To the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of China:
YOUR EXCELLENCY: By the instructions of my home Government—which reached me on the 10th inst.—I beg to forward you the following reply to China's protest to the latest blockade policy of Germany:—
"The Imperial German Government expresses its great surprise at the action threatened by the Government of the Republic of China in its Note of protest. Many other countries have also protested, but China, which has been in friendly relations with Germany, is the only State which has added a threat to its protest. The surprise is doubly great, because of the fact that, as China has no shipping interests in the seas of the barred zones, she will not suffer thereby.
"The Government of the Republic of China mentions that loss of life of Chinese citizens has occurred as the results of the present method of war. The Imperial German Government wishes to point out that the Government of the Republic of China has never communicated with the Imperial Government regarding a single case of this kind nor has it protested in this connexion before. According to reports received by the Imperial Government, such losses as have been actually sustained by Chinese subjects have occurred in the firing line while they were engaged in digging trenches and in other war services. While thus engaged, they were exposed to the dangers inevitable to all forces engaged in war. The fact that Germany has on several occasions protested against the employment of Chinese citizens for warlike purpose is evidence that the Imperial Government has given excellent proof of its friendly feelings toward China. In consideration of these friendly relations the Imperial Government is willing to treat the matter as if the threat had never been uttered. It is reasonable for the Imperial Government to expect that the Government of the Republic of China will revise its views respecting the question.
"Germany's enemies were the first to declare a blockade on Germany and the same is being persistently carried out. It is therefore difficult for Germany to cancel her blockade policy. The Imperial Government is nevertheless willing to comply with the wishes of the Government of the Republic of China by opening negotiations to arrive at a plan for the protection of Chinese life and property, with the view that the end may be achieved and thereby the utmost regard be given to the shipping rights of China. The reason which has prompted the Imperial Government to adopt this conciliatory policy is the knowledge that, once diplomatic relations are severed with Germany, China will not only lose a truly good friend but will also be entangled in unthinkable difficulties."
In forwarding to Your Excellency the above instructions from my home Government, I beg also to state that—if the Government of China be willing—I am empowered to open negotiations for the protection of the shipping rights of China.
I have the honour to be....
(Signed by the German Minister.)
March 10, 1917.
With a Parliamentary endorsement behind them there remained nothing for the Peking Government but to take the vital step of severing diplomatic relations. Certain details remained to be settled but these were expeditiously handled. Consequently, without any further discussion, at noon on the 14th March the German Minister was handed his passports, with the following covering dispatch from the Chinese Foreign Office. It is worthy of record that in the interval between the Chinese Note of the 9th February and the German reply of the 10th March the French mail-steamer Athos had been torpedoed in the Mediterranean and five hundred Chinese labourers proceeding to France on board her drowned.
Your Excellency:—
With reference to the new submarine policy of Germany, the Government of the Republic of China, dictated by the desire to further the cause of world's peace and to maintain the sanctity of International Law, addressed a protest to Your Excellency on February 9th and declared that in case, contrary to its expectations, its protest be ineffectual, it would be constrained to sever the diplomatic relations at present existing between the two countries.
During the lapse of a month no heed has been paid to the protest of the Government of the Republic in the activities of the German Submarines, activities which have caused the loss of many Chinese lives. On March 10, a reply was received from Your Excellency. Although it states that the Imperial German Government is willing to open negotiations to arrive at a plan for the protection of Chinese life and property, yet it declares that it is difficult for Germany to cancel her blockade policy. It is therefore not in accord with the object of the protest and the Government of the Chinese Republic, to its deep regret, considers its protest to be ineffectual. The Government of the Republic is constrained to sever the diplomatic relations at present existing with the Imperial German Government. I have the honour to send herewith to Your Excellency, the passport for Your Excellency, the members of the German Legation and their families and retinue for protection while leaving Chinese territory. With regard to the Consular Officers of Germany in China, this Ministry has instructed the different Commissioners of Foreign Affairs to issue to them similarly passports for leaving the country.
I avail myself of this opportunity to renew to Your Excellency the assurance of my highest consideration.
March 14th, 1917.
