The viceroy responded to de Courcy by pointing out that Father Chapdelaine had already violated Chinese law by preaching Christianity in the interior (the 1844 treaty signed with France only permitted for the propagation of Christianity in the 5 treaty ports opened to the French), he also claimed that the priest was in a rebel territory and that many of his converts had already been arrested for acts of treason, and the viceroy further claimed that Father Chapdelaine's mission had nothing in common with the propagation of religion.