The Story of China Studies(5)


Zhāng Tàiyán, A Soldier and a Master (1)

In a Chinese name, family name is put before the given name. A Chinese used to have several given names in his life. The first one is his milk name, usually given by his father in three months of his birth, then, his adult name when he is eighteen years old. The adult name is closely related to his milk name, could be a synonym or an antonym. Besides these two kinds of names, a person could also have many other names like a monicker, a style name or pen names. The name of our hero in this chapter is Zhāng Tàiyán, in Chinese characters, 章太炎. So his family name is Zhāng or 章, then follows his milk or adult name. Yet, Tàiyán or 太炎 was not his milk name or adult name, it was only one of his monickers. His milk name was Xuéchèng (学乘)，which was changed later by himself into Bǐnglín (炳麟)，and his adult name was Méishū (梅叔). The name Zhāng Tàiyán is most popular and widely known.

Zhāng Tàiyán was born on January 12, 1869 into a scholar’s family in a small town in Yúháng County named Cāngqián in Zhéjiāng Province. His father Zhāng Jùn (章濬) was a faculty man at Hāngzhōu Delicate Cottage of Research of Classics. But the one who gave him real enlightenment education was his grandfather on his mother’s side, Mr. Zhū Yoǔqián (朱有虔) who himself was a man of letters and author of a few books and a magistrate at several counties and a prefecture. Under his guidance, Zhāng Tàiyán laid a solid foundation in the phonology of the Chinese language. Zhū left after four years of teaching when Tàiyán was twelve and his elder brother Bǐngsēn, who was sixteen years senior and a faculty man at the Delicate Cottage as well, took over and taught Tàiyán for almost ten years.

During this period, Tàiyán studied seriously such important works as “Interpreting and Decoding Characters(说文解字Shuōwén Jiězì)” by Xǔ Shèn , “Notes to ‘Interpreting and Decoding Characters (说文解字注Shuōwén Jiězì zhù) by Duàn Yùcái , “Five Books on Phonetics (音学五书Yīnxué Wǔshū) by Gù Yánwǔ and “The Exegesis of ‘Towards Elegance’ (尔雅义疏Eryǎ Yìshū) ” by Hǎo Yíxíng . Through such studies, Tàiyān acquired a rather systematic knowledge in philology and phonology. He then moved to “Presentation of Meanings in Classics (经义述闻 Jīngyì Shùwēn)” by Wáng Yǐnzhī , the book served as a ladder to him to Sinology. To understand what the Qīng Dynasty had achieved in the study of classics, starting from 1886 he spent two whole years in reading “Annotation of Classics by the Hall of the Ocean of Learning (学海堂经解 Xuéhǎitáng Jīngjiě)”, which is a collection of writings on study of classics by 74 authors in 1,408 volumes. He also read “Annotation of Classics by Nánjīng Academy (南菁书院经解 Nánjīng Shūyuàn Jīngjiě)”, which is a continuation of the former collection and contains writings by 110 authors in 1,430 volumes.

Tàiyán left home shortly after his father passed away in 1890 and went to Hángzhōu and entered into the Delicate Lecturing Cottage of Classics, which was originally found by Ruān Yuán (阮元)，the then Governor of Zhéjiāng to train young sinologists, a difference from other academies across the country which focused their study on Confucius and Confucianism. At Tàiyán’s time, the rector of the cottage was Yú Yuè (俞樾 1821-1907)，a widely accepted master of study of classics. Tàiyān was deeply influenced by him.

One important accomplishment during his days in the cottage was his writing of “Readings of the Spring and Autumn Annals with Zuǒ’s Commentary (春秋左传读 Chūnqiú Zuǒzhuàndú)”. “Spring and Autumn Annals” was written by Confucius and was China’s first chronicle historic book. There were three different versions of annotations to this book, one carried Gōngyáng Gaō’s commentary, the other Gǔliáng Chì’s commentary, and the third carried Zuǒ Qiūmīng’s commentary. All three have been regarded as Confucian classics. However, there were sharp confrontations between Gōngyáng Gaō’s version, which was originally in clerical script, popular in the Hàn Dynasty and was referred to as “Contemporary Classic”, while Zuǒ Qiūmīng’s version was originally in seal’s script and referred to as the “Ancient Classic”.

