END OF THE EDUCATIONAL MISSION
In the fall of 1875 the last installment of students arrived. They came
in charge of a new commissioner, Ou Ngoh Liang, two new Chinese teachers
and a new interpreter, Kwang Kee Cheu. These new men were appointed by
Viceroy Li Hung Chang. I knew them in China, especially the new
commissioner and the interpreter.
These changes were made at the request of Chin Lan Pin, who expected
soon to return to China on a leave of absence. He was going to take with
him the old Chinese teacher, Yeh Shu Tung, who had rendered him great
and signal service in his trip to Cuba on the coolie question the year
before. Tsang Lai Sun, the old interpreter, was also requested to resign
and returned to China. These changes I had anticipated some time before
and they did not surprise me.
Three months after Chin Lan Pin’s arrival in Peking, word came from
China that he and I were appointed joint Chinese ministers to
Washington, and that Yeh Shu Tung, the old Chinese teacher, was
appointed secretary to the Chinese Legation. This was great news to me
to be sure, but I did not feel ecstatic over it; on the contrary, the
more I reflected on it, the more I felt depressed. But my friends who
congratulated me on the honor and promotion did not take in the whole
situation as it loomed up before my mind in all its bearings. As far as
I was concerned, I had every reason to feel grateful and honored, but
how about my life work--the Chinese educational mission that I had in
hand--and which needed in its present stage great watchfulness and care?
If, as I reflected, I were to be removed to Washington, who was there
left behind to look after the welfare of the students with the same
interest that I had manifested? It would be like separating the father
from his children. This would not do, so I sat down and wrote to the
Viceroy a letter, the tenor of which ran somewhat as follows: I thanked
him for the appointment which I considered to be a great honor for any
man to receive from the government; and said that while I appreciated
fully its significance, the obligations and responsibilities
inseparably connected with the position filled me with anxious
solicitude that my abilities and qualifications might not be equal to
their satisfactory fulfilment. In view of such a state of mind, I much
preferred, if I were allowed to have my preference in the matter, to
remain in my present position as a commissioner of the Chinese mission
in Hartford and to continue in it till the Chinese students should have
finished their education and were ready to return to China to serve the
State in their various capacities. In that event I should have
discharged a duty to “Tsang the Upright,” and at the same time fulfilled
a great duty to China. As Chin Lan Pin had been appointed minister at
the same time, he would doubtless be able alone to meet the expectations
of the government in his diplomatic capacity.
The letter was written and engrossed by Yung Yune Foo, one of the old
Chinese teachers who came over with the first installment of students at
the same time Yeh Shu Tung came. In less than four months an answer was
received which partially acceded to my request by making me an assistant
or associate minister, at the same time allowing me to retain my
position as Commissioner of Education, and in that capacity, to
exercise a general supervision over the education of the students.
Ou Ngoh Liang, the new commissioner, was a much younger man than Chin.
He was a fair Chinese scholar, but not a member of the Hanlin College.
He was doubtless recommended by Chin Lan Pin. He brought his family with
him, which consisted of his second wife and two children. He was a man
of a quiet disposition and showed no inclination to meddle with settled
conditions or to create trouble, but took rather a philosophical view of
things; he had the good sense to let well enough alone. He was connected
with the mission but a short time and resigned in 1876.
In 1876 Chin Lan Pin came as minister plenipotentiary and brought with
him among his numerous retinue Woo Tsze Tung, a man whom I knew in
Shanghai even in the ’50’s. He was a member of the Hanlin College, but
for some reason or other, he was never assigned to any government
department, nor was he ever known to hold any kind of government office.
He showed a decided taste for chemistry, but never seemed to have made
any progress in it, and was regarded by all his friends as a crank.
After Ou’s resignation, Chin Lan Pin before proceeding to Washington to
take up his official position as Chinese minister, strongly recommended
Woo Tsze Tung to succeed Ou as commissioner, to which Viceroy Li Hung
Chang acceded without thinking of the consequences to follow. From this
time forth the educational mission found an enemy who was determined to
undermine the work of Tsang Kwoh Fan and Ting Yih Cheong, to both of
whom Woo Tsze Tung was more or less hostile. Woo was a member of the
reactionary party, which looked upon the Chinese Educational Commission
as a move subversive of the principles and theories of Chinese culture.
