pressure for a high valuation of losses 
 is not inconsistent, and acceptance of indermity obviously in excess of losses 
 wouid be deplorable. The influrence of the missionary and the Missionary Society 
 should be on the side of leniency in the action of Government, and absolutely 
 asainst unjust exaction.e Where the innocent are involved in the payment, 4 
 eenerous attitude is the more important, and consideration may well be given in 
 such cases to the possibility of return of the payment in part, or of relief, 
 by donations to local interests. Tha personal attitude should be unmistable - 
 that of disinterestedness and kindliness; but cooperation in promoting the just 
 ends of a just Government, is a plain obligation, not inconsistent with, but 
 involved in fidelity to the law of service. 
 
 "Tf Christian missions rest upon a just basis and are, therefore, legitimate-— 
 ly antitied to the same protection accorded other interests, will not a courss 
 involving a quiet assumption of this ultimately be most helpful to all interests? 
 
 "Advocacy of acceptance of indemity under international action may, we 
 think, be made from very pure motives and on erat Se in the interests of 
 true and lasting service of manking."* 
 
 D.» China 1910 ~ 1926, © 
 
 Aftar the Boxer trouble subsided, EGSS LCR AL riots continued to cause alarm 
 and distress in Chinae Mission policy in ay he to indemities was still 
 divided. A saction falt that missionary forces should seek reparation in order 
 to force the government to establish order. An argument for this attitude was 
 presented in an article in the Chinese Recorder in 1910. After going to some 
 length to prove that the Bible authority is not conclusively in favor of "no 
 indemnities", the writer puts forth the following arguments: 
 
 "Mha next argument against indemities is. the bitter feeling engendered 
 in the hearts of the Chinesa for having to pay,them., There is a great deal of 
 misapprehension on this point . « » on this,matter’I. can spgak with authority. 
 The bittar faeiing against foreigners, which existed in Hunan when [I first 
 
 travélled in the province was so intense that, when, Te talk about it now nsonle 
 find it hard to believe mé. The people’ did, not know then that China had ever 
 
 ¢ * 
 
 *Tdam, pe 108-9 
 
paid an indemnity to any forsign power. . . but they did know that all foreign 
 powers paid tribute to China, and I was despised and maltreated accordingly. « » 
 At what remote date this bitter feeling was ongendered I du not kuow, bit I am 
 surs tnat it wxists now because itis csrefully cultivatsa by certain classes and 
 
 4-5 Int 
 
 fliction of indemnitiss acts as & oure. « « 
 "tthe fact that it is not the people who have done the injustise that have 
 tO pave'le. an amatter or fact the money is paia from the vublic a nes ; 
 GQ although it has already been taken, or wili be taken from t ¢ tne 
 s001e it does not follow that they are av all conscious of the proces aes its 
 abstr BOtLON + 4 
 
 _ 
 — 
 Ke 
 49) 
 ra? 
 S 
 <> 
 at 
 (D 
 ct 
 G2 c 
 
 tA 
 
 "ttt would be better for the interest of the work if all claims to indsmnity 
 
 were Waived'. .. a few years ago a British Mission had two of its members 
 massacred by a mob at thsir Station in Hunan. The British Consul demanded inaem- 
 nity in spite of the fact that the mission protested, and refused to accent ite « -« 
 Ultimately two American Missions accented the resvonsibility of spending the money 
 for the benefit of the Hunan people. Ons of these has a splendid hosrital and 
 flourishing mission at the scene of the trazedy now, while the Mission to which the 
 martyrs belonged is no longer represented in the city. (Other examples are given 
 to prove value of taking indemnity money). . . 
 
