courts of any self-called civilized country would consider themselves bound to recognize that comity towards China, in opposition to the interest and policy of their own government. II. The validity of such contracts, under the law of this country, is next to be considered. The matter of immigration is included in that class of subjects upon which the United States Congress has power to legislate under section VII, p. 4, of the Constitution, provided that such legislation is not in conflict with other constitutional provisions or with any treaty. (Smith vs. Turner, 7 Howard, United States Supreme Court Rep., 283.) Congress has passed various laws regulating the matter of immigration, among which are the acts of February 22, 1847, and March 3, 1849, prescribing the provisions and accommodation to be furnished on immigrant ships, and has enacted laws relating specially to coolies and to immigrants of a somewhat similar class. By the act of February 19, 1862, it is provided that no citizen or ship of the United States shall engage in transporting coolies from China or elsewhere, to any foreign place whatever, to be disposed of in any way or for any time as servants or slaves; but that this act shall not interfere with emigration of the Chinese, certified to be voluntary by the United States consul at the port of departure. By the act of July 4, 1864, the offices of commissioner and superintendent of immigration are created, with the duty of regulating contracts made by emigrants in foreign countries, of protecting them after arrival here against imposition, and of forwarding them to their places of destination. The same act provides certain means for enforcing contracts so made, the efficiency of which will be considered hereafter. It seems, therefore, that the voluntary emigration of Chinese to this country is directly legalized by Congress, but this legislation is subject to all treaties made by the United States, and to all provisions of the Constitution. The treaty made with China, June 18, 1858, contains no provision bearing upon the subject under consideration, unless involved in the prohibition and clandestine, illegal, and contraband trades contained and implied in article XIV. The terms of that article, strictly construed, seem to apply only to merchandise, and to trading at closed ports; and there can be but little doubt that any commerce which is not prohibited under a strict construction of the treaty, would be held not to come within such prohibition if found to be advantageous to the other contracting power. The recent amendment of the United States Constitution, proposed February 6, 1865, and now adopted, is a more formidable obstacle both to the validity and the enforcement of any such contract as should give to the importer a valuable and assignable title to the services of the immigrant. By that amendment it is enacted that neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except upon conviction of crime, shall exist within the United States. This provision seems to be fatal to any means that could be devised, whether with or without the consent of the laborer, for making such a contract with him in a foreign country as should place him on arrival here in a condition of involuntary servitude or in any condition essentially different from that of a free immigrant, bound, indeed, by his contracts, but not bound in any manner or to any extent differing from that manner and extent in and to which other free men are bound by their contracts, and this enactment prevents the States from adopting any laws contrary to its provisions. I am therefore of opinion that a contract made with coolies in China, by the terms of which they should agree to place themselves after arrival here in any state or condition different from that of freemen, or by which they should covenant to submit to other remedies for the enforcement of such contract than those provided by law for enforcing contracts made by and between freemen, would be void. III. It is undoubtedly competent for coolies or any other persons to contract for the performance of any kind of labor, for any term of years, and at any rate of wages, and such contracts are assignable unless it is otherwise stipulated. The question next to be considered is how such contracts are to be enforced in any case of refusal or failure to perform them on the part of the coolies. There is no remedy in such cases known to the law, except an action for money damages, unless the case be such as would cause a court of equity to decree specific performance, or unless the means provided by the act of July 4, 1864, can be availed of. With respect to a suit for money damages, it may be observed that imprisonment for nonpayment of such damages, if recovered, is now rendered practically useless in almost all of the States and actually abolished in some of them. In actions brought upon contracts, the breach of which is in its nature capable of being compensated in money, the inability of the defendant to pay such damages as may be recovered is not a cause for the interference of