This was told me by one of Chin’s suite who held the appointment of
_chargé d’affaires_ for Peru. The making of Woo Tsze Tung a commissioner
plainly revealed the fact that Chin Lan Pin himself was at heart an
uncompromising Confucian and practically represented the reactionary
party with all its rigid and uncompromising conservatism that gnashes
its teeth against all and every attempt put forth to reform the
government or to improve the general condition of things in China. This
accounts for the fact that in the early stages of the mission, I had
many and bitter altercations with him on many things which had to be
settled for good, once and for all. Such as the _school_ and _personal_
expenses of the students; their vacation expenses; their change of
costume; their attendance at family worship; their attendance at Sunday
School and church services; their outdoor exercises and athletic games.
These and other questions of a social nature came up for settlement. I
had to stand as a kind of buffer between Chin and the students, and
defended them in all their reasonable claims. It was in this manner that
I must have incurred Chin’s displeasure if not his utter dislike. He had
never been out of China in his life until he came to this country. The
only standard by which he measured things and men (especially students)
was purely Chinese. The gradual but marked transformation of the
students in their behavior and conduct as they grew in knowledge and
stature under New England influence, culture and environment produced a
contrast to their behavior and conduct when they first set foot in New
England that might well be strange and repugnant to the ideas and senses
of a man like Chin Lan Pin, who all his life had been accustomed to see
the springs of life, energy and independence, candor, ingenuity and
open-heartedness all covered up and concealed, and in a great measure
smothered and never allowed their full play. Now in New England the
heavy weight of repression and suppression was lifted from the minds of
these young students; they exulted in their freedom and leaped for joy.
No wonder they took to athletic sports with alacrity and delight!
Doubtless Chin Lan Pin when he left Hartford for good to go to
Washington carried away with him a very poor idea of the work to which
he was singled out and called upon to perform. He must have felt that
his own immaculate Chinese training had been contaminated by coming in
contact with Occidental schooling, which he looked upon with evident
repugnance. At the same time the very work which he seemed to look upon
with disgust had certainly served him the best turn in his life. It
served to lift him out of his obscurity as a head clerk in the office of
the Board of Punishment for twenty years to become a commissioner of the
Chinese Educational Commission, and from that post to be a minister
plenipotentiary in Washington. It was the stepping stone by which he
climbed to political prominence. He should not have kicked away the
ladder under him after he had reached his dizzy elevation. He did all he
could to break up the educational scheme by recommending Woo Tsze Tung
to be the Commissioner of Education, than whom he could not have had a
more pliant and subservient tool for his purpose, as may be seen
hereinafter.
Woo Tsze Tung was installed commissioner in the fall of 1876. No sooner
was he in office than he began to find fault with everything that had
been done. Instead of laying those complaints before me, he
clandestinely started a stream of misrepresentation to Peking about the
students; how they had been mismanaged; how they had been indulged and
petted by Commissioner Yung; how they had been allowed to enjoy more
privileges than was good for them; how they imitated American students
in athletics; that they played more than they studied; that they formed
themselves into secret societies, both religious and political; that
they ignored their teachers and would not listen to the advice of the
new commissioner; that if they were allowed to continue to have their
own way, they would soon lose their love of their own country, and on
their return to China, they would be good for nothing or worse than
nothing; that most of them went to church, attended Sunday Schools and
had become Christians; that the sooner this educational enterprise was
broken up and all the students recalled, the better it would be for
China, etc., etc.
