Unhappily the hopes thus raised were not destined to be realised.  On the 12th of October nine more prisoners were returned to the camp—­eight troopers of Fane’s Irregular Horse and one French soldier; but the evidence given by them left no doubt that two at least of the remainder, Lieutenant Anderson and Mr. De Norman had perished, having sunk under circumstances of much suffering from the consequences of the maltreatment to which they were subjected.  ‘I was not personally acquainted’ wrote Lord Elgin, ’with Lieutenant Anderson, but he is spoken of by all who knew him as an excellent officer.  Mr. De Norman was a young man of remarkable promise.  With considerable abilities, great assiduity, singular steadiness of character, and courage of no mean order, he had every promise of achieving eminence in his profession.  We all mourn most bitterly his untimely end.’[9]

There were others whose fate remained at that time unknown; among them Mr. Bowlby, the correspondent of the Times, whose corpse was afterwards recovered and recognised.  The warmth of regard which Lord Elgin had learnt to feel for him, is shown in many passages of his journal.  Officially he wrote, ’I deplore his loss, not only because he was a highly-accomplished and well-informed gentleman, but also because, from the conscientious and liberal spirit in which he addressed himself to the investigation of the singularly complicated problems presented by the moral, social, political, and commercial condition of China, I had conceived the hope that he would be the means of diffusing sound information on many points on which it is most important for the national interests that the British public should be correctly informed.’[10]

The journal, during these anxious and troubled days, is naturally imperfect.  One brief entry sums up his feeling on the main subject.

Camp near Pekin.—­October 14th.—­We have dreadful news respecting the fate of some of our captured friends.  It is an atrocious crime, and, not for vengeance, but for future security, ought to be severely dealt with.

[Sidenote:  Burning of the Summer Palace.]

The form which the retribution took is well known.  The Palace of Yuen-ming-yuen, the Summer-palace of the Emperor, the glory and boast of the Chinese Empire, was levelled with the ground.

The reasons which led Lord Elgin to decide upon this act are fully stated in a despatch dated the 25th of October.  After dwelling on the necessity of inflicting some punishment at once severe and swift, that should leave Pekin untouched (for he had engaged not to harm the city) and should fall specially on the Emperor, who was personally responsible for the crimes that had been committed, he goes on to discuss the different courses that were open to him.  He might inflict a fine; but it could not be exacted except by appropriating a further portion of the Chinese revenue, already seriously trenched upon by our previous demands.  Or he might require the surrender of the individuals guilty of violating the flag of truce:  but if he named no one, some miserable subordinates would be given up; if he specified the real culprit, Sang-ko-lin-sin, the demand would infallibly be refused and could not be enforced.  Dismissing these alternatives he proceeds:—­