18071
bass goods will be liable to the higher duties. It is unfortunate that the right to levy any further duty at all should be admitted but that point was conceded long ago and it is useless arguing
again now.
What will the practical effect of the pro- clamation be? In 1891, for some reason hitherto unexplained the Canton Govern ment relaxed its opposition to the transit pass trade. || The result is shown in the following extract from the re- port of Mr. L. ROCHER, Commissioner of Customs, for that year:-"There were issued 1,948 transit passes, representing a value “of Hk. Tls: 1,741,884, against a nil issue "in 1889, and 79 passes, value Hk. Tis. *** 195,117, in 1890.... To this remarkable "development of the transit trade is partially «due the advance evidenced by the table "of imports, and it also shows to what an "enormous extent, with lighter taxation "and unfettered transit privilege, the trade “and prosperity of the province could be “increased.” In the following year, how ever, the same Commissioner in his report under the heading "Inland Transit" wrote:
"
This most promising trade ceased com- "pletely in July. Thus, from January to "July, 1892, there were issued 492 transit "passes, representing a value of Hk. Tla. 406,696, showing, as compared with the figures for 1891, the enormous decrease of 1,454
passes, value Hk. Tls. 1,335,168, or "76.65 per cent. To the extinction of this "trade is mainly attributable the decline
of
evidenced in the table of imports.' Traders will naturally be as eager to avail themselves of the privileges of the transit pass now as they were in 1891; and the increase in the volume of trade that followed then, as indicated in Mr. ROCHER'S reports, will follow now, greatly to the advantage of this colony.
F
tead.
intaining proportionately
CHINA OVERLAND TRADE REPORT"
derives a revenue from light dues far in | met the excess of the cost of maintaining the lights in and that it appropriates the balance to reasons purposes in no way connected with shipping. higher passage rates on the Bombay line The argument that the Chinese Govern- than on other lines, but the only one tha ment was not morally called upon to use the readily suggests itself is that the rate is tonnage dues for the benefit of shipping governed by the natural law of supp would then acquire some plausibility and demand, that the Company makes when a revision of the treaties is entered it can out of its business and that upon a claim to levy taxes on shipping stances allow it to impose higher cha without acknowledging any obligation to the case of Bombay than in other provide aids to navigation might be formally That seems a very good and sufficient reason, advanced. This is an argument which from the shareholders point of view): should appeal to Sir WILLIAM ROBINSON, events, but it is not one whose and especially to Mr. CHAMBERLAIN, calculated to inspire much sentiment - or should a reference to the Secretary of enthusiasm State become necessary in the matter. It ought also to appeal, with the various other arguments advanced against the proposed tax, to those of the unofficial members of Council who so hastily and inconsiderately recommended the imposition. These gentle- men must now, we think, recognise that they made a grave mistake, a mistake cal- culated not only to prejudice the colony but also to have, Indirectly, a deleterious effect on foreign trade with China. It is not plea sant to have to acknowledge a mistake, but when a mistake has been made that is the proper course to pursue, and if the unofficial members could see their way to inform the Governor that on further consideration they find the course previously recommended by then inadvisable they would earn the thanks of the mercantile community and enhance the respect in which they are held.
THE LIGHT DUES QUESTION. An important argument in reference to the light dues question has, we hear, been suggested from a neighbouring port. It has always been contended by foreigners that the revenue derived from tonnage dues levied on foreign shipping in Chinese ports should be utilised exclusively for the benefit of shipping, that is, on harbour improvements and on lights and beacons. In the British treaty of Tientsin, immediately after the articles relating to the imposition of tonnage dues comes article XXXII. providing that The Consuls and Superintendents of Customs shall consult together regarding the erection of beacons or lighthouses and the distribution of buoys and lightships as occasion may "demand." In the United States treaty the two subjects are dealt with in the same article, thus proving their connection in the minds of the negotiators; and in the Rules
65
¿
#
SIR THOMAS SUTHERLAND'S SPEECH AT THE P. & 0. COMPANY'S MEETING.
