I am glad to report two of the young men on the Yang-wu who studied for a time in the United States, safe and sound. They are Yung Shang-him and Woo Kie-jo. The other four of these American students are reported killed. They are Yang Sue-nam, Sik Yao-fook and Wang Kwai-liang belonging to the same corvette Yang-wu as midshipmen, and Kang Wing-chung, the second officer of the Chin-wei, which fought so gallantly while burning and discharging a gun just before she sank.
Jeme Tien-yaw, a graduate of the Sheffield Scientific School of Yale College, is also safe. He was employed as a teacher in the naval school, and was not in the engagement.
這也是詹天佑之名在戰(zhàn)役后首次在該報(bào)出現(xiàn),而且一直至該年年底該報(bào)也再?zèng)]有其他報(bào)導(dǎo)提及詹天佑。(整間耶魯大學(xué)雖以Yale University為名,頒授學(xué)士學(xué)位的部分則稱為Yale College,至今仍如此)。
幾天后,上引的一段文字原封不動(dòng)地在9月12日的周報(bào)(《北華捷報(bào)》)再刊登一次。
這段報(bào)導(dǎo)的重要性不在它值得連刊兩次,而是在它所說(shuō)的和容尚謙、張佩綸所講者完全吻合,復(fù)能斬釘截鐵地說(shuō)詹天佑與戰(zhàn)斗無(wú)關(guān)。詹天佑沒(méi)有參加中法馬江之役該可定為鐵般事實(shí)了。
假如抄入越南檔的是這項(xiàng)報(bào)導(dǎo),日后那些“天下本無(wú)事”的論戰(zhàn)就不會(huì)發(fā)生了。
正話講完,還有兩件雜事要說(shuō)。
這報(bào)導(dǎo)所用的人名拼者法雖與容尚謙所用者同基于粵語(yǔ)讀音,拼法卻很有分別。如此報(bào)導(dǎo)開(kāi)列的吳其藻、楊兆南、薛有福、黃季良(依報(bào)導(dǎo)內(nèi)之次序),容文作Woo Kee Tsao, Yang Sew Nan, Sit Yau Fu, Wong Kwei Liang(容尚謙姓名的拼法則兩處均一樣)。詹天佑的情形更妙,他自己的拼作Jeme Tien Yow,“佑”字容文作Yaw。上引又另拼吳其藻、薛有福、詹天佑作Woo Ki-tsau, Sit Yew-fuh, Chim Tien-yow[詹同濟(jì)也看出姓名用廣東音拼法容易引起混亂,但他說(shuō)“容(Jung)與詹(Jeme)字頭均為J”,則不對(duì);見(jiàn)其《詹天佑生平志》,頁(yè)36。容尚謙姓名的英文拼法,無(wú)論是自用的,還是人稱的,從來(lái)都是Yung Shang Him;其姓氏未在任何場(chǎng)合用過(guò)Jung,那是北京話的讀音。其伯父容閎的英文名作Yung Wing,情形亦一樣。直至今日,凡不在中國(guó)大陸生活的容姓廣東人,姓氏均作Yung,用Jung者可說(shuō)絕無(wú)僅有。后來(lái)和詹同濟(jì)聯(lián)絡(luò)上,他說(shuō)錯(cuò)誤出自排印時(shí)的混亂,非他本意。]。即使在正常的情況下,洋記者向本地人士采訪消息,都會(huì)有誤記的可能,更何況要在戰(zhàn)斗甫結(jié)束,一切皆亂的環(huán)境下作迅速報(bào)導(dǎo)。在福州語(yǔ)區(qū)用粵語(yǔ)讀音拼出姓名怎也會(huì)是導(dǎo)致誤報(bào)的部分原因。
李滿康謂詹天佑在中法艦只齊集,戰(zhàn)火隨時(shí)爆發(fā)時(shí),請(qǐng)假離艦上岸,遂得脫險(xiǎn)地之說(shuō),本已難成立。高宗魯指出在劍拔弩張之際要求離艦上岸,且獲準(zhǔn)許是不合邏輯的[高宗魯,《有關(guān)詹天佑的史料問(wèn)題》,頁(yè)265。]。現(xiàn)在真相已白,更不必再費(fèi)辭了。但仍應(yīng)藉此機(jī)會(huì)說(shuō)明,就算說(shuō)得符合實(shí)情,考證還是不能靠沒(méi)有可信文獻(xiàn)支持的人證的。