It was not until eleven days later—on the 25th March—that the German Minister and his suite reluctantly left Peking for Germany via America. Meanwhile the Chinese Government remained undecided regarding the taking of the final step as a number of important matters had still to be settled. Not only had arrangements to be made with the Allies but there was the question of adjusting Chinese policy with American action. A special commission on Diplomatic affairs daily debated the procedure to be observed, but owing to the conflict of opinion in the provinces further action was greatly delayed. As it is necessary to show the nature of this conflict we give two typical opinions submitted to the Government on the question of a formal declaration of war against Germany (and Austria). The first Memorandum was written for the Diplomatic Commission by the scholar Liang Ch'i-chao and is singularly lucid:—
"Those who question the necessity for war can only quote the attitude of America as example. The position of China is, however, different from that of America in two points. First, actual warfare will follow immediately after America's declaration of war, so it is necessary for her to make the necessary preparations before taking the step. For this purpose, America has voted several hundred million dollars for an increase of her naval appropriations. America therefore cannot declare war until she has completed every preparation. With China it is different. Even after the declaration of war, there will be no actual warfare. It is therefore unnecessary for us to wait.
"Secondly, America has no such things as foreign settlements, consular jurisdiction or other unequal treaties with Germany. Under the existing conditions America has no difficulties in safeguarding herself against the Germans residing in America after the severance of diplomatic relations even though war has not yet been actually declared, and as to future welfare, America will have nothing to suffer even though her old treaties with Germany should continue to be operative. It is impossible for China to take the necessary steps to safeguard the country against the Germans residing in China unless the old treaties be cancelled. For unless war is declared it is impossible to cancel the consular jurisdiction of the Germans, and so long as German consular jurisdiction remains in China we will meet with difficulties everywhere whenever we wish to deal with the Germans. If our future is to be considered, unless war is declared, the old treaties will again come into force upon the resumption of diplomatic relations, in which case we shall be held responsible for all the steps which we have taken in contravention of treaties during the rupture. It will be advantageous to China if the old treaties be cancelled by a declaration of war and new treaties be negotiated after the conclusion of peace.
"In short by severing diplomatic relations with Germany China has already incurred the ill-feelings of that country. We shall not be able to lessen the hostile feelings of the Germans even if we refrain from declaring war on them. It is therefore our obligation to choose the course that will be advantageous to us. This is not reluctantly yielding to the request of the Entente Allies. It is the course we must take in our present situation.
"The presumptuous manner in which Germany has replied to our demand is an open affront to our national integrity. Recently Germany has deliberately shown hostility to our advice by reiterating her determination to carry out the ruthless submarine policy with increased vigour. All these are reasons for diplomatic rupture as well as for declaration of war. Furthermore, the peace of the Far East was broken by the occupation of Kiachow by Germany. This event marked the first step of the German disregard for international law. In the interests of humanity and for the sake of what China has passed through, she should rise and punish such a country, that dared to disregard international law. Such a reason for war is certainly beyond criticism.
"War should be declared as soon as possible. The reason for the diplomatic rupture is sufficient reason for declaring war. This has already been explained. It would be impossible for us to find an excuse for declaring war if war be not declared now. According to usual procedure war is declared when the forces of the two countries come into actual conflict. Now such a possibility does not exist between China and Germany. Since it is futile to expect Germany to declare war on us first, we should ask ourselves if war is necessary. If not, then let us go on as we are, otherwise we must not hesitate any more.
"Some say that China should not declare war on Germany until we have come to a definite understanding with the Entente Allies respecting certain terms. This is indeed a wrong conception of things. We declare war because we want to fight for humanity, international law and against a national enemy. It is not because we are partial towards the Entente or against Germany or Austria. International relations are not commercial connexions. Why then should we talk about exchange of privileges and rights? As to the revision of Customs tariff, it has been our aspiration for more than ten years and a foremost diplomatic question, for which we have been looking for a suitable opportunity to negotiate with the foreign Powers. It is our view that the opportunity has come because foreign Powers are now on very friendly terms with China. It is distinctly a separate thing from the declaration of war. Let no one try to confuse the two.
"If China decides to declare war on Germany the same attitude should be taken towards Austria. We have severed diplomatic relations with Germany but retain the status quo with Austria. This is fraught with danger. German intrigue is to be dreaded. What they have done in America and Mexico is enough to shock us. The danger can easily be imagined when we remember that they have in China the Austrian Legation, Austrian Consulates and Austrian concessions as their bases of operation for intrigue and plotting. Some say we should follow America, which has not yet severed diplomatic relations with Austria. This is a great mistake. America can afford to ignore Austria because there are no Austrian concessions and Austrian consular jurisdiction in America.
