The Life of Yakoob Beg Part 8
We have a.s.sumed throughout this volume, and we shall a.s.sume here, the irreconcilable hostility of England and Russia, in Asia at all events, veneered over as it is by a lacquer of politeness and civilization. We have only to consider the relations between England and China, and between Russia and China. To take the latter first, they have always been united by ties of friendship and reciprocity in commercial and political rights. Their intercourse has been on the whole singularly harmonious, and while we have been compelled to wage three wars to obtain a standing for our merchants in the seaports, Russia, without being compelled to resort to anything like the same extreme measures, has been able to secure all she, or her merchants, wanted in Middle and Western China. She has made the Amoor a Russian river; she dominates the Yellow and j.a.panese seas from Vladivostock; and she has acquired in her position among the Khalkas, and in Kuldja, two portals to various weak points in the Chinese Empire. Yet all the time she has been on terms of the closest amity with China. She has several commercial treaties of the most favourable character, and she has always been on the footing of "the most favoured nation." But she has been more than that; she has been the most favoured nation. But the Chinese have not failed to observe that this good understanding with Russia has, so far as advantages arising from it go, been a very one-sided affair. For all Russia's protestations of friendship and good-will, what advantages has China reaped from those high-flown promises? Whereas, the patriotic Chinaman has but to look to the Amoor, and to the attenuated province of Manchuria, to see what Russian friendship means. He can go farther still. He has only to enquire into the relations Russia has managed to conclude with the Taranath Lama; he has only to hear what the people of Ourga think of Russia's position in the vicinity of that important city; and he cannot fail to form a very clear and decided opinion as to what Russia's friendship signifies. The Chinese have, in the full extent of their northern frontier, a great question in discussion with Russia. So long as China was weak, and consequently unable to resent the patronage of her friend, so long was Russia able to play "my lady bountiful" with a good grace and perfect success. But the moment China became strong, and in a position to resent the condescension of her whilome ally, the Chinese took a different tone, and already we hear of the Chinese a.s.suming a semi-hostile att.i.tude in the Amoor region. But whereas China's apprehension--for it is apprehension that is at the root of her hostility to Russia, at Russia's designs in Manchuria and among the Khalkas is vague at present--her indignation is clear and easily defined at Russia retaining possession of Kuldja after she has demanded its restoration. In short, all her apprehension along the northern frontier, which has slumbered, but never died out, since the Russians seized the Amoor posts during the Crimean War, is reduced to a focus in Central Asia, where Russia appears inclined to throw herself in the path of, or at least to r.e.t.a.r.d, their victorious career. It is not so much the Kuldja question, which is of local importance, that is of pressing moment, as the rupture between Russia and China, that a crisis in the Issik Kul region will make complete. That rupture has already taken place, and no concession on the part of Russia will restore her good name with the Chinese. She may hand Kuldja over now, or she may keep it by the strong arm if she can; but she has forfeited all claim to consideration by the Chinese, through delaying to accede to that which those people consider in every sense their right and due. Had Russia at once said to China, "We will abandon Kuldja, and only require you to guarantee the safety of the population," there would have been not only the preservation of the good understanding between the countries, but there might have been, for fresh purposes, a Russo-Chinese alliance in Central Asia. That alliance must have been fraught with danger to this country, and for reasons that will best be described under the head of Anglo-Chinese relations.
But the Russian authorities failed to grasp the situation in its full extent. They treated the Kuldja question as a mere local affair, and they trifled with the Chinese as if the latter had no very strong interest in the matter. They altogether ignored the terrible earnestness of the Chinese character, and they treated the demands of Tso Tsung Tang in a spirit of levity that must have roused the ire of that general.