In the Qīng Dynasty, the position of the Gōngyáng Gaō’s version was elevated to such a height that Zuǒ Qiūmīng’s version was often criticized. Tàiyán spent independent efforts for almost six years in studies of Zuǒ Qiūmīng’s version and as a result wrote “Readings of the Spring and Autumn Annals with Zuǒ’s Commentary (春秋左传读 Chūnqiú Zuǒzhuàndú)” to safeguard Zuǒ’s commentary. The writing contained over 500,000 characters; its main contents are firstly explanation of difficult words, things not easy to comprehend on basis of his rich knowledge in philology and phonology; secondly explanation of the composition of the book and the intended meaning of the author’s descriptions and arguments; lastly verification that the book was not a fake by Liū Xīn (刘歆) of the Hàn Dynasty as it was believed by so many scholars including some of his teachers. Tàiyán tried to have this writing published, a few of his friends promised to help, yet they all failed. It was published by the People’s Republic as a part of Volume Two of “The Complete Works of Zhāng Tàiyán”, and the original manuscript is being kept in Shànghǎi Museum. The writing marked a higher achievement than his peer and fellow school mates. He could have kept on doing his research, but the sounding of the cannons by the Japanese to annex Korea and invade China in 1894 stopped his career towards a master of China Studies.

China’s defeat in the Sino-Japanese war in 1894 deeply hurt Tàiyān; he left the cottage and worked at a few newspapers. He wrote articles to analyze why China lost the war. He made a loud cry for reform. He organized the Society to Revive Zhéjiāng. He supported the One Hundred Days’ Reform. After the reformed failed and the six martyrs were slaughtered, he wrote “Elegy for the Six Sages” in the name of “Common Folk of China” to castigate on Qīng rulers’ betrayal of the nation and murder of the reformers and people. The elegy became a battle song in the society. He also wrote an article analyzing failure of reforms ever since the Hàn dynasty. When the authority began to arrest editors of news papers that supported the reform, Tàiyān was also on the blacklist. His life was in danger. With help of some friends, he went to Táiwān to stay away of the danger and arrived there on December 4, 1898.

While in Táiwān, he wrote articles for “Táiwān Daily”, the biggest newspaper of Táiwān. He not only criticized the Empress Dowager Cíxǐ and her party who suppressed the reform, but also denounced the decayed ruling system, a different position from Kāng Yoǔwēi (康有为) and Liáng Qǐchaō (梁启超) who initiated the reform and only opposed the Empress Dowager but not the Qīng System.

Despite differences of opinion, Tàiyán kept relations with both Kāng and Liáng who sought shelter in Japan after the reform was thwarted. Unable to get timely information of what was going on in the mainland, and after a serious quarrel with the newspaper he worked for, Tàiyán decided to go to Japan where quite a number of those who are determined to transform China were gathered. He arrived in Kobe on June 14, 1899, and then he traveled to Kyoto, Nagoya and Tokyo. When he got to Yokohama, he stayed at Liáng Qǐchaō’s residence, and arranged by Láing, he met briefly Dr. Sun Yat-sen for the first time. Sun is the leader of the 1911 Revolution which overthrew the Qīng Dynasty and ended China’s feudalist regime, founder of the Nationalist Party. He was at that time in Japan discussing possible alliance with both Kāng and Liáng. The alliance was never formed, because, Tàiyán found out that Liáng tried to be its president and intended to annex “Reviving China Society (兴中会xíngzhōnghuì)” founded by Dr. Sun Yat-sen. Tàiyán started to doubt the political integrity of Kāng and Liáng, and decided not to be mingled with them any more. Yet, he could not break away from them just then, on the contrary, he had to defend them. Shortly after he returned secretly to China in August 1899, a “Collection of Writings to Support Values （翼教丛编yìjiàocōngbiān）” compiled by Sū Yú (苏舆) was published. Being most representative of diehard feudalist thought, the book put together articles written by thirteen scholars and smeared Kāng and Liáng for challenging old classics, distorting constitution, ruining the accepted social order by advocating equality, scorning the Emperor by promoting civil right. Tàiyān wrote two articles to refute them, namely “After ‘Collection of Writings to Support Values’ Came Out” and “Discerning Contemporary and Ancient Writings”. In these articles, Tàiyān cited many examples to say that Kāng Yoǔwēi was not the first to doubt ancient classic, before him there were Wāng Chōng (王充) who wrote “Questioning Confucius”, Liú Zhījǐ （刘知几） who wrote “The Captivating Classics”, Chéng Haò （程颢）and Chéng Yí （程颐）changed the order of words in “The Great Learning” and Zhū Xǐ (朱熹) never believed “The Classic of Filial Piety” was a Confucian work. Tàiyán asked why these writers who bowed to the two Chéngs and Zhū Xǐ and so biased to criticize Kāng only. He pointed out that these writers were swaggering about in borrowed plumes and were like the Míng Dynasty castrated eunuchs in framing scholars. Tàiyán went further to say that differences of opinion can be discussed, but these writers, who were crafty sycophants and a big turtle trapped in a well, were utilizing “difference” in their attack of reformers. These remarks were highly convincing and a great number of progressive scholars were persuaded.

