_Ibid._, No. 137, inclosure (Consul Fulford at Niu-chwang, May 19). Footnote 461: _Ibid._, No. 156 (Satow to Lansdowne, September 10). Footnote 462: The author has been informed from a reliable source that the _Chargé’s_ note containing those demands was dated April 5, 1903. Footnote 463: Again the revelation must have emanated from the Chinese official circle. M. Lessar is said to have, about June 4, bitterly complained at the Peking Foreign Office of their breach of faith, and requested that there should be appointed two special Chinese negotiators, who should be entirely responsible for the secrecy of the matter. Footnote 464: _China, No. 2 (1904)_, No. 81 (Townley to Lansdowne, April 24). Footnote 465: _Ibid._, No. 127. Footnote 466: _Ibid._, No. 94. Also see Nos. 77, 78, 81, 82, 86. Footnote 467: The _Kokumin_. Footnote 468: _China, No. 2 (1904)_, Nos. 78, 81, 127. Footnote 469: Perhaps on April 21. Footnote 470: _China, No. 2 (1904)_, Nos. 79 and 80 (April 23). Footnote 471: _Ibid._, Nos. 81, 82 (April 24). Footnote 472: _China, No. 2 (1904)_, Nos. 83, 85 (April 26 and 27). Cf. No. 82. Footnote 473: _Ibid._, No. 89 (April 28). It does not appear that this instruction was carried out, for when Count Lamsdorff gave to the American Ambassador a positive denial of the truth of the current reports, the British Ambassador deemed it unnecessary to repeat the inquiry. See _ibid._, No. 91 (April 29). Footnote 474: _Ibid._, No. 90, Lansdowne to Herbert (April 28). Footnote 475: Namely, M. Plançon. The same M. Plançon stated the next day to Prince Ching that the delay in the evacuation was due to the military party in Russia.—_China, No. 2 (1904)_, No. 95. The statements of the two diplomats are not necessarily contradictory to each other. Footnote 476: For the interview between MacCormick and Lamsdorff, see _ibid._, Nos. 91, 92, 103. Footnote 477: _China, No. 2 (1904)_, No. 95. Footnote 478: _Ibid._, No. 98. Footnote 479: _Ibid._, Nos. 110 (May 8); 114 (May 19); 117 (May 23). Footnote 480: _Ibid._, No. 114 (May 19). Footnote 481: _China, No. 2 (1904)_, No. 117. Footnote 482: _Ibid._, No. 119. Footnote 483: _Ibid._, Nos. 119, 120. Footnote 484: _Ibid._, No. 120 (June 4). Footnote 485: See Chapter V., above. Footnote 486: _China, No. 2 (1904)_, No. 121. Footnote 487: _Ibid._, Nos. 117, 121. Footnote 488: _Ibid._, No. 123. Footnote 489: Cf. _ibid._, No. 125. Footnote 490: _Ibid._, No. 123, and the Japanese press. Footnote 491: _China, No. 2 (1904)_, No. 126. CHAPTER XVI DIPLOMATIC STRUGGLE IN KOREA, I