Their policy, regarded from any point of view, was shallow and unwise, but, bearing in mind the past tact and diplomatic skill shown by Russia in her dealings with China, it must appear more shallow and foolish. Of course this Kuldja question differs from all previous questions in the essential point of all, that here for the first time Russia had to go back instead of advancing, as always had been the case heretofore. The Russian authorities simply regarded the matter from the point of view of what effect it would have upon the peoples of Central Asia. They persuaded themselves that to hand over Kuldja would be to give an impetus to every hostile element in Western Turkestan, as well as to lower their prestige generally throughout Asia. As a leading Russian paper expressed it, "the retrocession of Kuldja would be an act of political suicide, for not only would it raise the prestige of China to a higher point than ever before, but it would also undermine our position in Eastern Asia, by giving the Chinese a strong military position within our natural frontier. For these reasons Kuldja cannot be restored." That paragraph sums up the arguments the Russians will employ in defence of their continuing to retain possession of Kuldja. They add something to their effect in the popular mind by diatribes against the Chinese for rumoured barbarities, by drawing comparisons, flattering to themselves and to their administrative capacity, between the present condition of Kuldja, and what it would become under a restored Chinese rule. In depicting what this would be, they entirely ignore the prosperous condition of Kuldja before the Tungan revolt, and they appear to a.s.sume that the anarchy existing there, when they entered it in 1871, was due to the Chinese, instead of being caused by the ingrat.i.tude and fickleness of its own people. And they shut their eyes to the great benefits China conferred upon Central Asia during the century that she was paramount therein. They would like us, and every other observer of the crisis, to do the same. That is impossible, for the teaching of history is clear, and points to a diametrically opposite conclusion. We do not dispute the beneficence of Russia's government of Kuldja. We freely admit it. That is no reason for maligning the Chinese, and a.s.serting that they are utter barbarians; nor is it a reason, in the eyes of Chinamen, for a refusal to restore Kuldja. By refusing to entertain the overtures of Tso Tsung Tang, which were made, there is reason to believe, before the attack on Yakoob Beg, the Russians huffed the Chinese; and by procrastinating ever since, when questioned upon the subject, they have still further displeased them. The Russians are aware of this, and feel convinced that, no matter how obliging they might be disposed to be, the Chinese will now no longer appreciate their moderation. If we admit this, as can scarcely be gainsaid, what becomes of the Kuldja question, and of its peaceful solution that many claim to see? How can it be peacefully solved, if Russia will not accede to the terms from which China is resolved not to budge? Surely not by a fresh commotion on the part of the Mussulman population, which some persons have pretended to forecast by magnifying a petty success that has been obtained by the insignificant ruler of Khoten over a Chinese detachment.
Surely not by such trivial circ.u.mstances as the hostility of an outlying dependency, will China be either expelled from Kashgar, or induced to forego her claims on Kuldja. The success of the Khoten chief is but a minor incident in the campaign, and for that district and its people it must be p.r.o.nounced a great misfortune. The Chinese will exact a terrible revenge. The Kuldja question will not be solved by such means, English readers can feel a.s.sured; and the hostility of Russia and China towards each other will become more p.r.o.nounced every day. Already petty disturbances are reported to have taken place along the border. Russian merchants have been molested by parties of brigands, among whom the a.s.sailed a.s.sert there were Chinese soldiers; and no satisfaction could be obtained from their generals. Representations have been made to Tso Tsung Tang upon the subject, and his reply has not been very amicable.
Russian caravans, which were always welcome during the progress of the war at Manas, Karakaru, and Urumtsi, are now no longer greeted with the same cordiality, and the Chinese are evincing an intention to close their frontier to Russians. Few caravans, the _Tashkent Gazette_ informs us, now care to leave Kuldja for the territory occupied by the Chinese army; and slowly, but none the less surely, is the old alliance between Russia and China departing to join the things that were, but are not.
But, although so much is clear, it is almost impossible to predicate the future course of the Kuldja question. It is not probable that Tso Tsung Tang will openly attack the Russians, yet his hand may be forced by the home authorities, and he may be left no alternative between that and the abandonment of his enterprise. It must be always remembered that Russia's best weapon is intrigue at Pekin, and a skilful envoy might so far manipulate the rivalry between Tso and Li Hung Chang as to induce the latter to paralyze the ambition of the former by withholding supplies and reinforcements from the army of Central Asia. So unpatriotic a course would, we believe, be hateful to Li Hung Chang, and it, certainly, would be attended with great danger, sure to recoil upon his guilty head, if for a personal rivalry he debased himself so far as to become the tool of his country's foe. But yet it is in vain to deny that there is danger to the preservation of China's most cherished interests in the rivalry of some of her chief statesmen. The Kuldja question, which scarcely admits of peaceful solution in Central Asia, might be solved in the palace at Pekin more easily and more effectually than by a campaign on a large scale in Jungaria and Turkestan; and there is a possibility that Russia may by this means seek to nullify the danger from Tso Tsung Tang, and to stultify the recent Chinese successes. It is very doubtful whether they would succeed, for Chinese opinion runs high upon the topic, and the Mantchoo caste is united in its support of its member Tso Tsung Tang. Even if they did, it would only be shelving the Kuldja question, for so long as the Chinese remain in Kashgaria, and at Manas and Karakaru, they must regard the presence of Russia in Kuldja as a slight to themselves, as well as a menace to their line of communications.
But every probability is against their succeeding. Li Hung Chang's position is not so secure that he can dare to put himself in face of those who champion a national cause, as is the re-absorption of Chinese Turkestan. The return of Tso Tsung Tang with his veterans would be the least danger that the adoption of an unpatriotic policy would entail. If this home danger, then, does not arise, the Kuldja question will be settled between Tso and the Russian authorities in Khokand and Kuldja.