"The question is then what steps should be taken to sever diplomatic relations with and declare war on Austria. The solution is that since Austria has also communicated to our Minister regarding her submarine policy we can serve her with an ultimatum demanding that the submarine policy be cancelled within twenty-four hours. If Austria refuses, China may sever diplomatic relations and declare war at the same time immediately upon the expiry of the twenty-four hour limit.
"In conclusion I wish to say that whenever a policy is adopted we should carry out the complete scheme. If we should hesitate in the middle and become afraid to go ahead we will soon find ourselves in an embarrassing position. The Government and Parliament should therefore stir up courage and boldly make the decision and take the step."
Unanswerable as seem these arguments to the Western mind, they were by no means so to the mass of Chinese who are always fearful lest some sudden reshuffling in the relationships existing between foreign Powers exposes them to new and greater calamities. This Chinese viewpoint, with its ignorance of basic considerations, is well-illustrated by the Second Memorandum, which follows. Written by the famous reformer of 1898 Kang Yu-wei, it demonstrates how greatly the revolutionists of 1911 are in advance of a school which was the vogue less than twenty years ago and which is completely out of touch with the thought which the war has made world-wide. Nevertheless the line of argument which characterizes this utterance is still a political factor in China and must be understood.
... "The breach between the United States and Germany is no concern of ours. But the Government suddenly severed diplomatic relations with Germany and is now contemplating entry into the war. This is to advance beyond the action of the United States which continues to observe neutrality. And if we analyse the public opinion of the country, we find that all peoples—high and low, well-informed and ignorant—betray great alarm when informed of the rupture and the proposal to declare war on Germany, fearing that such a development may cause grave peril to the country. This war-policy is being urged by a handful of politicians, including a few members of Parliament and several party men with the view of creating a diplomatic situation to serve their political ends and to reap great profits.
"Their arguments are that China—by siding with the Entente—may obtain large loans, the revision of the Customs Tariff and the suspension of the Boxer indemnity to Germany, as well as the recovery of the German concessions, mining and railroad rights and the seizure of German commerce. Pray, how large is Germany's share of the Boxer indemnity? Seeing that German commerce is protected by international law, will China be able to seize it; and does she not know that the Kaiser may in the future exact restitution?
"News from Holland tells of a rumoured secret understanding between Germany, Japan and Russia. The Japanese Government is pursuing a policy of friendship toward Germany. This is very disquieting news to us. As to foreign loans and the revision of the Customs Tariff, we can raise these matters at any time. Why then should we traffic for these things at the risk of grave dangers to the nation? My view is that what we are to obtain from the transaction is far less than what we are to give. If it be argued that the policy aims at securing for China her right to live as an unfettered nation, then we ought to ask for the cancellation of the entire Boxer Indemnities, the abolition of exterritoriality, the retrocession of the foreign concessions and the repeal or amendment of all unjust treaties after the war. But none of these have we demanded. If we ourselves cannot improve our internal administration in order to become a strong country, it is absurd to expect our admission to the ranks of the first-class Powers simply by being allowed a seat at the Peace Conference and by taking a side with the Entente!
"Which side will win the war? I shall not attempt to predict here. But it is undoubted that all the arms of Europe—and the industrial and financial strength of the United States and Japan—have proved unavailing against Germany. On the other hand France has lost her Northern provinces and Belgium, Serbia and Rumania are blotted off the map. Should Germany be victorious, the whole of Europe—not to speak of a weak country like China—would be in great peril of extinction. Should she be defeated, Germany still can—after the conclusion of peace—send a fleet to war against us. And as the Powers will be afraid of a second world-war, who will come to our aid? Have we not seen the example of Korea? There is no such thing as an army of righteousness which will come to the assistance of weak nations. I cannot bear to think of hearing the angry voice of German guns along our coasts!
"If we allow the Entente to recruit labour in our country without restriction, thousands upon thousands of our fellow countrymen will die for no worthy cause; and if we allow free exportation of foodstuff, in a short time the price of daily necessaries will mount ten to a hundredfold. This is calculated to cause internal troubles. Yea, all gains from this policy will go to the politicians but the people will suffer the evil consequences through no fault of theirs.
