STRONA SAARENGANA MAY
213
It seems however very unfortunate not merely that such a precedent should be established allowing an illegal proclamation to be left unaltered, on the assurance of the Viceroy that such Proclamation meant something different from that which it stated, but that the objections raised by the Governor of Hong Kong affected by that Proclamation should be regarded as disposed of by explanations what Governor... ever communicated to ...
19. I further consider that a very grave omission pervades all the explanations given by the Colonial and Sir Rutherford Alcock relative to the Proclamation of the Viceroy. They both dilate at length on the right of the Chinese Government to protect itself against loss of Revenue by smuggling. No one denies that principle, but under a doctrine that secures general assent, Her Majesty's Minister at Peking observes that the very unusual manner in which that protection is sought to be secured, namely by compelling vessels when leaving a Foreign Port whither they are not bound to go to a certain port for the purpose of there paying a duty which should by the general usage of civilized nations only become payable on arrival of the dutiable articles at their destination.
10. I consider that whatever be the right of the Chinese to protect their Revenue against smuggling their "modus operandi" effecting that object has limits which are determined...