The result of that discussion cannot be doubtful. The advocates on either side are soldiers, each equally confident in their own abilities and power, and each flushed by a long tide of success. They will come to the discussion of the question with heated blood and excited nerves; reason will not be the presiding G.o.ddess at the council board. There will be accusations and recriminations bandied from one side to the other. If such be the case, the Kuldja question will not be long in discussion, and before the close of the present year perhaps, but more probably early next spring, there will be war between Russia and China along the Tian Shan range. Even if Tso is content to permit his arguments to be clothed in diplomatic language, there will be no solution of the difficulty, so long as Russia remains where she is; and consequently the difference will be as great between Russia and China as if there were open hostilities between the countries. And this, after all, is the main point, for the destruction of all friendly sentiment between Russia and China means the addition of another element to "the great game in Central Asia," and that element, as an adverse one to Russia, is a beneficial circ.u.mstance for this country. The difference over the Kuldja question magnifies the previously existing discordant points between the countries, and irretrievably wrecks whatever prospect there once was of Russia and China pursuing an identical policy towards Baroghil and Cashmere. We have now to consider the past relations between England and China, in order that we may be in a position to appreciate the full significance of China's reappearance in Central Asia, and also what is to be the probable outcome of the gradual approximation of the three Great Powers, and the slow extinction of the once innumerable petty states of Asia.
What, then, have been the mutual relations between England and China in the past? There is no necessity to enter into the question of the footing we are on along the sea-coast, for that is really beside the question; nor need we recapitulate the wars which we have at various times been compelled to wage in Eastern China. The result of those wars, those treaties, and that constant inter-communication has been, that Englishmen have secured a foothold in many of the princ.i.p.al cities, and that English trade is supreme there. But the relations along the land frontier are quite the opposite of those obtained on the sea-board, and they are influenced by entirely different considerations. During the last century, and for a considerable portion of the present, we were not, strictly speaking, neighbours of the Chinese; for between the two empires there intervened a belt of semi-independent states, who nominally owned allegiance to China. Some of these were Nepaul, Sikhim, Bhutan and Birma, with its dependency of a.s.sam. It was in the days of Lord Cornwallis that we first realized the significance of the fact that Chinese prestige had penetrated south of the Himalaya. The Ghoorka rulers of Nepaul had, on several occasions, molested the peaceable Tibetans, and at last had grown so bold, that on one expedition they advanced as far as Lhasa, which they plundered. At that moment the aged Keen-Lung was meditating the retirement from public life, which a few years afterwards, like the Asiatic Charles the Fifth that he was, he adopted; but, on the news of this insult to his authority, his warlike spirit fired up, and he vowed that the marauders of Khatmandoo should dearly pay for their audacity. A large army, of the reputed strength of 70,000 men, was collected, and the Chinese generals advanced by the Kirong Pa.s.s upon the Nepaulese capital. A desperate battle was fought along this elevated road, resulting in victory to the Chinese. Several other encounters took place with the same result, and the Ghoorkas were compelled to sue for terms. The Chinese showed no disposition to stay their advance, until Lord Cornwallis mediated between the foes, and peace ensued. Nepaul acknowledged its suzerainty to China, and agreed to send tribute every five years to Pekin. For more than half a century this was regularly sent, but during the last thirty years it has been either discontinued, or has grown irregular. But for us the main point is, after all, that the Chinese, although yielding to the remonstrance of Lord Cornwallis, really did so with a bad grace. We had stood between them and their prey.
But this was not the full extent of the mistake we had actually committed. We had annoyed the Chinese; but we had absolutely offended the people and the ruling Lamas of Tibet. Warren Hastings had sent two missions--one under Mr. George Bogle, the other under Captain Turner--to the Teshu Lama, and by means of these emba.s.sies had broken ground very happily in Tibet. He had also conferred an obligation upon him by dealing leniently with the intractable Bhutanese or Bhuteas; and he had followed up that sense of obligation by the despatch of two successful missions. When Lord Cornwallis threw the _aegis_ of British protection over Nepaul, it is true that we had no diplomatic relationship with Tibet, but we were on a good footing with the people generally, having a native representative at Lhasa named Purungir Gosain, and being in high repute at Shigatze, the chief city of the southern portion of Tibet. The Tibetans, the instant the Ghoorkas raided their country, notified the same to our government, and requested its good offices to prevent the Ghoorkas invading their country. The Chinese, their lawful protectors, were so far away that much damage could be inflicted upon them before the Chinese could have time to despatch a vindicating army; therefore they appealed to their friends the English, whom they had always found so just, for a.s.sistance in their extremity. Their appeal was evidently made with the impression that it would be granted. Therefore it was with double regret they saw the English remain indifferent while the Ghoorkas were pressing on against Lhasa, and ravaging the fertile districts watered by the Sanpu. But their regret and surprise at our government remaining indifferent were as nothing compared with their indignation when they learnt that we were actually interfering on behalf of the marauding Ghoorkas. We saved the Ghoorkas from condign chastis.e.m.e.nt, and we of course prevented the establishment of a Chinese garrison at Khatmandoo, which we could whenever we chose have easily expelled; but we offended the Tibetans and the Chinese, and induced them to unite in a policy of hostility against ourselves. After that war (1792) the Himalayan pa.s.ses were closed against us, and the Chinese block-houses have effectually barred the way to Tibet and Northern Asia ever since.