January 1900 saw an important academic event of Tàiyán when his collection of 50 essays was sent to printer’s in Sūzhōu. The collection was entitled in Chinese 訄书 （qiú shū）, which means in English “Words of Truth in Urgent Search”. Most essays were published on newspapers before. The collection centered on four aspects. The first is historical writings about Pre-Qín thinkers other than the Confucius; the second part deals with philosophical issues, “Common Language (公言gōng yán)” in this section was the first group of writings in modern China expounding epistemology; the third analyzes theory of nationality in which Tàiyán classified the Manchu as “a frontier tribe with tied hair like ropes, far from an urbane race”, whose rule of China runs counter to historic rationale, hindered the advancement of the Chinese nation and rendered China into a disadvantaged position in world competition. The final part expressed his ideas of how to reform China, which included his assessment of the general trend of social development, his specific plans for reform in politics, legal, education, religion and economic aspects. The book was warmly applauded by intellectuals, in particular such outstanding scholars as Yán Fù (严复) .

In the same month, Tàiyān was unnecessarily involved in an event when the Director-General of Shànghǎi Telegraph Bureau Jīng Yuánshān (经元善jīng Yuánshàn) sent an urgent cable to Běijīng asking the Empress Dowager not to dethrone Emperor Guāngxù, the cable was signed by 1,231 persons, including Yè Hàn (叶瀚)， Dīng Huìkāng (丁惠康) and Táng Cāicháng (唐才常). Tàiyán’s name was also on even though nobody asked for his consent before hand. The Empress Dowager ordered arrest of those who sent the cable after her effort of replacing the present emperor failed. With assistance of Timothy Richard, a British missionary, Mr. Jīng managed to run to Macau. Facing with danger, Tàiyān remained in Shànghǎi even though some of his friends suggested he should write to someone in power to explain why his name was on the list; when one wrote such a letter for him, he published a letter on one of the newspapers to say he would rather be put into prison than begging for favors from notorious scholars.

Tàiyán came to know Tāng Cāicháng in the winter of 1899. Táng was actively supporting the “One Hundred Days’ Reform” with his sharp pen when he was Editor-in-Chief of “Húnān Daily” and the journal “Húnān Academics”. He went back and forth among Hong Kong, Japan, Southeast Asia and Shànghǎi to talk to Kāng Yoǔwēi (康有为), Liáng Qǐchaō (梁启超), Dr. Sun Yat-sen and Chén Shàobāi (陈少白) . He became a royalist with the influence from Kāng and Liáng and learned how to network with people and prepare for armed uprising from Sun and Chén. By July 14, 1900 when the troops of the Eight Powers took Tiānjīn he had been promoting the formation of “China’s Parliament” for some time. Tàiyán supported the idea of having a “parliament”, yet he detested that Táng wanted to bring the then emperor to the south when the parliament was set up, and this annoyed him. The inauguration of the parliament was held on July 26, 1900 at Yūyuán (愚园) garden of Shànghǎi. Róng Hóng (Yung Wing was his English Name,容闳) was elected its president and Yán Fù its vice president. Even thought Tàiyān attended the inauguration, his request of not admitting Manchu and Mongolian members was turned down. He was so disappointed, he cut his pigtail on August 3, which was the symbol of loyalty to the imperial rule, to sever with the “parliament”; he also published a statement for what he did. Five days later he sent his plea for not admitting Manchu and Mongolians into the parliament and his statement for cutting his pigtail to Dr. Sun Yat-sen who was overseas and asked to have both writings published on “China News Every Ten Days” in Hong Kong. Dr. Sun and the newspaper warmly welcomed Tàiyán’s behavior; both writings appeared on the 19th issue of the paper. On August 14, the troops of the eight powers took and occupied Běijīng, the Empress Dowager, the emperor fled to Xī’ān. Tàiyān was now even more determined to overthrow the rotten Qīng Dynasty regime.