Such malicious misrepresentations and other falsehoods which we knew
nothing of, were kept up in a continuous stream from year to year by Woo
Tsze Tung to his friends in Peking and to Viceroy Li Hung Chang. The
Viceroy called my attention to Woo’s accusations. I wrote back in reply
that they were malicious fabrications of a man who was known to have
been a crank all his life; that it was a grand mistake to put such a man
in a responsible position who had done nothing for himself or for others
in his life; that he was only attempting to destroy the work of Tsang
Kwoh Fan who, by projecting and fathering the educational mission, had
the highest interest of China at heart; whereas Woo should have been
relegated to a cell in an insane asylum or to an institution for
imbeciles. I said further that Chin Lan Pin, who had recommended Woo to
His Excellency as commissioner of Chinese Education, was a timid man by
nature and trembled at the sight of the smallest responsibilities. He
and I had not agreed in our line of policy in our diplomatic
correspondence with the State Department nor had we agreed as
commissioners in regard to the treatment of the Chinese students. To
illustrate his extreme dislike of responsibilities: He was requested by
the Governor to go to Cuba to find out the condition of the coolies in
that island in 1873. He waited three months before he started on his
journey. He sent Yeh Shu Tung and one of the teachers of the Mission
accompanied by a young American lawyer and an interpreter to Cuba, which
party did the burden of the work and thus paved the way for Chin Lan Pin
and made the work easy for him. All he had to do was to take a trip down
to Cuba and return, fulfilling his mission in a perfunctory way. The
heat of the day and the burden of the labor were all borne by Yeh Shu
Tung, but Chin Lan Pin gathered in the laurel and was made a minister
plenipotentiary, while Yeh was given the appointment of a secretary of
the legation. I mention these things not from any invidious motive
towards Chin, but simply to show that often in the official and
political world one man gets more praise and glory than he really
deserves, while another is not rewarded according to his intrinsic
worth. His Excellency was well aware that I had no axe to grind in
making the foregoing statement. I further added that I much preferred
not to accept the appointment of a minister to Washington, but rather
to remain as commissioner of education, for the sole purpose of carrying
it through to its final success. And, one time in the heat of our
altercation over a letter addressed to the State Department, I told Chin
Lan Pin in plain language that I did not care a rap either for the
appointment of an assistant minister, or for that matter, of a full
minister, and that I was ready and would gladly resign at any moment,
leaving him free and independent to do as he pleased.
This letter in answer to the Viceroy’s note calling my attention to
Woo’s accusations gave the Viceroy an insight into Woo’s antecedents, as
well as into the impalpable character of Chin Lan Pin. Li was, of
course, in the dark as to what the Viceroy had written to Chin Lan Pin,
but things both in the legation and the Mission apparently moved on
smoothly for a while, till some of the students were advanced enough in
their studies for me to make application to the State Department for
admittance to the Military Academy at West Point and the Naval Academy
in Annapolis. The answer to my application was: “There is no room
provided for Chinese students.” It was curt and disdainful. It breathed
the spirit of Kearnyism and Sandlotism with which the whole Pacific
atmosphere was impregnated, and which had hypnotized all the departments
of the government, especially Congress, in which Blaine figured most
conspicuously as the champion against the Chinese on the floor of the
Senate. He had the presidential bee buzzing in his bonnet at the time,
and did his best to cater for the electoral votes of the Pacific coast.
The race prejudice against the Chinese was so rampant and rank that not
only my application for the students to gain entrance to Annapolis and
West Point was treated with cold indifference and scornful hauteur, but
the Burlingame Treaty of 1868 was, without the least provocation, and
contrary to all diplomatic precedents and common decency, trampled under
foot unceremoniously and wantonly, and set aside as though no such
treaty had ever existed, in order to make way for those acts of
congressional discrimination against Chinese immigration which were
pressed for immediate enactment.
When I wrote to the Viceroy that I had met with a rebuff in my attempt
to have some of the students admitted to West Point and Annapolis, his
reply at once convinced me that the fate of the Mission was sealed. He
too fell back on the Burlingame Treaty of 1868 to convince me that the
United States government had violated the treaty by shutting out our
students from West Point and Annapolis.
Having given a sketch of the progress of the Chinese Educational Mission
from 1870 to 1877-8, my letter applying for their admittance into the
Military and Naval Academies might be regarded as my last official act
as a commissioner. My duties from 1878 onwards were chiefly confined to
legation work.
When the news that my application for the students to enter the Military
and Naval Academies of the government had proved a failure, and the
displeasure and disappointment of the Viceroy at the rebuff were known,
Commissioner Woo once more renewed his efforts to break up the Mission.
This time he had the secret co-operation of Chin Lan Pin.
Misrepresentations and falsehoods manufactured out of the whole cloth
went forth to Peking in renewed budgets in every mail, till a censor
from the ranks of the reactionary party came forward and took advantage
of the strong anti-Chinese prejudices in America to memorialize the
government to break up the Mission and have all the students recalled.
The government before acceding to the memorial put the question to
Viceroy Li Hung Chang first, who, instead of standing up for the
students, yielded to the opposition of the reactionary party and gave
his assent to have the students recalled. Chin Lan Pin, who from his
personal experience was supposed to know what ought to be done, was the
next man asked to give his opinion. He decided that the students had
been in the United States long enough, and that it was time for them to
return to China. Woo Tsze Tung, the Commissioner, when asked for his
opinion, came out point blank and said that they should be recalled
without delay and should be strictly watched after their return. I was
ruled out of the consultation altogether as being one utterly
incompetent to give an impartial and reliable opinion on the subject.