Mr. Thomas Manning, one of the most intrepid and highly gifted of English travellers, penetrated into Tibet in 1812, and resided there some time. But that is the only instance in which an English traveller overcame Bhutea and Ghoorka indifference and Chinese hostility. Tibet remains a sealed book, and, despite treaty rights to enter it, no Englishman goes thither, although the attraction is great, and the prize to be secured far from vague or trivial. The a.s.sumed reason is the covert hostility of the Chinese.
If we turn farther to the east, to a.s.sam--which we have absorbed--to Birma, and even to Siam, we find the same causes in operation. We recognized in Yunnan the Panthay Sultan of Talifoo; we have always striven to treat the kings of Birma and Siam as independent princes, whereas they are only Chinese va.s.sals; and we are believed to have carried on intrigues with the Shans and other tribes beyond the a.s.samese frontier. These steps may be prudent or they may not for other reasons; but they certainly are imprudent for the reason that they offend the Chinese. As a policy intended to conciliate the Chinese, our frontier policy on the north and the east has been the worst possible, and a tissue of blunders from beginning to end; and the result is that for the last half-century we have lived on the very worst terms with the Chinese. We should have conciliated them, but we aroused instead all their latent suspicion and dislike. We should have become friendly neighbours, and, on the contrary, we are neighbours who, if not decidedly hostile to each other, shun each other's presence. And the real base of our sentiment towards the Chinese is to be seen in the fact that one of the first articles in the creed of Indian state policy is "to keep China as far off as possible." That precept, which may have been very useful, has served its turn, and it is time that our Indo-Chinese policy should be set upon a new basis. With China once more supreme upon our whole northern frontier, and with her presenting ultimatums at Bangkok, and coercing the ruler of Mandalay as she esteems fit, it is high time for us, apart from the Central Asian question altogether, to set our house in order with the Chinese. The mistakes we made in championing the Ghoorkas, in acknowledging the Panthays, and in a general policy of indifference to Chinese opinion, have all tended to bring about the present deadlock in our relations with China. Our acknowledgment of the Athalik Ghazi cannot have conduced to the creation of any very friendly sentiment among the Chinese towards us, and, therefore, at the present moment we must a.s.sume that the state of feeling existing among the Chinese in Tibet and Yunnan towards us exists in Kashgaria also; and that feeling is a veiled hostility. Therefore, while the Chinese are beginning to regard Russia with the hostile feelings that once were reserved for England, they have by no means altered their old sentiments towards us. We have done nothing whatever to induce them to do so. We have not helped them in any way to regain Kashgar, and on the whole English opinion may be said to have been more adverse to, than in favour of, their claims. They have found in the a.r.s.enals of Kashgar and Yarkand many proofs of England's alliance with, and friendship for, Yakoob Beg; and, on the other hand, they certainly owe much to the a.s.sistance of Russian merchants, and the forbearance of the Russian government. Nor should we for an instant delude ourselves with the fallacy that the Chinese will look to us for aid against Russia, as Yakoob Beg did. They have conquered Eastern Turkestan without us--in fact, despite of our moral opposition; and they will retain it if they can by their own right arms. It will not enter their head for an instant to play the old game of Yakoob Beg, of setting England off against Russia. But, although they will play a perfectly independent game, it by no means follows that they will be hostile to this country, if by some fortunate stroke of diplomacy we could bring home to their minds the fact that England is glad at the result of the war in Central Asia, however much she may have failed during its progress to recognize which was the rightful cause. But what is that fortunate stroke of diplomacy to be? and how is it to be brought to pa.s.s? To each of these questions it would be rash to give any confident reply. In dealing with the Chinese we are not only treating with a people whom we very imperfectly understand, but also with a government the secret springs of whose policy we neither know nor appreciate. The action we might therefore adopt, founded though it should be on the experience of some Englishman versed in the mysteries of China, might fail to accomplish what it seemed calculated to secure. It might be crowned with success, it might be condemned with failure. Of course the first thing to decide is, how are we to take official cognizance of China's reconquest of Kashgaria, and how are we to bring home to the minds of Tso Tsung Tang and his lieutenants the knowledge that we have repented of our shortsighted policy towards Yakoob Beg, and are willing to atone for it in so far as we are able by an ample recognition of the change in affairs north of the Karakoram?