"In the matter of diplomacy, we do not need to go to the West for the apt learning on the point at issue. Confucius has said: 'Be truthful and cultivate friendship—this is the foundation of human happiness.' Our country being weak and undeveloped, if we strive to be truthful and cultivate friendship, we can still be a civilized nation, albeit hoary with age. But we are now advised to take advantage of the difficulties of Germany and abandon honesty in order that we may profit thereby. Discarding treaties is to be unfaithful, grasping for gains is not the way of a gentleman, taking advantage of another's difficulties is to be mean and joining the larger in numbers is cowardice. How can we be a nation, if we throw away all these fundamental qualities.
"Even in the press of England and the United States, there is opposition to America entering the war. If we observe neutrality, we are not bound to any side; and when the time comes for peace—as a friend to both sides—we may be able to bring about the ends of the war. Is this not a service to humanity and the true spirit of civilization?
"Now it is proposed to take the existence of this great nation of five thousand years and four hundred million people in order to serve the interests of politicians in their party struggles. We are now to be bound to foreign nations, without freedom to act for ourselves and running great risks of national destruction. Can you gentlemen bear to see this come to pass? China has severed relations with Germany but the decision for war has not yet been reached. The whole country is telegraphing opposition to the Government's policy and wants to know whether Germany will not in the future take revenge on account of our rupture with her; and if we are not secured against this eventuality, what are the preparations to meet with a contingency? The Government must not stake the fate of the nation as if it be a child's toy, and the people must not be cast into the whirlpool of slaughter. The people are the backbone of a country, and if the people are all opposed to war on Germany, the Government—in spite of the support of Parliament—must call a great citizens' convention to decide the question. We must persist in our neutrality. You gentlemen are patriotic sons of this country and must know that the existence of China as a nation depends upon what she does now in this matter. In tears, I appeal to you.
"KANG YU-WEI."
March and April were consumed in this fruitless discussion in which everybody participated. The Premier, General Tuan Chi-jui, in view of the alleged provincial opposition, now summoned to Peking a Conference of Provincial Military Governors to endorse his policy, but this action although crowned with success so far as the army chiefs were concerned—the conference voting solidly for war—was responsible for greatly alarming Parliament which saw in this procedure a new attempt to undermine its power and control the country by extra-legal means. Furthermore, publication in the Metropolitan press of what the Japanese were doing behind the scenes created a fear that extraordinary intrigues were being indulged in with the object of securing by means of secret diplomacy certain guarantees of a personal nature. Apart from being associated with the semi-official negotiations of the Entente Powers in Peking, Japan was carrying on a second set of negotiations partly by means of a confidential agent named Kameio Nishihara dispatched from Tokio specially for that purpose by Count Terauchi, the Japanese Premier, a procedure which led to the circulation of highly sensational stories regarding China's future commitments. When the Premier, General Tuan Chi-jui, had made his statement to Parliament on the 10th March, regarding the necessity of an immediate rupture with Germany, he had implied that China had already received assurances from the Allies that there would be a postponement of the Boxer Indemnities for a term of years, an immediate increase in the Customs Tariff, and a modification of the Peace Protocol of 1901 regarding the presence of Chinese troops near Tientsin. Suddenly all these points were declared to be in doubt. Round the question of the length of time the Indemnities might be postponed, and the actual amount of the increase in the Customs Tariff, there appeared to be an inexplicable muddle largely owing to the intervention of so many agents and to the fact that the exchange of views had been almost entirely verbal, unofficial, and secret. It would be wearisome to analyse a dispute which belongs to the peculiar atmosphere of Peking diplomacy; but the vast difficulties of making even a simple decision in China were glaringly illustrated by this matter. With a large section of the Metropolitan press daily insisting that the future of democracy in China would be again imperilled should the Military Party have its own way, small wonder if the question of a formal declaration of war on Germany (and Austria) now assumed an entirely different complexion.
On the 1st May, in spite of all these trials and tribulations, being pressed by the Premier to do so, the Cabinet unanimously decided that a declaration of war was imperative; and on the 7th May, after an agreement with the President had been reached, Parliament received the following dispatch—this method of communication being the usual one between the executive and legislative branches of the Government:
The President has the honour to communicate to the House of Representatives the following proposal. Since the severance of diplomatic relations with Germany, Germany has continued to violate the rights of the neutral nations and to damage and cause losses in life and property to our people as well as to trample on international law and disregard principles of humanity. For the purpose of hastening peace, upholding international law and protecting the life and property of our people, the President is of the view that it is necessary to declare war on the German Government. In accordance with Article 35 of the Provisional Constitution, he now asks for the approval of the House, and demands—in accordance with Article 21 of the Provisional Constitution—that the meeting in the House be held in secret.