 "Having answered to the best of my ability the arguments against the accept- 
 ange of indemnities, I wish to bring forward a few in favour of the opposite party. 
 "A, The Directors of the Mission Boards are not altogether free agents in 
 the matter of refusing. They are the trustees of certain moneys which have been 
 sivean to them for a Peuheagiae purpose and are not.at liberty to allow them to 
 
 be mMisa;wiied to something else. « .« 
 
 "RB. Neither are missionaries free agents. Even as respects their own lives , 
 they are only Trustees. The value of the life belongs to those who are denvendent 
 on it, and if that value can, in @ measure, be made “good when a life is taken, it 
 ougnt to be done. Some will accept indemnity for property destroyed, but refuse 
 it for life destroyed. They call it ‘blood money’. . . But blood money is the 
 money paid for causing the death of any person - the hire of the assassin - and 
 to apply it to the indemnity paid to relatives of an assassinated man is a misuse 
 Of termSs « « « 
 
 "C. By refusing indemnities missionaries place their government in a difficult 
 position. It cannot stand by and sée its nationals slaughtered and do nothing. It 
 is the missionary's duty therefore to cansider and say what better method thers is 
 of dealing with such oases than on the indemni ty plan, oe 
 
 "De Refusal nas tho Chinese government in a difficult position. The Chinese 
 do not understand at.itous condonation. Ah case is not settled and put away 
 tnsy consider ehaty at is booked up against them; | to be ,brought forward at another 
 tims and payment exacted with aa alae interest. o's” 
 
 "2, Tho refusal of indemnities places missions in a difficult position. There 
 are in China any number of churches, hospitals, schools, and mist¢ionary residences 
 which, through indemnities, rose from their ashes, when, but for these, they would 
 have been in ashes yet. Almost evory large centre, in this part of China, has its 
 riot at some time or other, but the rule is, never oftener than once at the same ~ 
 
~18 
 
 place. Nothing discourages such efforts so mich as to see the establishments 
 which had been destroyed re-srected at the expense of those who did the misohiocf, 
 and more firmly rooted than ever. I shall bo told that such establishments can 
 evar expect to be blessed, but expericnce shows that their work progresses rap- 
 idly and perhaps more rapidly than if there had never been a riot at all. 
 
 "FR. The refusal of indemnities places wido.s and orphans in a difficult 
 position. It dooms them to a life of dependence on the bounty of friends and 
 rolativese « « 
 
 "Ge It also places the native Christians in a difficult position. They 
 must be taught to follow the missionary's example. .. If our teaching is that 
 they must submit cheerfully to robbery, spoilation, incendiarism, and murder, 
 not only without seeking redress, but even refusing it when offered, we are lay- 
 ing down a standard which no community in this world ever made a success of. 
 
 "He Granting that riots will happen, to exact indemnities is good for China, 
 or any other country where the lika is allowed to prevail. . . The best friends 
 of China are not those who condone her wrong doing, but those who make her atone 
 for them."'* 
 
 The next step in the development of the situation in China was the invasion 
 of the country by Bandits. Soldiers without discipline, invading a section of 
 the country pillaging and destroying lives and property. This presented to tho 
 missions another angle of the perplexing indemnity problem. 
 
 Mr. Frederick Onloy, sums up the ius ones attitude in a short paragraph 
 on the subject in the China Mission Year Book for 1924; he says: 
 
 "Much mission and church property has been destroyed, and many Christians 
 have suffered from captivity, and some have lost their lives. In some cases, 
 there has been a notiseable keeness to urge the missionary to claim compensation, 
 and when this has been refused, some bitterness has been caused but this has been 
 modified when missionaries have refrained from claiming compensation for personal 
 and mission losses. The opinion of the Chinese outside the church has been that 
 this is a sign of weakness, and some of the more ignorant have turned from the 
 evangelistic appeal with scorn in consequence. This is probably due to a belief 
 in the church as a help in litigation and a survival from past methods of propa- 
 ganda. On a full explanation of the reasons being given, the outsiders and church 
 members have appreciated the point of view that inasmuch as indemnities in most 
 cases come from added taxes placed on local peonle (who in most cases havo them- 
 selves suffored from bandits with no hope of recress) it is a génerous and 
 Christian act to forego any claim on the Chinese Government. The attitude of the 
 consular officials and business community generally is that indemnities should 
 be claimed in order to force the government to protect the lives and property of 
 foreigners, 
 
 *Aychibald, J. Tho Case for Indemnities (in The Chinese Recorder! 
 {Nove 1910, p.. 719~726) 
 
 
 
