The so-called Manchus, the original inhabitants of Manchuria, have migrated to China proper, which they conquered during the seventeenth century. The present inhabitants of Manchuria are immigrant Chinese, whose greater economic capacity has been rapidly developing this immensely rich territory. Footnote 61: An official report of the Province of Amur, dated June 22, 1903, denies that the actual cost of construction per verst was, as had been alleged, 150,000 rubles, but 113,183 rubles. The _Tsūshō Isan_ for August 8, 1903, p. 46. A ruble is equivalent to about 51.5 cents. In this connection, it is interesting to note in M. Witte’s report to the Czar after the former’s tour in the Far East in 1902, that the Siberian Railway had cost 758,955,907 rubles, but, with the Circum-Baikal section, would cost not less than 1,000,000,000 rubles, excluding the salaries of officers, expenses for soldiers, the Pacific fleet, harbor work, and the like. The _Dōbun-kwai Hōkoku_, No. 42, p. 30. Footnote 62: According to the “Past and Present of the Siberian Railway,” compiled in 1903 by the government committee in charge of the railway, as quoted in the _Dōbun-kwai Hōkoku_, No. 51, pp. 58–60. Footnote 63: M. Witte’s report of September, 1901, quoted in the _Kokumin_ for October 1, 1904. Footnote 64: Consul Miller at Niu-chwang, in the U. S. daily _Consular Reports_, February 15, 1904 (No. 1877), p. 8. Footnote 65: The _Tsūshō Isan_, November 25, 1903, pp. 16–18. Footnote 66: The U. S. daily _Consular Reports_, July 30, 1903. Footnote 67: See the _Shiberiya oyobi Manshū_ (“Siberia and Manchuria”) Tokio, 1904, compiled by T. Kawakami, special agent of the Foreign Office of Japan, who was sent to Siberia and Northern Manchuria to investigate economic and military conditions there, pp. 94, 119–121, 124, 138. Footnote 68: For the relative advantages of the Manchurian Railway and the Amur River, see the U. S. daily _Consular Reports_, August 5 and October 5, 1903, and January 19, 1904. Footnote 69: