A levy of $10 a head on immigrants of Chinese origin. This Act was confirmed by the Queen and communicated to the Foreign Office on the 11th October 1855.
The Governor writes to Sir S. Bowring that the colonial legislature has by this Act interfered with "a sovereign Treaty," and that "this interference may seriously embarrass negotiations with the Chinese Authorities when such negotiations shall have arrived.
He also complains that this Act is an usurpation of the rights of those persons of Chinese origin who are British subjects.
The first objection which the Governor offers is that the Act violates a Treaty. Sir John Bowring refers to the Treaty which he alleges to be violated, or indicates the nature of its provisions. We should have presumed that he would have referred to the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs.
It seems, however, extraordinary that the Chinese Government, which does not allow foreigners to penetrate into its own country, and affects to forbid the emigration of its own subjects, should have a right to complain that those subjects are not relaxed on their arrival in Victoria.
And if such a right really exists under Treaty, it also appears strange whether Foreign...
Page 4
POSTGARTME
...
becomesA levy of $10 a head on immigrants of Chinese origin. This Act was confirmed by the Queen and communicated to the Foreign Office on the 11th October 1855.
The Governor writes to Sir S. Bowring that the colonial legislature has by this Act interfered with "a sovereign Treaty," and that "this interference may seriously embarrass negotiations with the Chinese Authorities when such negotiations shall have arrived.
He also complains that this Act is an usurpation of the rights of those persons of Chinese origin who are British subjects.
The first objection which the Governor offers is that the Act violates a Treaty. Sir John Bowring refers to the Treaty which he alleges to be violated, or indicates the nature of its provisions. We should have presumed that he would have referred to the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs.
It seems, however, extraordinary that the Chinese Government, which does not allow foreigners to penetrate into its own country, and affects to forbid the emigration of its own subjects, should have a right to complain that those subjects are not relaxed on their arrival in Victoria.
And if such a right really exists under Treaty, it also appears strange whether Foreign...
Page 4
POSTGARTME
However, to follow the exact format requested:A levy of $10 a head on immigrants of Chinese origin. This Act was confirmed by the Queen and communicated to the Foreign Office on the 11th October 1855.
The Governor writes to Sir S. Bowring that the colonial legislature has by this Act interfered with "a sovereign Treaty," and that "this interference may seriously embarrass negotiations with the Chinese Authorities when such negotiations shall have arrived.
He also complains that this Act is an usurpation of the rights of those persons of Chinese origin who are British subjects.
The first objection which the Governor offers is that the Act violates a Treaty. Sir John Bowring refers to the Treaty which he alleges to be violated, or indicates the nature of its provisions. We should have presumed that he would have referred to the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs.
It seems, however, extraordinary that the Chinese Government, which does not allow foreigners to penetrate into its own country, and affects to forbid the emigration of its own subjects, should have a right to complain that those subjects are not relaxed on their arrival in Victoria.
And if such a right really exists under Treaty, it also appears strange whether Foreign...
Page 4
POSTGARTME