The Che-foo Convention gave us the right to send an emba.s.sy to Tibet, on the condition that it should be acted upon within a given s.p.a.ce. We did not avail ourselves of that concession, and the Chinese, we are informed, consider that the right has lapsed. We may have been wise or we may have been foolish--in my opinion we have been foolish--in declining to enforce the only real concession China made, in reparation for the murder of Mr. Margary. Does this concession, which we never made use of, ent.i.tle us to send a mission to the Chinese in Kashgar? Acting upon this precedent, are we justified in supposing that the Chinese would hold out a hand of friendship to an English envoy coming from Leh to Yarkand? It is much to be feared that it would not. At the present moment, too, the country must be in such a disturbed state, that the Chinese would have a ready excuse if any accident befel our envoy.
Moreover, at the present moment an envoy would have no definite object before him. A few years hence, when the Chinese rule shall be completely restored throughout Eastern Turkestan, it may be reasonable to expect a revival of trade in this direction; but at present it would be premature to agitate for it. Nor would a simple emba.s.sy of congratulation look well. We have too recently befriended the Athalik Ghazi to make our congratulations to his conqueror anything but a mockery. The Chinese would be puffed up with vanity, and think that we were only worshipping their rising sun. Whatever action we do take in Central Asia, to effect an understanding with the Chinese, we must be very careful that it has been well considered, and that it is as cautious as it must be clearly defined. Any mistake would be simply fatal to the preservation of good relations with China. Therefore, we must do nothing. _Quieta non movere_ must be our motto, and we must only look forward to some auspicious occasion when it may be possible to enter into cordial relations with China.
But, although our hands are tied in Central Asia, they are not fettered at Pekin, and we certainly should congratulate, if we have not done so already, the Chinese on their remarkable successes in the Tian Shan regions. That step might be pregnant with beneficent results, and our desire to be on good terms with our new, yet our old, neighbour might be met in a cordial manner by the Chinese. The Chinese will not stoop to propitiate us in order to preserve their rule in Eastern Turkestan; but it is against common sense to suppose that they will be eager to embroil themselves with us at the same moment that they are quarrelling with the Russians. The Kuldja question must throw China into our alliance, if we are not precipitate, and do not offer her any slight by meddling with this semi-independent chief of Khoten, who is said to have overthrown a Chinese detachment. And, in negotiating with the rulers of Kashgaria, we must remember that commercial advantages are all very well, but that political are infinitely more important. It has been tersely said that we patronized Yakoob Beg in order to make a market for Kangra tea; but the very trivial advantages we secured in a commercial sense were far more than counterbalanced by the political disadvantages we derived from a recognition of the Athalik Ghazi. In dealing with the Chinese we must not set before us, as our guiding star, the privilege of supplying the good people of Kashgar and Yarkand with tea and other necessaries. What we aspire to is to be on terms of amity with China, as a power in Central Asia, which will possess everything it desires when Ili has been restored, and which most accordingly be inclined to resent with us the undue aggrandizement of Russia. These are the future advantages that may accrue from an understanding between England and China. But at the present juncture there are others similar in kind, but immediate in effect. The Afghan question, which now clamours for solution, and which will scarcely pa.s.s through this crisis without finding our hold on Cabul made more a.s.sured, is in many respects connected with the Kuldja.
In each case the ambition of Russia is the motive power, and in each she seeks to play her game with as little risk, and as much gain, as possible. In neither will she fight, if she can avoid the necessity, yet in each there is a point beyond which her honour and her interests alike refuse to permit her to remain concealed and neutral. The solution of the two questions is being worked out simultaneously, and the progress of the Afghan question will at least very seriously affect the later stages of the Kuldja. If Russia has to fight to defend Shere Ali, then we may be sure that Tso Tsung Tang's legions will not remain inactive, and that General Kolpakovsky will either have to beat a retreat to Vernoe, or engage in a war out of which, on his own resources alone, it will be impossible for him to issue victorious. If Russia interfere openly in defence of Shere Ali, Kuldja must be restored to the Chinese, otherwise Russia's flank would be exposed to a crushing blow, which the Chinese would not be slow to take advantage of. Present events on the Ili and on the Cabul have, therefore, this much in common, that they both aim, directly or indirectly, at the fabric of Russian supremacy in Central Asia. The occupation of Afghanistan by England, or even a partial occupation of it as is very probable, would seriously weaken Russian prestige in Western Turkestan. A Chinese occupation of Kuldja would undermine her position in Vernoe and Naryn and among the Kirghiz.