On 8th May, after hearing a statement made in person by the Premier, the House of Representatives in secret session referred the question for examination to the House sitting as a Committee in order to gain time to make up its mind. On the same day the Senate sat on the same question. A very heated and bitter discussion followed in the upper House, not because of any real disagreement regarding the matter at issue, but because a large section of Senators were extremely anxious regarding the internal consequences. This is well-explained by the following written interpellation which was addressed to the government by a large number of parliamentarians:
We, the undersigned, hereby address this interpellation to the Government. As a declaration of war on Germany has become an object of the foreign policy of the Government, the latter has held informal meetings to ascertain the views of parliament on the question; and efforts are being made by the Government to secure the unanimous support of both Houses for its war policy. In pursuing this course, the Government appears to believe that its call for support will be readily complied with by the Houses. But in our view there are quite a number of members in both Houses who fail thoroughly to understand the war decision of the Government. The reason for this is that, according to recent reports, both foreign and vernacular, the Government has entered into secret treaties with a "neighbouring country." It is also reported that secret agents on both sides are active and are travelling between the two countries. The matter seems to be very grave; and it has already attracted the attention of Parliament, which in the near future will discuss the war-issue.
Being in doubt as to the truth of such a report, we hereby request the Government for the necessary information in the matter. We also beg to suggest that, if there is any secret diplomatic agreement, we consider it expedient for the Government to submit the matter to Parliament for the latter's consideration. This will enable the members in Parliament to study the question with care and have a clear understanding of the matter. When this is done, Parliament will be able to support the Government in the prosecution of its war policy according to the dictates of conscience. In this event both Parliament and Government will be able to co-operate with each other in the solution of the present diplomatic problem. Troubled not a little with the present diplomatic situation of the country, we hereby address this interpellation to the Government in accordance with law. It is hoped that an answer from the Government will be dispatched to us within three days from date.
On the 10th May Parliament met in secret session and it was plain that a crisis had come. Members of the House of Representatives experienced great difficulties in forcing their way through a mob of several thousand roughs who surrounded the approaches to Parliament, many members being hustled if not struck. The mob was so plainly in control of a secret organization that the House of Representatives refused to sit. Urgent messages were sent to the Police and Gendarmerie headquarters for reinforcements of armed men as a protection, whilst the presence of the Premier was also demanded. Masses of police were soon on the ground, but whilst they prevented the mob from entering Parliament and carrying out their threat of burning the buildings, and murdering the members, they could not—or would not—disperse the crowds, it transpiring subsequently that half a battalion of infantry in plain clothes under their officers formed the backbone of the demonstrators.
It was not until nearly dark, after six or seven hours of these disorderly scenes, that the Premier finally arrived. Cavalry had meanwhile also been massed on the main street; but it was only when the report spread that a Japanese reporter had been killed that the order was finally given to charge the mob and disperse it by force. This was very rapidly done, as apart from the soldiers in plain clothes the mass of people belonged to the lowest class, and had no stomach for a fight, having only been paid to shout. It was nearly midnight, after twelve hours of isolation and a foodless day, that the Representatives were able to disperse without having debated the war-question. The upshot was that with the exception of the Minister of Education, the Premier found that his entire Cabinet had resigned, the Ministers being unwilling to be associated with what had been an attempted coercion of Parliament carried out by the Military.
The Premier, General Tuan Chi-jui, however, remained determined to carry his point, and within a week a second dispatch was sent to the House of Representatives demanding, in spite of what had happened, that the declaration of war be immediately brought up for debate. Meanwhile publication in a leading Peking newspaper of further details covering Japan's subterranean activities greatly inflamed the public, and made the Liberal political elements more determined than ever to stand firm. It was alleged that Count Terauchi was reviving in a more subtle form Group V of the Twenty-one Demands of 1915, the latest Japanese proposal taking the form of a secret Treaty of twenty articles of which the main stipulations were to be a loan of twenty million yen to China to reorganize the three main Chinese arsenals under Japanese guidance, and a further loan of eighty million yen to be expended on the Japanization of the Chinese army. As a result of this publication, which rightly or wrongly was declared to be without foundation, the editor of The Peking Gazette was seized in the middle of the night and thrown into gaol; but Parliament so far from being intimidated passed the very next day (19th May) a resolution refusing to consider in any form the declaration of war against Germany until the Cabinet had been reorganized—which meant the resignation of General Tuan Chi-jui. A last effort was made by the reactionary element to jockey the President into submission by presenting to the Chief Executive a petition from the Military Governors assembled in Peking demanding the immediate dissolution of Parliament. On this proposal being absolutely rejected by the President as wholly unconstitutional, and the Military Governors soundly rated for their interference, an ominous calm followed.