a court of equity, and as the contracts in question are clearly of that description, there is no ground to hope for such interference. Moreover, if courts of equity did so interfere, they have no means but imprisonment of enforcing their decrees. Imprisonment without food would hardly be tolerated in this age and country, and imprisonment with food would probably be highly agreeable to the delinquent. Upon examination of the act of July 4, 1864, it will be seen that the means, such as they are, therein provided for enforcing contracts made with immigrants, apply only to such contracts as shall be in conformity to the regulations of the commissioner of immigration, and extend only to the giving of rights of action thereon in the United States and State courts, aud to providing a troublesome and doubtful method of obtaining a lien on lands if acquired by the immigrant, but only to the extent of his wages, for the term of twelve months, and only for the repayment of the "expenses of immigration:" so that in case the immigrant should in fact receive and spend his wages for twelve months after arrival and should acquire no land, or if the importer should fail to keep advised of the place of his settlement, the remedy would be practically valueless. The commissioner of immigration has published one set of regulations, dated August 12, 1864, and I am advised of no others. In those it is set forth that no contract is to be approved if made at rates of wages unusually low or improvident, and it is clear that none of the regu lations are adopted for the encouragement of such contracts as could be made practically valuable to the importer. I am therefore of the opinion that such contracts as are the subject of your inquiry cannot be so made as to be valuable to the importer, for the want of means of enforcing them in his hands or in those of his assignee. Yours truly, TO JOHN HEARD, Esq. W. L. DEXTER. Mr. Seward to Mr. Williams. No. 25.] DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, March 6, 1866. SIR: Your despatch of the 23d of November last, No. 16, imforming me of the reprint in Japan of Wheaton's International Law, and the beneficial results which may be expected from this proceeding, has been received and read with great interest. The importance which you ascribe to the appointment of Seu-ki-yu to a post in the Foreign Office seems to be well founded. It is gratifying to this government to learn from these events that the efforts and purposes of the western powers are appreciated, and it views them as proof of the advance in China of the sentiments of western civilization. I am, sir, your obedient servant, S. WELLS WILLIAMS, Esq., &c., &c., &c. WILLIAM H. SEWARD. No. 24.] Mr. Williams to Mr. Seward. LEGATION OF The United STATES, SIR: I have the honor to inform you that the Chinese government has just sent an accredited agent of its own to those countries with which it has treaties, a special commissioner instructed to tender the respects of the Foreign Office of Peking to those nations, and make such observations on foreign lands as a hurried visit will allow. Though the subject has often been proposed to Prince Kung and the members of the Foreign Office, they have acted in it now without any urging, and apparently from a conviction of the benefits which they may derive; so that, being quite voluntary on their part, the step is regarded by the diplomatic body here as an advance in the right direction. The delegate sent on this mission is Pin-Chun, (addressed as Pin-tajin,) who has been acting for two or three years as a revisor of custom-house returns, in connection with the foreign inspectorate, and has thus been brought into contact with foreigners, and learned as much of their countries as his opportunities allowed. Before leaving the capital he was raised to the third rank, and formally introduced by Prince Kung to the foreign ministers on their New Year's visit as his agent to their respective countries, sent on the part of the foreign office. His instructions require him to make careful notes on the customs, peoples, and all objects of interest in the lands he visits. His design is to go in course to Paris, London, the Hague, Copenhagen, Berlin, and St. Petersburg, return to England to take passage for America, and get back, if possible, via California by next winter. He is accompanied by three Manchu lads, students in English and French, and by Messrs. Bowra and Deschamps of the customs, as interpreters. Mr. Robert Hart, the able inspector general of the customs, goes with the party as far as England, and it is his return home on a short furlough that has probably been the immediate moving cause for the appointment of Pin-tajin. If he carries out his design of visiting the United States, I hope that you will grant him every facility to make such obervations as will be of service to him and his country. As he does not go in a diplomatic character, it is not expected that he will have an audience in any of the courts he visits, but will only call on their ministers for foreign affairs to present the