Admitting these, is it not natural to suppose that in each case Russia will fight, or that, even if she does not fight in each case, she will fight in the one that she may deem of the most importance? But we need not pursue the subject farther. The Chinese are face to face with Russia in the heart of Central Asia, just as a few short months ago they were opposed to Yakoob Beg and the power of the Tungani.
Their army is drawn up in hostile array; it is each day becoming more numerous and more perfectly prepared. Its generals are the same who have led it to constant victory; its main body is the veterans of three campaigns. The Chinese are persuaded, and it is impossible to say not justly persuaded, of the righteousness of their cause. The Russians can have no equal confidence either in their strength, or in their moral position. They are not exactly championing a bad cause, or a lost one, but, in comparison to the Chinese, they have no legal position. It remains to be seen whether by force of arms, or by diplomatic superiority, they can make up for the flaw in their tenure of Kuldja.
Farther on, in the vista of the events yet to come, there looms the prospect of an Anglo-Chinese alliance, that must be most beneficial to the peoples of Asia generally. But, before it will be possible for Englishmen to count upon the presence of the Chinese as a favourable "factor in the Central Asian question," our relations with China must be placed upon a firmer and a more friendly basis than any which has yet existed. We have it in our power to do this, and the ever-widening breach between Russia and China simplifies our task in no slight degree.
The day will come when Russia will discover that the Kuldja question was no trivial matter at all, and that to it can be traced many important events in Central Asia. England may also recognize in it one of the most useful circ.u.mstances that have ever operated in her favour in her long rivalry with Russia. At the very crisis of our border history, when we are on the eve of dealing out well merited chastis.e.m.e.nt to an Ameer of Cabul, Russia finds herself weakened by being compelled to discuss a question with China, when her attention is required elsewhere. She will not yield what the Chinese demand, yet she dare not refuse; and the latter will simply bide their time until she is hampered elsewhere. It is no rash prophecy to say that China will be reinstalled, either by peaceful means or by force, in Kuldja before the close of next year, probably long before. An alliance between any two of the three great Asiatic Powers must then be conclusive in all Central Asian matters, and, before that alliance, the third will have the prudence to submit.
It behoves us to learn our lesson, when that day comes, thoroughly and in good time.
APPENDIX.
THE POSITION OF LOB-NOR.
Lake Lob-Nor is placed in the map accompanying this volume in accordance with the explorations of Colonel Prjevalsky in 1876-77; the result of which was published in Dr. Petermann's _Mittheilungen_ as an extra number during the spring of the present year. The accuracy of the gallant explorer in identifying Lob-Nor with his lake of Kara Koshun had not been challenged when this map was drawn, and when the following good reasons for doubting its accuracy were published on the 14th of September, it was too late to make the necessary alteration.
The quotation of Baron Ferdinand von Richthofen's strictures on Colonel Prjevalsky's lakes is taken from the _Athenaeum_ of the 14th of September, 1878:--
"It would appear that the Russian traveller Prejevalsky, in his last remarkable journey in the heart of Central Asia, did not explore Lob-Nor at all, as he claims to have done. Baron Ferdinand von Richthofen, one of the first comparative geographers of the day, has examined the account of the journey, more especially by the light of Chinese literature, and proves, almost incontestably to our thinking, that the true Lob-Nor must lie somewhere north-east of the so-called Kara Kotchun Lake discovered by Prejevalsky, and that, in all probability, it is fed by an eastern arm of the Tarim river. This, at all events, would account for the remarkable diminution in bulk undergone by the waters of that stream as they proceed southward, which could not but strike an attentive reader of the Russian explorer's narrative. We have not s.p.a.ce to reproduce all the arguments which Von Richthofen adduces, but the more important are these:--Prejevalsky's lake was fresh, whereas Lob-Nor has been called _The_ Salt Lake, _par excellence_, in all ages; Shaw, Forsyth, and other authorities, report that the name Lob-Nor was known in those regions, whereas Prejevalsky found no such name applied to his lake; the Chinese maps, of the accuracy of which Von Richthofen has had repeated proofs, represent Lob-Nor as lying more to the north-east, and call two lakes lying nearly in the position of those discovered by Prejevalsky, Khasomo, Khas being the Mongolian for jade, a famous product of Khotan of which mediaeval traders from China went in quest, pa.s.sing by these very lakes _en route_. Another important argument is, as we have mentioned, based on the bulk of water discharged by the Tarim at its mouth. Von Richthofen's theory presupposes that the Tarim River has altered its course, and that the main rush of water is now south-east instead of due east as formerly. The whole question is well worthy of further investigation, and it is possible that Prejevalsky, whom a recent telegram from St. Petersburg reports about to return to Central Asia, may be enabled to elucidate it. He will return to Zaissan, the Russian frontier post, and thence endeavour to make his way into Tibet by way of Barkul and Hami.