Parliament, however, remained unmoved and continued its work. Although the draft of the Permanent Constitution had been practically completed, important additions to the text were now proposed, such additions being designed to increase parliamentary control and provide every possible precaution against arbitrary acts in the future. Thus the new provision that a simple vote of want of confidence in the Cabinet must be followed by the President either dismissing the Cabinet or dissolving the House of Representatives—but that the dissolution of the Lower House could not be ordered without the approval of the Senate—was generally recognized as necessary to destroy the last vestiges of the Yuan Shih-kai régime. Furthermore a new article, conferring on the President the right to dismiss the Premier summarily by Presidential Mandate without the counter-signature of the other Cabinet Ministers, completed the disarray of the conservatives who saw in this provision the dashing of their last hopes.[25]
By the 21st May, the last remaining Cabinet Minister—the Minister of Education—had resigned and the Premier was left completely isolated. On the 23rd May the President, relying on the general support of the nation, summarily dismissed General Tuan Chi-jui from the Premiership and appointed the veteran diplomat Dr. Wu Ting-fang to act during the interim period in his stead, at the same time placing the metropolitan districts under four trustworthy Generals who were vested with provost-marshals' powers under a system which gave them command of all the so-called "precautionary troops" holding the approaches to the capital. The Military Governors, who a few hours before these events had left Peking precipitately in a body on the proclaimed mission of allying themselves with the redoubtable General Chang Hsun at Hsuchowfu, and threatening the safety of the Republic, were, however, coolly received in the provinces in spite of all their most bitter attempts to stir up trouble. This, however, as will be shown, had no influence on their subsequent conduct. The quiet disappearance of the ex-Premier in the midst of this upheaval caused the report to spread that all the members of the corrupt camarilla which had surrounded him were to be arrested, but the President soon publicly disclaimed any intention of doing so,—which appears to have been a fatal mistake. It is disheartening to have to state that nearly all the Allied Legations in Peking had been in intimate relations with this gang—always excepting the American Legation whose attitude is uniformly correct—the French Minister going so far as to entertain the Military Governors and declare, according to reports in the native press, that Parliament was of no importance at all, the only important thing being for China promptly to declare war. That some sort of public investigation into Peking diplomacy is necessary before there can be any hope of decent relations between China and the Powers seems indisputable.[26]
Before the end of May the militarists being now desperate, attempted the old game of inciting the provincial capitals "to declare their independence," although the mass of the nation was plainly against them. Some measure of success attended this move, since the soldiery of the northern provinces obediently followed their leaders and there was a sudden wild demand for a march on Peking. A large amount of rolling-stock on the main railways was seized with this object, the confusion being made worse confounded by the fierce denunciations which now came from the southernmost provinces, coupled with their threats to attack the Northern troops all along the line as soon as they could mobilize.
The month of June opened with the situation more threatening than it had been for years. Emissaries of the recalcitrant Military Governors, together with all sorts of "politicals" and disgruntled generals, gathered in Tientsin—which is 80 miles from Peking—and openly established a Military Headquarters which they declared would be converted into a Provisional Government which would seek the recognition of the Powers. Troops were moved and concentrated against Peking; fresh demands were made that the President should dissolve Parliament; whilst the Metropolitan press was suddenly filled with seditious articles. The President, seeing that the situation was becoming cataclysmic, was induced, through what influences is not known, to issue a mandate summoning General Chang Hsun to Peking to act as a mediator, which was another fatal move. He arrived in Tientsin with many troops on the 7th June where he halted and was speedily brought under subversive influences, sending at once up to Peking a sort of ultimatum which was simply the old demand for the dissolution of Parliament.
Meanwhile on the 5th June, the United States, which had been alarmed by these occurrences, had handed China the following Note hoping thereby to steady the situation:
The Government of the United States learns with the most profound regret of the dissension in China and desires to express the most sincere desire that tranquillity and political co-ordination may be forthwith re-established.
The entry of China into war with Germany—or the continuance of the status quo of her relations with that Government—are matters of secondary consideration.
The principal necessity for China is to resume and continue her political entity, to proceed along the road of national development on which she has made such marked progress.
