"On their way back to the Allied camp, they were seized by the Chinese and taken prisoner. Among the altogether 39 men—26 British and 13 French—were Harry Parkes; Henry Loch, Lord Elgin’s secretary; Thomas Bowlby, correspondent for The Times ; and Stanislas d’Escayrac de Lauture, the one member of the French scientific mission. When the Allied commanders insisted that the captured men be returned, the Chinese officials said, somewhat contradictorily, that they were not responsible for their capture and that they would be handed over only once the Europeans were on their way back home...
If the French were responsible for looting Yuanmingyuan, the British were responsible for its final destruction... W h a t the British sought was revenge for the way the prisoners taken by the Chinese had been treated. On September 18, we said, several groups of Europeans—altogether 39 men, 26 British and 13 French—had been taken hostage by the Chinese while on reconnaissance missions behind enemy lines. The Allied commanders regarded this as a treacherous action on the part of the Chinese since, following the capture of the Dagu forts, peace negotiations were under way, and a settlement of the conflicts was in sight. The men had peaceful intent and the groups included several civilians. The Allied commanders had demanded their immediate release, but it was only on October 9, once Yuanmingyuan had been pillaged, that the first prisoners were surrendered, and during the next couple of days a trickle of others followed. The returning men told horrific tales of torture and maltreatment at the hands of their captors. They had been kicked and punched, not fed for days, and exposed to the scorching sun, but above all they had had their hands tied behind their backs and water had been poured on the ropes to tighten the knots. The wrists on several of the men had swelled up, turned black and started rotting; maggots had appeared in the wounds and a few of the men, including Thomas Bowlby, reporter for The Times , had died in a most gruesome manner. In the end only 18 out of the 39 men came back alive.
This treatment, the Allies agreed, constituted a crime against the laws of war, against humanity, and an insult both against Britain and France. The Chinese had to be punished, the question was only how...
Having ruled out the alternatives, Lord Elgin argued, only the destruction of Yuanmingyuan remained. It was an “act of retribution and punishment sufficiently severe to produce the required effect”—it would avenge the lives that had been lost, but it would also terrorize the Chinese, forcing them to agree to European terms and reminding them for ever more just who the Europeans were and of what they were capable... Destroying the palace was also a way to strike at the Chinese emperor personally rather than at the Chinese people with whom, Elgin insisted, Britain had no quarrel. Yuanmingyuan “was the Emperor’s favourite residence, and its destruction would not fail to be a blow to his pride as well as to his feelings.” The action would no doubt “produce a greater effect in China and on the Emperor, than persons who look on from a distance may suppose.”"
--- Liberal Barbarism: The European Destruction of the Palace of the Emperor of China
Naturally, China shills will pretend that China did nothing wrong and was an entirely innocent victim.