5, 
 <2) — 
 owt 
 
 "On the part of the missionary community, opinion is divided. In the case 
 of ono mission, the L. M. S., the exporience of the harm done to the evangelistic 
 work by the acceptance ot indemnities in 1900, has led them to refuse unanimously 
 any ¢claim for destruction of property at Tsaoshih,. At Kuling in the sunmer of 
 1926 a resolution at @ meeting of mission2ries looking to the relinguishment of 
 tho use of force and the exercise of extraterritorial rights found a majority 
 aeainst it, but it is said more might have been in favour had the wording been 
 
 diffierent.''* 
 In speaking of International Agreements, Dr. D. E. Hoste, of the ©. I. M. 
 makes a very pertinent statement on the subject of intervention; he says: 
 
 "Speaking with considerable experience, the writer ventures to affirm with 
 confidence that the policy of suffering wrongfully rather than requesting official 
 intorvention will do more to conserve and promote the good name of the country to 
 which the missionary belongs than the othor course of appealing to consular intor- 
 vention." ** 
 
 It is also significant to note a new attitude on the part of the Chinese 
 
 finding expression today. T. C. Chao is quoted as saying: 
 
 "We necd to understand that such foreign protection and indemnity money as wo 
 receive from the hands of our missionary friends are obstacles to the gospel of 
 peace and love and to the Kingdom of God. .. . Henceforth, all patriotic Chinese 
 Christians mst do the following things; 1. Be determined not to receive foreign 
 protection when in danger; 2. Refuse to receive indemnity money secured by for- 
 eign help, or intervention, for tho loss of lives and property." *** 
 
 When Dr. R. E. Speer was in China in the fall of 1926 the question of indem- 
 nities came up at various conferences. Although no final decision was reached it 
 
 is important to note the action taken. In his Report on Japan and China, Dr. Speer 
 
 Says: 
 
 "In several of the conferences the difficult question of relations of missions 
 and missionaries to governments and to political rights, including the problem of 
 indemnities for loss of life or property was discussed. Various proposals were 
 made and rejected. The Shanghai Conference took no action and this was the only 
 Conference whose Findings were authoritative. The only regional Conference which 
 took action was Twinanfu. There a Committee presented the following resolution; 
 
 *Onley, Frederick, The Bandit Situation and Christain Work. (in The China 
 Mission Year Book, 1924, p. 7-15. 
 **Hoste, D.E., The Christian Attitude Tc‘ard Present International Agreements 
 (in the Chinese Recorder, April 1924, p. 250) 
 ***The Church in China and International Agreements (The Chinese Recorder. 
 April 1924, p. 241) | 
 
 
 
many ie 
 
 "'The Gommittee proposes that tas conference recommend to the Presbyterian 
 Board of Foreign Missions that it should neither seek nor accept indemnity 
 for the loss of missionary life or mroperty, or of mission property, 
 caused by riots or mobs or as a result of civil wars. 
 
 "'We make this recommendation in the belief that it is in accord with 
 the teaching and practise of our Master. 
 
 "'TIn no way can we more clearly reveal Jesus Christ to those who have 
 injured us than to forgive them, and out of love to them, refrain from 
 enforcing lagal rights.' 
 
 "The Tsinanfu Gonference was not prepared to adopt this and substituted for 
 it the foilowing resolution offered by Dr. Lowrie: 
 
 "'While this Conference recognizes the evils arising from an abuse of 
 existing rights of a foreign resident to be indemnified for loss by 
 violence in a foreign land, it is of the oninion that such rights may 
 better be waived by individuals and by the Board of Foreign Missions at 
 discretion than thet such rights of citizenship as are recognized by 
 foreign nations the world over be disaliowed altogether.’ 
 