With the form of Government in China or the personnel which administers that Government, the United States has an interest only in so far as its friendship impels it to be of service to China. But in the maintenance by China of one Central United and alone responsible Government, the United States is deeply interested, and now expresses the very sincere hope that China, in her own interest and in that of the world, will immediately set aside her factional political disputes, and that all parties and persons will work for the re-establishment of a co-ordinate Government and the assumption of that place among the Powers of the World to which China is so justly entitled, but the full attainment of which is impossible in the midst of internal discord.
The situation had, however, developed so far and so rapidly that this expression of opinion had little weight. The Vice-President of the Republic, General Feng Kuo-chang, unwilling or unable to do anything, had already tendered his resignation from Nanking, declaring that he would maintain the "neutrality" of the important area of the lower Yangtsze during this extraordinary struggle; and his action, strange as it may seem, typified the vast misgivings which filled every one's mind regarding the mad course of action which the rebellious camarilla had decided upon.
Until Saturday the 9th June, the President had seemed adamant. On that day he personally saw foreign press correspondents and assured them that, in spite of every threat, he would in no conceivable circumstances attempt the unconstitutional step of dissolving Parliament,—unconstitutional because the Nanking Provisional Constitution under which the country was still governed pending the formal passage of the Permanent Constitution through Parliament, only provided for the creation of Parliament as a grand constitutional Drafting Committee but gave no power to the Chief Executive to dissolve it during its "life" which was three years. As we have already shown, the period between the coup d'état of 4th November, 1913, and the re-convocation of Parliament on 1st August, 1916, had been treated as a mere interregnum: therefore until 1918, if the law were properly construed, no power in the land could interrupt the Parliamentary sessions except Parliament itself. Parliament, in view of these threatening developments, had already expressed its willingness (a) to reconsider certain provisions of the draft constitution in such a conciliatory manner as to insure the passage of the whole instrument through both houses within two weeks; (b) to alter the Election Law in such fashion as to conciliate the more conservative elements in the country; (c) to prorogue the second session (1916-1917) immediately these things were done and after a very short recess to open the third session (1917-1918) and close it within three months, allowing new elections to be held in the early months of 1918,—the new Parliament to be summoned in April, 1918, to form itself into a National Convention and elect the President for the quinquennial period 1918-1923.
All these reasonable plans were knocked on the head on Sunday, the 10th June, by the sudden report that the President having been peremptorily told that the dissolution of Parliament was the sole means of saving the Republic and preventing the sack of Peking, as well as an open armed attempt to restore the boy-emperor Hsuan Tung, had at last made up his mind to surrender to the inevitable. He had sealed a Mandate decreeing the dissolution of Parliament which would be promulgated as soon as it had received the counter-signature of the acting Premier, Dr. Wu Ting-fang, such counter-signature being obligatory under Article 45 of the Provisional Constitution.
At once it became clear again, as happens a thousand times during every year in the East, that what is not nipped in the bud grows with such malignant swiftness as finally to blight all honest intentions. Had steps been taken on or about the 23rd May to detain forcibly in Peking the ringleader of the recalcitrant Military Governors, one General Ni Shih-chung of Anhui, history would have been very different and China spared much national and international humiliation. Six years of stormy happenings had certainly bred in the nation a desire for constitutionalism and a detestation of military domination. But this desire and detestation required firm leadership. Without that leadership it was inchoate and powerless, and indeed made furtive by the constant fear of savage reprisals. A great opportunity had come and a great opportunity had been lost. President Li Yuan-hung's personal argument, communicated to the writer, was that in sealing the Mandate dissolving Parliament he had chosen the lesser of two evils, for although South China and the Chinese Navy declared they would defend Parliament to the last, they were far away whilst large armies were echeloned along the railways leading into Peking and daily threatening action. The events of the next year or so must prove conclusively, in spite of what has happened in this month of June, 1917, that the corrupt power of the sword can no longer even nominally rule China.
President Yuan Shi-kai photographed immediately after his Inauguration as Provisional President, March 10th, 1912.