Thus the fate of the educational mission was sealed, and all students,
about one hundred in all, returned to China in 1881.
The breaking up of the Chinese Educational Commission and the recall of
the young students in 1881, was not brought about without a strenuous
effort on the part of some thoughtful men who had watched steadfastly
over the development of human progress in the East and the West, who
came forward in their quiet and modest ways to enter a protest against
the revocation of the Mission. Chief among them were my lifelong friend,
the Rev. J. H. Twichell, and Rev. John W. Lane, through whose persistent
efforts Presidents Porter and Seelye, Samuel Clemens, T. F.
Frelinghuysen, John Russell Young and others were enlisted and brought
forward to stay the work of retrogression of the part of the Chinese.
The protest was couched in the most dignified, frank and manly language
of President Porter of Yale and read as follows:
_To The Tsung Li Yamun_
_or_
_Office for Foreign Affairs._
“The undersigned, who have been instructors, guardians and friends of
the students who were sent to this country under the care of the Chinese
Educational Commission, beg leave to represent:
“That they exceedingly regret that these young men have been withdrawn
from the country, and that the Educational Commission has been
dissolved.
“So far as we have had opportunity to observe, and can learn from the
representations of others, the young men have generally made a faithful
use of their opportunities, and have made good progress in the studies
assigned to them, and in the knowledge of the language, ideas, arts and
institutions of the people of this country.
“With scarcely a single exception, their morals have been good; their
manners have been singularly polite and decorous, and their behavior has
been such as to make friends for themselves and their country in the
families, the schools, the cities and villages in which they have
resided.
“In these ways they have proved themselves eminently worthy of the
confidence which has been reposed in them to represent their families
and the great Chinese Empire in a land of strangers. Though children and
youths, they have seemed always to understand that the honor of their
race and their nation was committed to their keeping. As the result of
their good conduct, many of the prejudices of ignorant and wicked men
towards the Chinese have been removed, and more favorable sentiments
have taken their place.
“We deeply regret that the young men have been taken away just at the
time when they were about to reap the most important advantages from
their previous studies, and to gather in the rich harvest which their
painful and laborious industry had been preparing for them to reap. The
studies which most of them have pursued hitherto have been disciplinary
and preparatory. The studies of which they have been deprived by their
removal, would have been the bright flower and the ripened fruit of the
roots and stems which have been slowly reared under patient watering and
tillage. We have given to them the same knowledge and culture that we
give to our own children and citizens.
“As instructors and guardians of these young men, we should have
welcomed to our schools and colleges the Commissioners of Education or
their representatives and have explained to them our system and methods
of instruction. In some cases, they have been invited to visit us, but
have failed to respond to their invitations in person or by their
deputies.
“We would remind your honorable body that these students were originally
received to our homes and our colleges by request of the Chinese
government through the Secretary of State with the express desire that
they might learn our language, our manners, our sciences and our arts.
To remove them permanently and suddenly without formal notice or inquiry
on the ground that as yet they had learned nothing useful to China when
their education in Western institutions, arts and sciences is as yet
incomplete, seems to us as unworthy of the great Empire for which we
wish eminent prosperity and peace, as it is discourteous to the nation
that extended to these young men its friendly hospitality.
“We cannot accept as true the representation that they have derived evil
and not good from our institutions, our principles and our manners. If
they have neglected or forgotten their native language, we never assumed
the duty of instructing them in it, and cannot be held responsible for
this neglect. The Chinese government thought it wise that some of its
own youth should be trained after our methods. We have not finished the
work which we were expected to perform. May we not reasonably be
displeased that the results of our work should be judged unfavorably
before it could possibly be finished?
“In view of these considerations, and especially in view of the injury
and loss which have fallen upon the young men whom we have learned to
respect and love, and the reproach which has implicitly been brought
upon ourselves and the great nation to which we belong,--we would
respectfully urge that the reasons for this sudden decision should be
reconsidered, and the representations which have been made concerning
the intellectual and moral character of our education should be properly
substantiated. We would suggest that to this end, a committee may be
appointed of eminent Chinese citizens whose duty it shall be to examine
into the truth of the statements unfavorable to the young men or their
teachers, which have led to the unexpected abandonment of the
Educational Commission and to the withdrawal of the young men from the
United States before their education could be finished.”