 "This whole problem of political rights and relationships is, as the Board 
 knows from discussions in its own meetings, a very difficult one. The eariy 
 Church found it so, as one may read in Cadoux's great volume on 'The Early Church 
 and. the World’. Probably the Conferences did well in not trying to make any 
 statement regarding it. Any attempt at st>tement finds it difficult to combine 
 the natural view and instinct of the missionary spirit and the clear plicy of 
 of our government es stated repeatedly in the Evarts doctrine and by the present 
 administration and very distinctly by President Taft in 1909. . . . In the case 
 of Japan and China it is now proposed by some that the difficultyshould be moet 
 and the missionary delivered from all implication in internationel affairs through 
 the naturalization of the missionary as a full citizen of the land to which he 
 goes. Dr. Timothy Lew urged this at the Foreign Mission Conference of the American 
 and Canadian Boards, January 1927. There is something to be said for the proposal. 
 Dr. David Trumbull did this in Chile and Dr. Verbeck would have done it in Japan 
 if there had been any provision for naturalization at that time. At present, 
 however, the plan would probably be found imprecticable. It would mesn the trans- 
 fer of nationality for wife and children too and many things would result for 
 which I suspect neither China nor missionaries are now prepared. Probably the 
 suggestion looks forward to tne day when Foreign Missions will have really ended 
 in China end when the Chinese Church if it wants help from abroadwill call men 
 to come to China and to become Chinese citizens just as we now call men from 
 Europe to come to us to become American professors or pastors.'* 
 
 Dr. James L. Barton has summed up the situation in regard to citizenship 
 
 as follows: 
 
 *Speer, Robert E., Reprot on Japan and China, 1926, pe 431-432 
 
* 
 
 "If a missionsry is convinced that he ought not to claim or receive national 
 protection, and his failure to do so imperils others of his nationals, he might 
 consider becoming a subject or a citizen of the country to which he is giving 
 his life. Then there could be no occasion for his former government to interfere 
 in case he had trouble. If there appeared difficulty in securing citizenship in 
 countries like Japan, China and Turkey, he might vacate his own citizenship and 
 so be without a country and therefore quite romoved from temptation to appeal for 
 rorsonal protection. Perhaps on the whole this would make the most complete dem- 
 
 istration possible of his purpose to live among the people for whom he labours 
 *3 one of them with no protection that they did not also possess. This might apply 
 uot only to countries under extra-territorial privileges but to all missionary 
 lands. In no other way can a missionary completely empty himself of his national- 
 ity so as not to give the impression to the native populations that he has behind 
 him 4 great, powerful, protecting nation."* 
 
 Attention should bo called, however, to the fact that if missionaries should 
 become citizens of China they would receive protection and indemnities would be 
 paid for loss of property or life. In Chinese tradition indemnities are primarily 
 a family responsibility and a community responsibility, entirely a local affair. 
 By relinquishing American citizenship in favor of Chinese citizenship missionaries 
 would not exempt themselves from indemnity but would merely change the authority 
 under which the indemnities would be collected. The Chinese believe in indemnity 
 and collect inemnity for wrongs done their own citizens as well as to foreigners. 
 
 It has been possible in certain instances to stipulate by treaty between the 
 two sovereign powers concerned the way in which the indemnity is to be levied. One 
 instance of this policy was in an argument with Persia, when Mr. Larabee, a Pres- 
 byerian missionary, was murdered. The U. S. Government demanded indemnity from 
 Persia despite the fact that Mrs. Larabee made a specific request that no demand 
 be made, stating that she felt that such a step would do harm to the missionary 
 cause and that the sum would be levied by the Persian Government on innocent people 
 in the arsa where her husband was killed. The U.. S.. Government stipulated there- 
 
 fore that the sum should not be levied locally but should be paid from the general 
 
 treasury. 
 
 *Barton, James L., Some Missionary Activities in Relation to Governments (in 
 International Review of Missions, July 1924, p. 340-359) 
 
t 
 
 The policy of indemnities borders very closely on the entire policy of the 
 relation of missions and governments. Beneath all matters such as exta-territori- 
 ality, citizenship, and incemnities, one might well expect to find a consistent 
 ideal, though policies may vary to suit circumstances. Dr. James tL. Barton, in 
 the conclusion of an article on Missionary Activities and Governments,* expresses 
 the philosophy that lies back of much of the missionary thinking today. He says: 
 