"It is, however, certain that he will encounter great, if not insuperable, obstruction, for we learn from private advices from India, that the ill-advised publication in the Chefoo Convention of the then proposed mission to Tibet has resulted in the issue of the most stringent orders to the Tibetan officials at all the various routes and pa.s.ses to allow no European traveller to enter into the country on any pretext whatever."
Having stated the view of Baron Ferdinand von Richthofen, which is endorsed by the high authority of the _Athenaeeum_, and which bears, moreover, conviction upon its face, it is but fair to give the vital portion of Colonel Prjevalsky's own description. The _Geographical Magazine_, for May, 1878 Contains _in extenso_ the report, and the sentences here quoted are from that translation.
"At a distance of fifteen versts from the smaller lake, Kara Buran, the party diverged southward to the village of Charchalyk, built about thirty years ago by outlaws from Khotan, of which there are at present 114 engaged in tilling fields for the state.... Where Charchalyk now stands, and also at the distance of two days' journey from it, are the ruins of two towns, called Ottogush-Shari (from Ottogush, a former ruler) and Gas-Shari respectively. Close to Lob-Nor (Kara Koshun) are the ruins of a third and pretty extensive town called Kune-Shari. From inquires, Prejevalsky ascertained that about 1861 or 1862 a colony of Russians numbering about 160 or 170 people, including women and children, with their pack-horses and armed with flint-lock muskets, settled on the Lower Tarim and at Charchalyk, but that they made no long stay, and soon returned to Urumchi, via Turfan.... Turning to the Lob-Nor Lake (Kara Koshun), which the travellers reached in the early days of February, it should be observed that the Tarim discharges itself first into a smaller lake (from thirty to thirty-five versts in length, and between ten and twelve versts in breadth) called Kara Buran (_i.e._ black storms) into which the Cherchendaria flows as well. A great part of the Kara Buran, as of Lob-Nor, is overgrow with reeds, the river flowing in its bed in the centre. The name Lob-Nor is applied by the natives to the whole lower course of the Tarim, the larger lake being called Chok-kul or Kara Koshun. This lake, or rather mora.s.s, is in the shape of an irregular ellipse running south-west and north-east.
"Its major axis is about 90 or 100 versts in length, its minor axis not more than twenty versts. This information is derived from the natives, as Prejevalsky himself explored only the southern and western end, and proceeded by boat down the river for about half the length of the lake, further progress being rendered impossible by the increasing shallowness of the water and the ma.s.ses of reeds in every direction. The water itself is clear and sweet, though there are salt marshes all round the lake, and beyond them a strip of ground parallel with the present borders of the lake and overgrown with tamarisks. It is probable that this strip was formerly the periphery of the lake, and this conclusion is corroborated by the natives, who say that thirty years ago the lake was deeper."
It is clear that the true position of Lob-Nor has yet to be defined by modern exploration, but we may safely a.s.sume with the _Athenaeum_ that Colonel Prjevalsky's Kara Koshun is _not_ Lob-Nor. The accompanying map then, in this particular, is unfortunately erroneous.
There is every reason for believing that Lob-Nor will be found in the position a.s.signed to it on the Chinese chart, the accuracy of which has been so strikingly proved by the correct position given to the two lakes Khas-omo, which are identical with the Kara Koshun and Kara Bunar of Prjevalsky.
It would be most interesting to obtain a diary or other account of those Russian settlers mentioned by Prjevalsky, who entered the _terra incognita_ of Central Asia during the halcyon days after the signature of the Treaty of Kuldja, and just before the outbreak of the Tungan revolt. It is possible that they may have solved during their return journey to Urumtsi the enigma of Lob-Nor without knowing what they had achieved. The reader will, therefore, have the kindness to bear in mind that Lob-Nor is really (probably about three-quarters of a degree) north-east of where it is placed on the map, and that the lake represented there is only the Kara Koshun, or Chok Kul of Colonel Prjevalsky.
