...........
the
diplomatic authorities
far
A
they are
wrong!
it is not easy to do with due
regard
514
Proclamation the doubtless, issued
with the above,
La
its Language
and thus
far
depended
to the Foreign Office. It appears
the best
the
7.0.
ca
that
to me that would be to write a letter, observing that
no doubt the Treaty of Tientsin only applied to the British Trade at Treaty Ports, & not to Chinese Trade or to other Ports; – that the Chinese were therefore at liberty to take the precautions which they had taken against smuggling by any person whatever into non-Treaty Ports, to
that it does not
interfere with British Trade at the Treaty Ports, that
His Grace resolved
to
to the establishment in Hongkong
agency for delivering
of
certificates, and that
while
capped
went too
far as the
force of the Viceroy's explanation
A
few words, which
but the
appeared not to have been used by the Viceroy,
are
it
the nature
of
and
that
open
to
interpreters' gloss
appeared to
some question whether, under the succession of Treaties which regulate this question, the Chinese Customs could properly impose duty on opium, being "British merchandise " (Treaty of Nanking, Art X. See _Treaties_ , Fol II, p. 224) and being an import at a
Treaty Port,
then the Likin may
be a
certain
Chinese Transit duty, any greater duty
than is
agreed
by the Treaty
at the rights of Tientsin, Art XXIII, and the
Tariff
contained
in it
if this
there
and
steps affected seriously that part of the community of Hongkong who
were
engaged
in contraband trade, this was
in consequence
of
an incident to which persons who exist by unlawful proceedings
must be liable.
On the other hand that the
agreement of Nov 8th 1858 (See _Treaties_ , pp. 91, 97)
in as open a manner
a clearer statement on this
head is in justice to British Traders required:
for it is
explained
by
M. Robertson's letters that he
anticipated objections
to this Govt.
of Hongkong
it appeared to H. E. unfortunate
that he did not ascertain the