 "The aim of the missionary should be to get as close as possible to the 
 psople he seeks to serve. Ev rything he retains that gives the impression that 
 he is a foreigner possessing special privileges erects barriers between him and 
 the people he would reach. This does not necessarily mean that he should adopt 
 native dress and live in all respects as the people about him live but it does 
 mean that he should in language and in his manner of life avoid giving the impres+ 
 sion that he is a member of a dominant foreign nation which stands ready to defend 
 him in time of danger and avenge his death in case of violence. The missionary's 
 methods of approach and his contact with the people he would best serve are watch- 
 ed to-day and discussed as they have never been before. Perhaps as at no othe 
 period in modern missions has the life of a missionary and his relations to his 
 native colleagues been more under observation or more powerful in commending or 
 condemning the religion he is supposed to exemplify. 
 
 "Educated and travelled natives in all the great missionary countries are 
 rapidly increasingin numbers and are found not only in the mission fields but in 
 the home alnds as well. Many of these have studied Christianity but have not 
 
 accepted it. Others are sincere Christians, but all have a high conception of 
 what the missionary life should be. These do not hesitate to criticise when they 
 see a missionary giving what seems to them undue care to his personal comfort, 
 calling upon foreign forces to protect him from the perils which threaten people 
 all a'out him for whom there is no foreign protection, or when they see him perform 
 and encourage acts which are intended to decive. The missionary lives and works 
 
 in a spedial sense in the limelight, his life and acts should be such as to commend 
 his religion to all as good to believe and adequate for life, and quite different * 
 from that of the other foreigners who make no profession of altruism. While the 
 missionary is thus under close scrutiny, he is in a position, however, so to exem- 
 plify the life and teachings of Jesus Christ and His gospel as to make a wide- 
 reaching impression such as was not possible a generation ago. If his life commends 
 his teaching, he becomes a pwwerful preacher of righteousness. If it does not com- 
 mend his teaching, the evil that he does is wide-spread. Hence it is important 
 
 that the missionary should recognize that the position he holds is unique, quite 
 different from that of m-rchants and travellers or even of diplomatic representa- 
 tives of his government. If he is in a country over whichis own government rules, 
 his position is made doubly difficult because of the tendency on the part of the 
 native populations to regard him as a department of the government itself. Ina 
 wor’, the missionary of this day must be truly a man of God, with a passion for 
 making Jesus Christ in His beauty and saving grace known to all with whom he comes 
 in contact and even to the nation of which he is the guest. Anthing that militates 
 against this is harmful. Everything that conserves this great and high aim adds to 
 
 his efficiency and power." 
 
 *Barton, James L., Some Missionary Activities in Relation to Governments 
 (in InternationalReview of Missions, July 1924, P. 340-359) 
 
4 
 fi 
 oe 
 
 E. Statements of Policy; 1927 
 In the present situation we have received some statements of mission policy 
 in China in relation to indemnities, tho most outstanding being the statement of 
 1G Presbyterian Board of Foreign Missions in relation to the death of Dr. John 
 -¢ Williams, of Nanking. The statement is a confirmation of their policy of 
 refusing indemiity for the lives of their missionarios. It is as follows: 
 
 "A recent death by violence of the Rev. John E. Williams, D.D., an American 
 citizen, in Nanking" the statement says in part "is the occasion for newspaper 
 roferences to the possibility of claim by the American Government for indemnity. 
 
 "Inasmuch as Dr. Williams was a regularly appointed missionary of the 
 Presbyterian Board of Foreign Missions, and as the board and the enterprise which 
 it represents would be indirectly affected by any claim for indemnity on account 
 of his death, we call attention to the historic policy of the board regarding 
 this question. 
 
 "The Presbyterian Board of Foreign Missions has never requested nor accepted 
 indemnity for the death of eny missionary and it ts fully convinced that in the 
 case of Dr. Williams it should adhere to this long-established practice. The 
 board has in mind not only those essential principles which inhere in the motive 
 and aim of missionary service, but also the welfare of the Christian causo in the 
 place where the violence occurs, especially as experience shows that indemnities 
 aré usuaily collected from innocent neonle in the local community. 
 