婆婆
"
+
Another point of a controversial nature to which Sir THOMAS SUTHERLAND referred was the diversion of trade from British to Continental ports, and here he was even more unsatisfictory than in his treat ment of the Indian passage rates. “In a British colony," he said, “namely, Singapore, where an enormous trade is "carried on, the exports to London "amounted last year, according to
the "statement sent to us by our agent, to, 88,000 tons, while the exports to Con- "tinental ports amounted to no less than "106,000 tons. There is no doubt that "these are facts which show very clearly "how the wind blows, and that the en-
*
<<
"
trepot and shipping trade of London, "which was a most important factor a few
years ago in its business, is rapidly becom ing a thing of the past, and that unless "the charges in this port, not only the dock dues, but the pilotage and light dues and "other charges, are assimilated to those of 'the Continental ports to which I have "referred this diminishing trade is certain At the annual meeting of the P. & O. Com-"to become more marked in the future.” pany the Chairman, Sir THOMAS SUTHER- LAND, made one of his usual interesting speeches, which must have been listened to with great satisfaction by the share holders present, as indeed was evidenced by the eulogistic remarks made by several of them in proposing and seconding votes of thanks. There is, as Sir THOMAS said, a certain sweet simplicity in 5 per cent. on the preferred shares and 10 per cent. on the deferred, the dividend that has been in vogue now for a considerable number of years, which cannot fail to be appreciated. Share- holders certainly, and, speaking generally, passengers and shippers, have indeed good reason to be satisfied with the fine service conducted by the P. & O. Sir THOMAS SUTHERLAND touched, however, on one or two controversial points, but as they are not in controversy with the share- holders no discussion took place leading to their more complete elucidation. One of these points is the agitation carried on in India by the Cheap Passage Association, to which Sir THOMAS referred in sarcastic terms. He gave an estimate of the expendi- Trade agreed upon between Lord ture of the Company which should be ELGIN and the Chinese plenipotentiaries it debited to the passenger traffic and arrived is expressly stipulated that the maintenance at the conclusion that the profit remaining of lights, buoys, beacons, and the like
was no more than seven per cent.,. which he shall be provided for out of the tonnage said was not a large profit in view of the dues.
ues." The Chinese Government would risks to which such a business is exposed. be as ready to derive a revenue from tonnage But the point taken by the Cheap Passage dues as from any other source and if left to Association, if we understand it aright, is, not themselves the amount appropriated for the that passage rates in general are too high, but provision and maintenance of lights, buoys, that the Bombay rates in particular are too and beacons would be small, but foreign high and out of proportion to the rates has always contended that the charged on other portions of the Company's whole of the tonnage dues should be service, the cost per mile to the Bombay available for this purpose. This conten passenger being very much in excess of the will be materially weakened cost per mile to the Australian passenger. the Chinese Government can point If Sir THOMAS SUTHERLAND thought it to the British colony of Hongkongnecessary to refer to the matter at all it and Bay that the Government here would have been more satisfactory if he had
+3
But does Sir THOMAS really wish the world to believe that it is the dock dues and other terminal charges that account for this diversion of the trade from London to Continental ports? Is it not rather the differential rates charged by British shipowners on British goods or goods destined for Great Britain? If the dock dues and all other charges in the port of London were swept away to-morrow would the shipper obtain any relief there from or would the benefit accrue wholly and solely to the shipowner? The differ- nee between the port charges at London and Hamburg is nothing like equivalent to the difference between the freight. charged on goods to or from the Continent and that charged on goods to or from Great Britain. If the shipowner will carry goods from Singapore to Hamburg for little more than half the price at which he will carry them to London small wonder that the figures work out as represented by the P. & O. agent at Singapore 106,000 tons shipped to Continental ports and 88,000 tons to Great Britain. For the shipowner, as represented in the person of Sir THOMAS SUTHERLAND, to_throw the sole blame for this state of things upon the owners of the London docks is to say the least extraordinary. We do not wish to contend that the rates of freight charged to or from the ports of Gread Britain are high, or that those charged to or from the Continent are too low, but what we is that British goods and the trade ports should not be discriminate by British shipowners. Th a new one it has been for years past, but alwa shipowners never havir to the charges brought difficult to believe that me SUTHERLAND, Mr.. ALFRED
Britis