Táng Cāicháng and his colleague Qín Lìshān organized an “Independent Army” and planned to rise up in July 1900. But the army was wiped out in three days, Táng was arrested in Hànkǒu and killed on August 22 together with 11 others. Tàiyán was very sad at the loss of Táng, he wrote an article to express his deep grief. However, Tàiyán was on the wanting list for a third time by the Qīng rulers, who were arresting those involved in the Independent Army and the “parliament”. Thinking that he was not an accessory himself, Tàiyān didn’t really worry and went back to his hometown. Yet, a few months later, a friend of his came to him from Shànghǎi in a hurry and told him the police was on the way to get him. Tàiyán had to leave home and hide in a temple for ten days. But at this time, he was more annoyed with Kāng Yoǔwēi and Liáng Qǐchaō who still adhered to their royalist attitude. Tàiyán himself once sang praises of the emperor, yet the death of Táng and the failure of the Independent Army helped him see through the true nature of the emperor and the Qīng regime. He thus became the first in China to openly criticize Royalism from political and theoretical triangles.

Tàiyán opened fire when Liáng Qǐchaō published his “On the History of the Last Decade”, which blamed all the fault of the society to the Empress Dowager and peddled the return to power of Emperor Guāngxù as the way out for China. He wrote an article entitled “Channeling the Hatred towards the Manchuria (正仇满论Zhèng Chóu Mǎn Lùn)” and sent it to Qín Lìshān who was now in Japan and Editor-in-Chief of the “National Daily (国民报Guó Mín Bào)”. Tàiyán said in the article that it was good that the emperor supported the One Hundred Days’ Reform, but it was for the interest of his ruling clique, he was ruling for the aristocratic group, it was the interest of this group, which was independent of the emperor’s personal will, that ruled, even when the Empress Dowager was gone, there would be someone else in her place. He went further to say that a constitutional political system could not be realized by relying on an individual person, but through a revolution. The article dawned on people that their blind belief on the emperor was only a wishful thinking.

Tàiyān went to Sūzhōu to teach at the Dōngwú University, which was run by an American missionary. As always Tàiyán openly criticized the Qīng regime and disseminated revolution. His actions irritated two provincial governors who gave order to arrest Tàiyán . With help of his friends, he managed to get away and again in February 1902 he went to Japan for a second time.

Zhāng Tàiyán arrived in Yokohama on February 28, 1902. He moved to Tokyo some ten days later and stayed in the living quarters of Chinese students. He met Qín Lìshān almost daily to discuss how to disseminate revolution. Qín played a key role in bridging Dr. Sun Yat-sen and Chinese students in Japan. Tàiyán went to Yokohama to have penetrating discussions with Dr. Sun and learned a lot from the latter, in particular the concept of “equal land rights” for Chinese farmers. April 26, 1902 was the 242nd anniversary of the death of the last Míng Dynasty Emperor Chóng Zhēn, in order to stimulate more hatred toward the Qīng rulers, Tàiyán, Qín Lìshān and Féng Zìyóu (冯自由) decided to hold a large-scale meeting to mark the event. The idea was supported by Dr. Sun. For the meeting, Tàiyán wrote “Marking the Fall of China 242 Years Ago”. However, when Cài Jūn (蔡钧)， Qīng regime’s minister in Japan learned about the meeting, he called on the Foreign Ministry of Japan with Tàiyán’s article in his hand asking the Japanese government to ban the meeting for the sake of the friendship between the two countries. One day before the meeting, the regional police notified Tàiyán that the meeting should be cancelled and on the day of the meeting a big group of policemen came to the venue and dispersed a few hundred student participants. Dr. Sun also came with some overseas Chinese and learned about the interference of the Qīng Embassy when he got to Tokyo. To make the event happen, Dr. Sun invited Tàiyán, Qín Lìshān and Féng Zìyóu to Yokohama and the meeting was held on the afternoon of the 26th of April to mark the death of the last emperor of the Míng. Dr. Sun presided over the meeting, Tàiyán addressed the meeting. At the same time, Tàiyán ’s article was carried on “China Daily” in Hong Kong. The meeting was a political demonstration against the Qīng rulers; it directed the surging revolutionary passion onto a simple and clear “Anti-Manchu” objective.