salutations of Prince Kung. It is probably best in the present case that as the Emperor of China does not give audience to foreign ministers, this commissioner from his capital should not receive higher courtesies than he gives. This mission from China to the west will be of great benefit to this government, if Pin-tajin brings back such an account as will encourage it in its foreign policy. It is, perhaps, better in some respects that the first attempt to break through the policy of the empire should be by sending a private agent, who can report without further committing the government; see other lands, as it were, with its own eyes, and test, in some degree, the descriptions that have been given it of those regions. It seems to me desirable, therefore, that while the party sees whatever is deemed most worthy its inspection, no great eclat should be made during its short stay in America. Since the appointment was made the Foreign Office has been much pleased at the approbation unexpectedly evinced by other high officials in Peking at the move, and consequently their interest in its result will be increased. I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, Hon. WILLIAM H. SEWARD, S. WELLS WILLIAMS, Secretary of State, Washington, D. C. Chargé d'Affaires. No. 27. Mr. Williams to Mr. Seward. LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES, SIR: I have the honor to transmit to you a despatch from Prince Kung, (enclosure A,) covering a copy of a set of regulations, (enclosure B,) which have been agreed upon between him and the representatives of Great Britain and France to prescribe the mode of hiring Chinese laborers to go abroad. The English and French versions are both enclosed. In my reply (enclosure C) I have mentioned the law of February 19, 1862, which I am almost sure is the only ordinance on this subject in the statute book of any nation, as the reason for not notifying them to our countrymen. I may also add that before they appeared, Baron Rehfues, the Prussian minister to China, had refused to allow Prussian vessels to carry coolies pending a reference to Berlin. The history of the coolie traffic since 1849, when the Peruvians came to Canton to get laborers to dig guano on the Chinchas islands, is a sad result of the foreign intercourse which has been forced upon China and its people. In carrying it on, the most flagitious acts have been committed by the natives upon each other, under the stimulus of rewards offered by foreigners to bring them coolies, while the character of all foreigners has been covered with infamy among the inhabitants of Canton province, especially in the rural districts. The cruel treatment suffered by many of these deceived people in the barracoons to force them to sign contracts and embark, is too well authenticated to be doubted; and especially has this evidence deepened the opprobrium which has fastened upon Macao as the place where the worst deeds were done. In 1859 the terror of kidnappers was so great among the natives in that city and neighborhood that they durst not venture abroad by night; and I printed a small tract for circulation in that region, warning the people of the wiles practiced to entrap them "like pigs in a basket." Out of the cargoes which have left Macao during the last fifteen years, consisting mostly of men between the ages of eighteen and thirty years, only a few scores have returned. The records of this legation contain so many statements going to prove these remarks, that I need not enlarge. Since 1861 less has been written to the department, partly because our flag has not been used, and partly because the trade itself dwindled to a few ships carrying the coolies to Peru, Trinidad, and Cuba during the civil war in the United States. It has revived within the last fifteen months, especially to Cuba. In the year 1859 emigration offices were established by the provincial authorities in Kwang-tung province, to protect the lives and rights of their people emigrating as laborers; but a large majority of the coolies have gone from Macao, where the delay, expense, and surveillance which attended their engagement in the emigration offices were greatly dimin ished or avoided, so that the laudable efforts of Chinese rulers were, in a great measure, neutralized. All those taken to English colonies (chiefly to Trinidad) have, I believe, been engaged in the emigration offices; but the enterprise of thus supplying labor there is said not to pay, though the emigrants and their families are reported to be satisfied with their lot. The failure to effect the exchange of the ratifications of the treaty with Portugal in 1864, has apparently led the Macao authorities to put the settlement in a state of defence; but the Chinese have no wish to provoke hostilities. However, being unable to exercise any supervision over the emigration thence, they disallow it altogether in these regulations, and I hope their people will soon learn that it is illegal, and that ere long the supply will be altogether cut off. No coolies have been shipped from Hong Kong for