英文摘要 |
The case Hill vs . Ta Kee, heard by the International Mixed Court at Shanghai in early 1875, went through a decades-long appeal process before the Tsungli Yamen & the United States legation at Peking from 1876. The Tsungli Yamen attempted to handle and settle the appeal case judicially, proposing and employing quite reasonable legal principles of evidence, whereas the American minister at Peking attempted to politicize the appeal case by resorting to ''negotiated justice'' on behalf of the appellant Charles E. Hill, an American merchant in China, who lacked sufficient documentary evidence to support his appeal. Various American ministers at Peking chose to ignore the fact that the appellant had no solid evidence, including the bill of sale and the charter party of the steamer Keor jeor, and instead sought to hold the Qing government responsible for the debt alleged by the appellant Hill, by employing ''gunboat diplomacy'', that is, transferring Ta Kee the appellee's individual responsibility (if any) to the government responsibility of Qing China. The case demonstrates that the United States obtained both consular and ministerial jurisdiction in late Qing China through domestic legislation and unequal treaties or conventions with China. Scholars have long overlooked the fact that the United States not only had consular courts in China, but also ran a ministerial court. Cases brought before the ministerial court from consular courts or the Shanghai mixed court were frequently handled and resolved as issues of international relations, and such resolution would be interpreted as both a political negotiation and the United States minister exercising extraterritorial or ministerial jurisdiction. |