Tàiyán returned home after staying in Japan for three months and started to revise his book “Words of Truth in Urgent Search”. He felt, shortly after its first print, some of his ideas already lagged behind the real situation in China. After his revision, which took him more than six months, the book became the first comprehensive work on national and democratic revolutionary theory on basis of criticism of China’s old thoughts and old systems. One striking feature of the new edition was his great amount of quotations from western modern works, for instance Edward Burnett Taylor’s “Primitive culture and Anthropology”, “The History of Human Marriage” by E.A.Westermarck of Finland, “The Theory of Sociology” by Franklin Henry Giddings of USA and “The Evolution of Nations” by Ariga Nagao of Japan. Apparently when he was writing the first edition, the theory of evolutionism was the main influence from the west, now when he was revising, western theory of sociology played a much bigger role in his thought. What this revised edition shocked the Chinese intellectual world most was his criticism of Confucius and Confucianism, which never happened before. His newly inserted essay “Comments on Confucius”, which replaced two essays in the first edition which were conspicuously venerating Confucius, pulled Confucius down from high up to the ground. He said many of Confucius’ words were self-contradicting, and that his ideological, moral and theoretical standards were not as high as that of Mencius and Xūn Zǐ (荀子) . Such words of Tàiyán were ear-piercing at the time and caused strong reactions from every corner of the society. Defenders of the feudalist system threw the dirtiest words on Tàiyán and some of them cried out that “Words of Truth in Urgent Search” should be burnt and be diminished for ever. Both Kāng Yoǔwēi and Liáng Qǐchaō realized that Confucianism was the biggest barrier in China’s enlightenment endeavor, yet none of them had the guts to confront Confucius. Tàiyán had and did it in a convincing way. In the same group of articles, he also commented on other thinkers like Dǒng Zhòngshū (董仲舒) , Ouyáng Xiū (欧阳修) and Sū Shì (苏轼) . He said Dǒng was the one who theologized Confucianism, Ouyáng didn’t master the six required skills (namely rites, music, archery, cart-driving, calligraphy and numerology) and didn’t really comprehend classics and Sū gave much empty talks. He at the same time sang praises of such outstanding scholars as Wáng Chōng (王充) whom he said was very brave in criticizing Confucius, Yán Yuán (颜元) whom he said regarded practice as the most important and Dài Zhèn （戴震） whose attitude and approach of studies he admired. “Prelude to Race and Family” (序种姓) was a newly added essay on the forming of the Chinese nation and the “Hàn” nationality in particular. He pointed out that nationalities were all historic nationalities which were different from clans and tribes that were based on blood relationship. There were also a group of essays dealing with the Chinese language and the local dialects, and another group of articles on ways of historic studies. The new edition was published in Japan by the “Xiáng Luán” (翔鸾—flying phoenix) publishing house in April of 1904. Being the first to expound revolutionary theories and policies in China’s history of bourgeois revolution, some reports said the publication caused a sensation.

China’s revolution didn’t die out with the failure of Táng Cāicháng’s Independent Army. The Association of Chinese Education carried it onward. It was founded by Cài Yuūnpéi (蔡元培) and a few others in April 1902. It said in its charter that its objective was to educate male and female youth, develop their intellect, enhance their concept of the state and to finally build a base for the restoration of sovereign power one day. The association founded a Society of Patriotic Students on Nánjīng Road of Shànghǎi in the winter of 1902 to take over students who left their original schools because of strike. Invited by Cài, Tàiyán came to the society shortly after the Spring Festival of 1903 to be a teacher of Chinese language. There he used classrooms and other platforms in Shànghǎi to disseminate revolution. In April 1903, the student supervisor from Húběi Province Yáo Wénfǔ (姚文甫) was caught on spot while he was committing an adultery by three students in Japan. They were Zōu Róng (邹容)， Zhāng Jì (张继) and Chén Dūxiù (陈独秀). They burst into Yáo’s residence, Zhāng held Yáo’s back from behind, Zōu held Yáo’s head and Chén cut off Yáo’s pigtail, which was displayed in the living quarters of the students. For this incident, the Qīng Embassy sent a note to the Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs requesting a serious punishment of the three students. The three therefore returned home in secrecy. Chén went back to his hometown in Anhuī and later founded the Chinese Communist Party. Zōu and Zhāng came to Shànghǎi and stayed at the association. Tàiyán knew Zhāng from his previous stay in Japan. His relationship with Zōu, came from Sìchuān and had been very active in revolutionary activities, deepened very quickly and became sworn friends with him.