Meanwhile the veteran Dr. Wu Ting-fang, true to his faith, declared that no power on earth would cause him to sign a Mandate possessing no legality behind it; and he indeed obstinately resisted every attempt to seduce him. Although his resignation was refused he stood his ground manfully, and it became clear that some other expedient would have to be resorted to. In the small hours of the 13th June what this was was made clear: by a rapid reshuffling of the cards Dr. Wu Ting-fang's resignation was accepted and the general officer commanding the Peking Gendarmerie, a genial soul named General Chiang Chao-tsung, who had survived unscathed the vicissitudes of six years of revolution, was appointed to act in his stead and duly counter-signed the fateful Mandate which was at once printed and promulgated at four o'clock in the morning. It has been stated to the writer that had it not been so issued four battalions of Chang Hsun's savage pigtailed soldiery, who had been bivouacked for some days in the grounds of the Temple of Heaven, would have been let loose on the capital. The actual text of the Mandate proves conclusively that the President had no hand in its drafting—one argument being sufficient to prove that, namely the deliberate ignoring of the fact that Parliament had been called into being by virtue of article 53 of the Nanking Provisional Constitution and that under article 54 its specific duty was to act as a grand constitutional conference to draft and adopt the Permanent Constitution, article 55 furthermore giving Parliament the right summarily to amend the Provisional Constitution before the Promulgation of the permanent instrument, should that be necessary. Provisions of this sort would naturally carry no weight with generals of the type of Chang Hsun, of whom it is said that until recent years he possessed only the most elementary education; but it is a dismal thing to have to record that the Conservative Party in China should have adopted a platform of brute force in the year of grâce, 1917.
In the 6th month of last year I promulgated a Mandate stating that in order to make a Constitution it was imperative that Parliament should be convened. The Republic was inaugurated five years ago and yet there was no Constitution, which should be the fundamental law of a nation, therefore it was ordered that Parliament be re-convened to make the Constitution, etc., at once.
Therefore the main object for the re-convocation of Parliament was to make a formal constitution for the country. Recently a petition was received from Meng En-yuen, Tu-chun of Kirin, and others, to the effect that "in the articles passed by the Constitution Conference there were several points as follows: 'when the House of Representatives passes a vote of want of confidence against the Cabinet Ministers, the President may dismiss the Cabinet Ministers, or dissolve the said House, but the dissolution of the House shall have the approval of the Senate.' Again, 'When the President dismisses his Prime Minister, it is unnecessary for him to secure the counter-signature of the Cabinet Ministers.' Again 'when a bill is passed by the Two Houses it shall have the force of the law.' We were surprised to read the above provisions.
"According to the precedents of other nations the Constitution has never been made by Parliament. If we should desire a good and workable Constitution, we should seek a fundamental solution. Indeed Parliament is more important than any other organ in the country; but when the national welfare is imperilled, we must take action. As the present Parliament does not care about the national welfare, it is requested that in view of the critical condition of the country, drastic measures be taken and both the House of Representatives and the Senate be dissolved so that they may be reorganized and the Constitution may be made without any further delay. Thus the form of the Republican Government be preserved, etc."
Of late petitions and telegrams have been received from the military and civil officials, merchants, scholars, etc., containing similar demands. The Senate and the House of Representatives have held the Constitution Conference for about one year, and the Constitution has not yet been completed. Moreover at this critical time most of the M.P.'s of both Houses have tendered their resignation. Hence it is impossible to secure quorums to discuss business. There is therefore no chance to revise the articles already passed. Unless means be devised to hasten the making of the Constitution, the heart of the people will never be satisfied.
I, the President, who desire to comply with the will of the populace and to consolidate the foundation of the nation, grant the request of the Tuchuns and the people. It is hereby ordered that the Senate and the House of Representatives be dissolved, and that another election be held immediately. Thus a Constitutional Government can be maintained. It must be pointed out that the object for the reorganization of Parliament is to hasten the making of the Constitution, and not to abolish the Legislative Organ of the Republic. I hope all the citizens of the Republic will understand my motives.
A great agitation and much public uneasiness followed the publication of this document; and the parliamentarians, who had already been leaving Peking in small numbers, now evacuated the capital en masse for the South. The reasonable and wholly logical attitude of the Constitutionalists is well-exhibited in the last Memorandum they submitted to the President some days prior to his decision to issue the Mandate above-quoted; and a perusal of this document will show what may be expected in the future. It will be noted that the revolting Military Governors are boldly termed rebels and that the constitutional view of everything they may contrive as from the 13th June, 1917, is that it will be bereft of all legality and simply mark a fresh interregnum. Furthermore, it is important to note that the situation is brought back by the Mandate of the 13th June to where it was on the 6th June, 1916, with the death of Yuan Shih-kai, and that a period of civil commotion seems inevitable.