CHINA.                            349

instructions were asked by Mr. Henderson, who stated that he was pre-
sumed to be on his way to Formosa.
  In answer to his request instructions were given by you to Mr. Hen-
derson to arrest him, and he was arrested at Amoy upon the 6th of
August. He thereupon filed a protest in the consular court, alleging,
among other things, that the warrant on which he was held contained
no mention of any offense, and insisting that his entry into the Japan-
ese service was lawful and permitted by the treaty, and that his contin-
uance therein was not in violation of any law of the United States. At
his request he was forwarded to Shanghai, and on his arrival, pursuant to
the suggestion of Mr. Williams, and by your direction, was discharged
from custody. These appear to be the facts as they have been commu-
nicated to the Department concerning the arrest.
  Many considerations have been advanced by you, tending to show
the animus of General Le Gendre toward the Chinese, and the object
of his original employment and his visit to China, but all such are, at
the most, argument or conjecture.
  General Le Gendre was a citizen of the United States who had ren-
dered patriotic and valuable services to his Government, who had lately
held the very consulate in which he was arrested, and was represented
to be attached to an important mission from the Mikado to the Emperor
of China.
  On all these-grounds a criminal proceeding should not have been
commenced against him without grave cause, and only for an offense
to substantiate which ample evidence existed. In judging of the legal-
ity of this arrest, and of the propriety of his discharge from custody,
it is necessary to know precisely the charges and the evidence at hand
to support them. Upon these vital points the dispatches in possession
of the Department give almost no information.
  Exhibit No. 8, attached to your No. 811, being a form of warrant not
filled out, and unsigned, is probably intended as a copy of the general
form of the warrant on which the arrest was made.
  It contains no charge of the commission of any particular offense, no
statement of any facts based on which the warrant had been issued, and
no mention of any complaint or information having been made. It is
true that Mr. Henderson, in his letter of the 10th of August to the act-
ing Japanese consul, states that "1 General Le Gendre was arrested by
me in the United States consulate, upon a charge of advising, aiding,
and abetting an expedition in hostility to the government of China, in
violation of the laws of the United States and their treaty with China,"
and in his No. 10, to Mr. Williams, a copy of which was forwarded with
his No. 42, to the Department, he states that he has arrested him for
aiding the Japanese armed forces in the invasion of the island of For-
mosa, and these are the only approaches to any distinct statement of a
charge.
   The offense in each case here referred to is indefinite; no designation
is made of the time or place when or where it is alleged to have been
committed, and no allegation of the citizenship of the offender, or state-
ment of the particular facts or legal provisions making the act an
offense.
  'By the provisions of the act of 1860, as appears by sections 2 and 7,
power is given to the consuls of the United States in China to arraign
and try citizens of the United States charged with offenses against law
which shall be committed in China, and such provisions are substantially
the same in the Revision. (See §§ 4084, 4087.)
  It is recognized in general as a part of the jurisprudence of this coun-
try, that offenses shall be tried where committed.