By May of 1903, it seemed necessary for Tàiyán to openly refute Kāng Yoǔwēi, whom he adored before, who was once the leader of the reform movement, who was now spreading his royalist ideas and tried to hinder the development of revolution. He then wrote an open letter entitled “Refuting Kāng Yoǔwēi’s Theory of Revolution” (驳康有为论革命书). The letter elaborated first of all the necessity of carrying out a national revolution with “Anti-Manchu” as its direct purpose. Tàiyán said that it was the need of history to overthrow the Qīng rule and establish a modern national state with “Hàn” nationality as the main body, that the rotten rule by the Qīng has been hindering China from building a modern national state. He cited many examples to proof what Kāng regarded as enlightened politics of the Qīng was wrong. The letter went further to explain why people should not pin all their hopes on a weak-willed emperor, whom he considered as a clown, as someone who could not tell soy beans from wheat. The letter also refuted Kāng’s theory that China should not be engaged in revolution and China was not capable of carrying out a revolution. Tàiyán found someone to deliver the letter to Kāng who was at the time in Singapore and at the same time had it published in Shànghǎi. The letter sounded like a thunder, it not only shook Shànghǎi, but the entire nation as well.

While Tàiyán was drafting the letter, the nineteen year old Zōu Róng had finished writing his book “The Revolutionary Army” with his sharp pen. The book not only castigated the rule by the Qīng, but also proposed a plan for the construction of Chinese Republic. Zōu asked Tàiyán to polish the language. Tàiyán finished reading the book in one breath and commented that no polishing was needed, it was very well written. He wrote a prelude to give an eulogy. He also managed to get some funding for the publication of the book, which together with his own “Refuting Kāng Yoǔwēi’s Theory of Revolution” heralded the high tide of China’s bourgeois democratic revolution in 1903.