several years; indeed, it is well understood in all that region that emigrants go from Hong Kong and coolies from Macao. I am somewhat skeptical how far these regulations will prevent the evils now complained of, until a year or so of trial has proven whether the energy of those who make gain by the traffic will not overcome the remedial measures now to go into immediate operation. Even the most disinterested officials cannot at once remove the ignorance which is imposed upon by specious tales, or the poverty which is tempted by the bounty offered; and, after all, these two facts, poverty and ignorance, underlie the whole business, and are worked upon by crafty agents to fill their own pockets. Yet I think it altogether probable that the largest proportion of the coolies go willingly, though stupidly ignorant where they are going and what they are to do. My expectation is, however, that though other flags can be obtained to carry on the trade from Macao, the Portuguese authorities will not persistently set themselves against these reasonable rules to protect every emigrant leaving his native land as a hired laborer. I am indebted to the British minister for a copy of his despatch accompany ing the regulations, (enclosure D,) which he furnished me at my request. Its perusal will repay you, especially the remarks on the appointment of consuls from China to countries with which she has treaties. Such a functionary would do much to reconcile the laborer to his new condition by sending letters and funds home, interpreting for and counselling him in cases of accusation for crime, aiding him to return to his friends, &c. It seems to me to be quite plain that the Chinese government has a reciprocal right to appoint consuls upon this point, as it is not unlikely to come up after the return of Pin-tajin. Almost all the treaties stipulate for the reception of ministers from the Emperor of China, but none of them specially mention consuls; yet the lesser privilege is doubtless involved in the greater. I regard these regulations as an index of progress. They show some solicitude for the welfare of subjects who have gone abroad, and form the first recognition from the Emperor that his people emigrating to other lands are not expatriated or forgotten. If carried out honestly, the obloquy heretofore attendant upon the trade, and the bad reputation of the foreign name, will both soon cease. If Congress sees proper to repeal the law of 1862, laborers could be taken to California, where railroads and other public works will demand thousands o hands to complete them; though if high wages and good treatment were offered, as many free emigrants might go as were needed. I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, Hon. WILLIAM H. SEWARD, S. WELLS WILLIAMS, Secretary of State, Washington, D. C. Chargé d'Affaires. P. S.-Information has just reached this place of the destruction of an Italian vessel, the Napoleon Canevaro, bound for Havana from Macao. It is reported by a part of the crew, who were picked up not far from Hong Kong, that symptoms of insubordination appearing among the coolies, the captain drove them below and battened down the hatches. Flames soon appeared, which the crew vainly endeavored to extinguish, and they soon left in their boats, without even opening the hatches. In January the British ship Pride of the Ganges, bound to Guiana, with between three hundred and four hundred emigrants, was captured by them. They threw the captain and purser overboard, and compelled the mate to land them on Hainan island, after which he brought the vessel back to port. In February the French ship Hong Kong, bound for Havana with over three hundred coolies, was captured by about a score of them, who had armed themselves at Whampoa. These, aided by the rest, possessed themselves of what little treasure was on board, and nearly all escaped to the land, where they were in turn plundered by the fishermen. These things show the necessity of the regulations which have now been adopted to prevent, if possible, wrongs and violente by both those who go as laborers, and those who hire them. S. W. W. A. Prince Kung to Mr. Williams. Prince KUNG, chief secretary of state for foreign affairs, herewith makes a communication: By one of the articles in the conventions made with the plenipotentiaries of Great Britain and France at Peking in 1860, it was agreed that Chinese subjects could be hired as laborers, to go out of the country on service. In order to carry out this provision, the Foreign Office has now been in consultation with their excellencies, Sir Rutherford Alcock, the British minister, and M. de Bellonet, the French chargé d'affaires, upon the details, and have now agreed upon a set of regulations, arranged under twenty-two heads, to which both parties have signed their names and affixed their seals, in order to certify them and assure their ob servance. Orders have been sent by these ministers to all the British and French merchants to conform to these regulations; and I have also forwarded instructions to the superintendents of |