The most recent information is, that Colonel Prjevalsky adheres to his view as to the position of Lob-Nor, and is preparing a reply which will be published in a few weeks from this date (October 1st).
TREATY BETWEEN RUSSIA AND CHINA.
TREATY OF COMMERCE CONCLUDED BETWEEN RUSSIA AND CHINA, AT KULDJA, ON THE 25TH DAY OF JULY, 1851, AND RATIFIED ON THE 13TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 1851.
The plenipotentiary of His Majesty the Emperor of All the Russias, and the plenipotentiaries of His Majesty the Bogdokhan of Tatsing, hereby declare; the Governor General of Ili, and its dependent provinces, as well as his deputy, have, after consulting together, concluded in the city of Ili (Kuldja), in favour of the subjects of both empires, a Treaty of Commerce, which establishes a traffic in the cities of Ili (Kuldja), and of Tarbagatai (Chuguchak). This treaty is composed of the following articles:--
ARTICLE I.
The present Treaty of Commerce, concluded in the interests of both powers, by demonstrating their mutual solicitude for the maintenance of peace between, as well as for the well-being of, their respective subjects, ought to draw still closer together those links of friendship which at the present moment unite the two Powers.
ARTICLE II.
The merchants of the two Empires will regulate between themselves the interchange of commerce, and arrange the various charges at their own will, and without any extraneous pressure. On the part of Russia a consul will be appointed to superintend the affairs of all Russian subjects; and on the part of China, a functionary of the superior administration of Ili. In the event of any collision between the subjects of either Power, each of these agents will decide, in accordance with justice, the affairs of his own countrymen.
ARTICLE III.
This commerce being opened in consideration of the mutual friendship of the two Powers, it will not be in contravention of existing rights on either side.
ARTICLE IV.
Russian merchants going either to Ili (Kuldja) or to Tarbagatai (Chuguchak) will be accompanied by a syndic (caravanbashi). When a caravan going to Ili (Kuldja) shall arrive at the Chinese picket of Borokhondjir, and when that destined for Tarbagatai (Chuguchak) shall reach the first Chinese picket, the syndic shall present to the officer of the guard the certificate of his government. The said officer, after having noted the number of men, of beasts, and of loads of merchandise, shall permit the caravan to pa.s.s, and shall furthermore cause it to be escorted from picket to picket by an officer and soldiers. During the march, all disturbance, or cause for such, shall be interdicted to soldiers and merchants alike.
ARTICLE V.
In order to facilitate the task of officers and soldiers, Russian merchants shall be obliged, in virtue of the present treaty, to follow the route chosen by their body guard, both going and returning.
ARTICLE VI.
If, whilst Russian caravans follow their route outside the limit of the guard of Chinese soldiers, bands of brigands from the outer clans (Kirghiz) shall commit acts of pillage, of a.s.sault, or other crimes, the Chinese government shall not be required to interfere in the matter.
When the caravan shall have arrived on Chinese territory, similarly also during its residence in the factories where merchandise is stored, Russian merchants must themselves guard and defend their property. They will be expected still more carefully to look after their animals when out at pasturage. If, despite all precaution, something should happen to go astray, notice of such loss must be promptly given to the Chinese official; who conjointly with the Russian consul shall trace out with all possible diligence the lost article. If traces of it are discovered, and those in a village held by Chinese subjects, and the thief be captured, the punishment shall be prompt and severe. If the thing lost be recovered, or any portion of it, it shall be restored to the person to whom it belonged.
ARTICLE VII.
In the event of disputes, litigations, or other trivial incidents, between the respective subjects, the Russian consul and the Chinese official, of whom mention has previously been made, shall use all their efforts to settle the affair satisfactorily. But if, despite every effort to avoid such, a criminal case or one of general importance should arise, it shall be decided conformably with the regulations actually in force on the Kiachta frontier.
ARTICLE VIII.
Russian merchants shall arrive each year with their merchandise between the 25th day of March and the 10th day of December (of our style, or according to the Chinese calendar between the day Tchin-ming and the day Tong-tchi); after the latter of these dates, the arrival of caravans shall cease. If the merchandise imported during that period (8-1/2 months) should not be sold, it shall be permissible to the merchants to remain a longer s.p.a.ce in China, in order to complete their sale; after which the consul shall take charge of their departure. It is moreover understood that Russian merchants shall not obtain an escort of officers and soldiers, neither for going nor for returning, if they have not at the least twenty camels laden with merchandise. If a merchant or the Russian consul has need for some special matter to send an express message, every facility shall be accorded him for doing so. But in order that the service of officers and soldiers should not become too onerous, there shall only be twice in the same month these extraordinary expeditions outside the line of the advanced guards.