“Sū Bào News” was created in 1896 and situated at No. 20 on Hànkǒu Road in the International Settlement of Shànghǎi . Ever since the newspaper employed Zhāng Shìzhāo (章士钊) , Tàiyán‘s student, as its Editor-in-Chief, it was virtually an organ for the Association of Chinese Education and the Society of Patriotic Students. Using the paper, Zhāng Tàiyán and his comrades fired relentlessly on the tyranny of the Qīng and its treason and denounced the absurd royalist opinions of Kāng and Liáng. They successfully proofed to their readers that all new political systems in other countries were realized through revolution. The Qīng rulers panicked at the firing, they issued secret orders to punish the teachers and students of the Society. Because the paper was in the international settlement, they could not just go into the paper to arrest anybody. Yet, they requested the consuls of foreign countries and the Municipal Council of the settlement to seal up the “Sū Bào News” and arrest Zhāng and Zōu. The Municipal Council sent out policemen to the paper on June 29 of 1903 to arrest the two, but Zhāng and Zōu were not in. The next day they came again, Zhāng was in and said to the police that “If you want to arrest Zhāng Tàiyán, it’s me.” He was then put into the police station in the settlement. There he managed to send a note to Zōu and asked him to face the danger and be an example to posterities. Zōu came to the police station himself the next day. The Qīng government was very pleased learning that the two were arrested and they sent notes to American, British and Japanese consulates requesting an extradite of the two. At this time, the American, Russian, French, Belgium and Germen ministers agreed to meet the request of the Qīng government. However, the British, Japanese and Italian ministers thought that may infringe upon their extraterritoriality, and cause strong indignation from the Chinese people; they therefore held that the case should be dealt with by them. The Mixed Court of the settlement began to interrogate them on July 1st and the charges were “smearing the emperor, the government and conspiring against the state”. Both Zhāng and Zōu, totally calm and collected in the court, declared during the interrogation that they didn’t recognize the brutal government. Their lawyer asked the court who the prosecutor was, “is it the government in Běijīng? Or the Governor of Jiāngsū? Or the Magistrate of Shànghǎi?” The representative of the Qīng government could not give a proper answer. Zhāng wrote a letter “Rely from the Prison to Reporters”, which was carried on “Sū Bào News” on July 6th. In the letter, he said, “This case was caused by the Manchuria government, it is a case between the Manchuria government and the 400 million Hàn people; the Governor of Jiāngsū, the Magistrate are representatives of the Manchuria government and a few of us are representatives of the Hàn race.” He also said that he wanted to shed his blood to awaken his countrymen. The letter ended with such words: “Please wait and see what will happen fifty years later. You would see a high bronze statute, and that would be me!” As a result, the next day the “Sū Bào News” was sealed up! The arrest didn’t scare away revolutionaries; on the contrary they were even more mobilized. Many newspapers and journals regarded what the Qīng government did as a war declared by the Qīng rulers against the Chinese people. Foreign governments quarreled among themselves regarding whether they should extradite the two to the Qīng government. The British Prime Minister and Foreign Minister (Lansdowne) refused time and again to give Zhāng and Zōu a capital punishment, refused to extradite them to the Qīng government; the American Consul John Goodnow held that Zhāng and Zōu should be handed over to the Chinese officials. His opinion caused strong indignation not only in China, but in the United States as well. On July 19th, Shěn Jìn (沈荩) who was organizing the Independent Army together with Táng Cáicháng was arrested. The Empress Dowager gave an order on July 31st to beat Shěn to death. When the Ministry of Justice was executing the order, Shěn was still alive after four hours of beating and they had to strangle him. Tàiyán knew Shěn from before and when he heard about Shěn’s death, his heart ached, he wrote a poem to express his sorrows. A memorial meeting was held in Shànghǎi to mourn for Shěn’s death. A final sentence was signed by the Qīng government and the ministers of various countries and announced to Zhāng and Zōu on May 21, 1904 that Zhāng would be imprisoned for three years and Zōu for two years. Compare with the original intention of the Qīng government, which was death by dismembering their bodies and later lifelong imprisonment, this was a victory. “The Alarm Daily” ran by revolutionaries in Shànghǎi claimed in an editorial when the sentence was announced that such a result was a commemoration for the Chinese people.

Tàiyán continued his revolutionary activities in the prison. He urged Cài Yuūnpéi to form the Recovery Society (光复会Guāng Fù Huì), which mobilized revolutionary forces in Zhèjiāng, Anhuī and Jiāngsū provinces. Both Tàiyán and Zōu were forced to smash gravels and do other manual labor in prison, and the jailors were very bad to them. Tàiyán decided to abstain from food to protect hush treatment. Seven days of abstaining didn’t take his life away, so when he resumed eating, he confronted the Indian jailors with his fist, but each time he was seriously injured. Tàiyán, in this western prison, was given three times canvas cangues with two arms fettered at the back. He remembered that within one hour, the whole body would become numb and the arms would ache like being cut by a knife. Any prisoner who was given such punishment would yell and the whole prison would be filled with terror. He said such punishment was worse than putting needles into your fingers. One day in March 1905, Zōu was suddenly ill. Tàiyán asked for Chinese or western doctors, but the request was refused. The prison only put Zōu into another room, yet he died all of a sudden on the night of April 3, 1905. When Tàiyán came to his corpse, Zōu still had his eyes open. There were such talking that the doctor was bribed and poisoned Zōu to death. There were only a few days left for Zōu to complete his term in prison. The doubtful death of Zōu caused much concern. A memorial meeting was held for Zōu on April 5. Articles of commiseration and denunciation of the atrocity of the International Settlement pored into newspapers and journals. Tàiyán finished serving his three years term on June 29, 1906. On the morning of that day, Cài Yuānpéi, a few of Tàiyán’s students and representative from the Alliance League (同盟会Tóng Mémg Huì) from Japan greeted him at the gate of the police station of the settlement. On the night of that day, Tàiyán boarded a ship with the company of those from the Alliance League for Japan.

Back