 "The bofrd can only speak for itself. It is not authorized to speak for any 
 individual versonally concerned in the death of Dr. Williams."* 
 
 The Y. M. C. A. in answer to a request concerning their policy on indemnities 
 for damages at Nanking, cabled to China, April 12th the following m:ssage: 
 
 "David Z, T. Yui, Foreign Committee National Councils United States Canada 
 cooperating with National Committee Y. M. C. A. of China exclusively for the 
 benefit of Chinese people. We sympathize with China in her present difficulties 
 It is not our desire under any circumstances claim damages for losses to foreign 
 secretaries. F. S. Brockman.'** \ 
 
 The Board of Foreign Missions of the American Friends states that: 
 
 ", . « To date we have suffered no loss in Chengtu, West China. The question 
 with us is therefore a theoretical one, but our Gommittee came to the united 
 judgment that in cose we do suffer loss in the future it would not te wise for 
 us to ask for any indemnity. We are carrying on our work in China under a sense 
 of concern to hely the Chinese people. We do not wish to place any embarrassment 
 upon Chinese leaders who may be struggling at the present time for a more demo- 
 Gratic form of Governmtit.*** 
 
 *Oppose Indemnity Over Williams (in New York Times, April 10,1987 tas 
 **Letter from Charles A. Herschleb to Dr. A. L. Warnshuis, April 14, 1927. 
 
 ys <7 
 
~25= 
 
 In the Minutes of Meeting of Standing Committee of the Conference of Mission- 
 ary Societies in Great Britain 2nd Ireland on the 18th March, 1927, there is a 
 short statement on the prusent situation in China. It reads as follows: 
 
 "Arising out of a statement made in the House of Commons that claims had 
 been lodged from missionary societies for damage done in the recent troubles, 
 the Societies working in China had been communicated with, and according to in- 
 formation received only two societies had actually taken up the matter in a 
 tentative way. The whole matter was refyrred to the China Group for further 
 consideration." 
 
 We shall probably receive here from time to time further indications of 
 
 policy which may be issued as a supplement to this report. 
 
III. QUESTIONS TO BU CONSIDERED 
 
 Among the specific questions that arise at this time the following seem to be 
 of especial importance to the Boards; 
 
 1. Is any distinction to be made between mission policy on indemnities for 
 life and for property? 
 
 \ 
 
 A recent American Board memorandum on indemnities says; "The word 
 'Indemnities', as viewed by @ Mission Board, has various bearings. 
 It may cover, for example, loss of life or loss of property; or 
 again the loss of property held by the Board direatly, or the Mis- 
 sion representatives; or the persoanl property of the missionaries; 
 or the buildings and equipment owned by the Christian Communities; 
 or the personal property of Christian Compounds; or, once more, it 
 may cover property the title to which is still held by the Mission 
 or Board, but which has been given over to church or other organiza- 
 tions in the Mission area for their management and control. 
 
 A primary question, therefore, will be as to how the American Board 
 differentiates the various classes of injury and what different 
 attitude it may take in the sase of one or another of them. 
 
 2- Should any distinction be made between asking, - presenting a claim, - 
 for indemnity, and receiving an indemnity that has been claimed and collected by 
 the government? 
 
 3. Should a Board or Society seek to determine the action of individual 
 missionaries, or their families, who might wish to press personal claims for 
 indemnities that are in aacordance with provision therefor approved both by the 
 United States and the nation in question? 
 
 4. Is it better policy to make claims by the home board to the government 
 at Washington, or by the mission and/or individual missionaries to the local 
 consul? Is the amount of the indemnity claimed settled by the Home Board or by 
 the missions on the field? 
 
 5. Is it desirable that the Boards concermed should endeavor to reach an 
 . agreement in defining a common policy regarding these indemnity questions in 
 China at the present time? If so, how should we proceed? 
 
 6. As a@ minimum, would it be advisable to ask the Boards not to take any 
 
 action without informing the other Boards regarding the proposed action? 
 
—29— 
 
 Comments on the subjeat of indemnities and answers to the above questions 
 are invited by the Committee on Missions and Governments. These should be 
 sent to; 
 
 A. Le Warnshuis 
 
 419 Fourth Avenue, 
 New York City. 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 ya He 4