you write to your Chinese friends at Singapore and inquire whether their business is perplexed by even that long and intricate Act? I think they will reply that they understand it as well as Europeans, and, although they would rather have no tax at all, that they would greatly prefer the Hongkong Ordinance to the Singapore Stamp Act.
Even supposing that you find at first some difficulty as to Stamps on Leases, Deeds, and Conveyances, there is seldom any hurry about them as there often is about Bills, whilst, being generally managed with professional advice, it is not true that your current daily business will be impeded thereby.
You ask, however, to pay an increased House Rate instead of a Stamp Duty. Is it just that Houses, which now pay more than $200,000 per annum, should bear all burdens? The general business of the Place has never yet contributed anything directly to its expenses. Now, under the Stamp Ordinance, those who have no chance of making profit by business will pay nothing. The poor who have only their labor, would under your plan, be soon made to hear your legitimate burden because, if Rates were increased, you would charge more for Rent. The new Ordinance therefore is more just than you. It also reaches in its operation many, who, though not residing in Hongkong, yet use Hongkong as their chief Mart of business, whereas your plan would throw on those, who accidentally reside here, all the cost of maintaining the Quays, Roads, Police and Harbor, which frequently facilitate the business of absentees just as much as of residents.
When the new Law comes into force I hope you will find in less than one month that your alarm and apprehensions were groundless, but if experience shews that the operation of the Law can be made more simple and easy, I shall readily assist to improve it.
I have been particular in giving you these Explanations of the nature of the new Stamp Ordinance because in a matter of Public Policy, intended to deal with all classes alike, I wish foreigners to see that such intention is really carried out. I am ready, therefore, to discuss such Legislation with any body of residents in the Colony, to hear objections, and if I think them unfounded, to explain why I do so.
All this however is very different from permitting those, who resort here for their own profit, and the protection which the strong and just Government of England affords, to discuss or cavil at Laws necessary for Police and sanitary purposes, and for protection of the lives and property of the Queen's Subjects. Those laws must be obeyed, and cannot be relaxed. None know better than yourselves how necessary it is at last to adopt stringent measures, too long deferred, for checking the nefarious dealings carried on by Chinese residents here with Pirates, and for that purpose to take care that the Government has in future full information of the equipment and movements of all Chinese Junks visiting the harbor. To complain of such an Ordinance is to complain that Europeans are not willing to be robbed and murdered by Chinese miscreants; and I tell you frankly that I shall pay no attention to such unreasonable remonstrances. I shall continue to do my duty, as Governor of an English Settlement and shall, to the utmost of my power, endeavor to rid this Colony of the stigma affixed to it by the numerous Chinese Thieves and Pirates who infest it. Fortunately there is also a still more numerous body of hard-working and trustworthy Chinese Residents, and I look to them for important assistance in dealing with their Countrymen. How absurd your objections when reckoned even by your own Countrymen will more fully appear I tell you that, a person, who understands the Chinese character and customs perfectly, heartily approves of the measure, and even thinks that some of its provisions should be more stringent. I think you will admit that his opinion on such a subject ought to carry weight with Chinese when I tell you he was no other than His Excellency the Governor General of the Provinces of Kwantung and Kwangsai.
I might decline to go further into your objections to Police Laws in reference to which you have only one duty, namely, that of obedience; but I wish to serve you and cannot do so more effectually than by correcting misapprehensions, which are unreasonably disquieting some industrious and well-disposed persons.
Thus your complaint that Chinese vessels must report on entering and leaving the harbor is simply a complaint that at last we put you on the same footing as Europeans-who even in their own Country have to make full reports on entering and leaving a harbor, whether they enter once or a hundred times in a year. It is a regulation intended to protect peaceful and honest traders by affording some guarantee of the legitimate character of the vessels which frequent the Port-and before long I hope to see it adopted at all Chinese Ports in these Seas. What other mode is there of getting the information required? Therefore, in the face of the shocking piracies recently committed by vessels fitted out by residents of this City, I would regard your objections as discreditable and in bad taste if I thought you fully understood their tendency.
In the same way I observe that you regard as onerous the slight Duty cast on you in aiding to preserve the peace and health of a City, in which there are fifty Chinese to one European. Is it a hard thing if the Queen's Government should expect those, who live under the British Flag, to assist in maintaining order?
It is impossible that Europeans can know the character of your Countrymen as well as you do, and therefore it is right and natural that we should expect each Chinese Householder to take some trouble in learning a little about his lodgers. In your own Country you would be held responsible for the conduct of persons inhabiting your houses, and frequently for the conduct of all members of your family, when guilty of any crime, whether residing with you or at a distance.
As for the security asked, it is only required from non-resident Owners of houses and need not be rendered burdensome. It is right there should be some security against their houses becoming in their absence the resort of thieves and bad characters.
I equally regard as untenable your objection to the registration of Servants employed by Europeans, a prudent precaution where so many robberies have been planned by Servants, and one which must be an advantage to all Servants that conduct themselves well. Moreover, when you speak of a payment of 25 cents for a Registration Certificate, which, (in the absence of any improper conduct by the Servant) might last 20 years, as "always fining and driving Servants to prison," you must admit that you have not taken the trouble to study the Ordinance.
The same observation applies to your assertion that any law has been passed imposing a "tax" on Cattle and Pigs. There has been no tax whatever imposed on either, but it has been provided that in future you shall not keep pigs within the limits of this town. I am sorry, if this Regulation interferes with the comfort the Chinese some of whom I have observed with their children living in filthy cellars and dens along with pigs. Nevertheless this is an English City and not a Chinese town. I
222