ang, I saw no reason for impeaching the fairness of the decision arrived at by the Chinese authorities in conjunction with yourself, and what has happened to the Prince Albert will in all probability happen to any other vessel found in a non-Treaty port under similar conditions.
It was a simple act of grace on the part of the Chinese Government, at the intervention of the British Minister at Peking, to mitigate the penalty; and, in consenting to reduce it to one eighth of the value at which the owner had estimated his vessel, and permitting him to redeem it on payment of the comparatively small sum of $4000, they acted in my opinion with great liberality, and in a very lenient spirit considering the notoriously large smuggling trade on the West Coast, the headquarters of which they believe, whether rightly or wrongly, to be at Hongkong, and carried on chiefly by means of vessels of the class of the Prince Albert under foreign flags, and in some cases colours conferred by the Colonial authority.
It was fully within their competence either to confiscate, or mitigate the penalty. It is idle to question their right to take this course. As to the complainant's argument in this case, which he has been ill-advised enough to put forward, that either the Chinese authorities should confiscate the ship or restore her and pay him damages for her detention, it is altogether untenable, as I have informed H. E. Sir Richard MacDonnell in my despatch of the 14th of June, of which a copy was sent to you. No useful result can arise from urging so utterly unreasonable an argument. It affords, on the contrary, a very strong inducement to the Chinese authorities in any future case to refuse any mitigation at the intercession of the Minister at Peking, or to abate any portion of their legal rights. It is the more important, therefore, that the misconstruction of the acts both of the Chinese Government and H. M.'s Minister, publicly put upon them by the Chairman of the Hongkong Chamber of Commerce, should be equally publicly corrected, that other shipowners like Kwok Acheong may not be misled to their loss. And that this statement of the bearing of the Treaty, and the powers given under the 47th and 49th clauses, may have all due weight with those whom it may concern, I have taken the opinion of Sir Edmund Hornby, the Chief Judge of the Supreme Court of China and Japan, and ascertained that he entirely concurs in the interpretation of the Treaty clauses which I have here given.
A copy of this despatch will be forwarded to H. E. Sir Richard MacDonnell, that he may take such steps as may seem to him fit for the information of Chinese and British subjects who are domiciled in the Colony more or less temporarily. But, as the larger interests of all British subjects trading with China are, in some degree connected with this question, you are authorized to give it publicity, as a declaration of the principles and the law applicable in such cases, in like manner as you would promulgate any formal notification affecting the general interests.
Your obedient Servant,
(Signed,) RUTHERFORD ALCOCK.
True copy,--ALEX. FRATER,
Assistant.
Page 237