Campbell, also raised the question of the right of the Portuguese authorities to exercise jurisdiction over British subjects at Macao; and instructions on both these subjects were accordingly addressed to Mr. Davis (Sir H. Pottinger's successor) in November 1844.
In these instructions Lord Aberdeen said :-
The course suggested is that measures should be taken for withdrawing British subjects from Portuguese jurisdiction, either by denying the right of the Portuguese authorities, under the peculiar tenure by which the establishments of the Portuguese Crown in Macao are held, to exercise any jurisdiction at all over British subjects, who would then, as residents within the Chinese dominions, come within those exclusive privileges of jurisdiction conferred on Great Britain by her Treaties with China, or by claiming, in pursuance of the Treaty engagements between Great Britain and Portugal, that in the same manner as the subjects of the Emperor of China at Macao are amenable to the jurisdiction of Chinese authorities only, so also the subjects of Great Britain should be under the exclusive jurisdiction of British authorities.
To Mr. Davis, No. 90;
November 16, 1844.
"By maintaining, however, the first proposition, Her Majesty's Government would expose themselves to the objection that if Macao is to be considered as part of the territory of China, the Treaty of Nanking, which limits residence of British subjects to five specified ports in China, would preclude them altogether from repairing to Macao; while, by contending for the second, if Macao is to be considered a portion of the Portuguese territory, the Court of Lisbon might pretend that any British authority claiming to exercise, in pursuance of Treaty between Great Britain and Portugal, the same exclusive jurisdiction over British subjects in Macao which the authorities of the Emperor of China are in the habit of exercising over Chinese subjects, should obtain the sanction of the Crown of Portugal to his residence in Macao in the ordinary form of a Consular exequatur. But an application to the Court of Lisbon for such an exequatur would be a tacit admission that the sovereignty of Macao is vested in the Crown of Portugal; and such an admission Her Majesty's Government are not disposed to make."
Covering letter only.
See p. 8.
And here it may be mentioned that the Queen's Advocate had (on the 9th May preceding) expressed an opinion that "the sovereignty of Macao being in the Emperor of China, and not in the Queen of Portugal, the exequatur of a British Consul could not be necessary.
But this decision was combated by Lord Aberdeen, and the point referred back to the Queen's Advocate, whose attention was drawn to the fact that, if Macao was Chinese territory British subjects could have no right to trade there, as it was not one of the ports opened by Treaty to British trade, whilst if it was Portuguese territory there might be a difficulty in requiring that a Consular Agent should reside there without the formal sanction of the Portuguese Government.
In a subsequent Report (of the 4th November, 1844) the Queen's Advocate therefore reported that he had not been able to discover any mode by which the difficulty which had been pointed out as rendering it inexpedient to question the tenure of the Portuguese in Macao could be obviated.
"That the application to the Portuguese Government for an exequatur for a British Consular Agent at Macao was certainly open to the objection that the sovereignty of the place was thereby implied to be invested in Portugal, but that the inconvenience which might be occasioned by openly asserting the sovereign right of China in preference to that of Portugal was so great as to induce him to think that it would be more advisable to apply for the exequatur than to bring forward the question of sovereignty."
[It will be seen from what follows that applications have on various occasions since this date been made to the Portuguese Government to recognize the appointment of British Consular Agents to reside at Macao.]
It was under these circumstances that the above instructions were sent to Mr. Davis.
Those instructions then continued as follows :- "Lord Stanley's despatch to your predecessor of the 12th November, 1843, with the letter from this Office of the 6th of that month therein inclosed, will explain to you the view which Her Majesty's Government take of the tenure by which the Crown of Portugal holds Macao, and of the
143