2
233
the Governor considers that there is no little force
in their objections.
It is not for one unacquainted with Hong k
to hazard an opinion in opposition to that of the
Governor, who is on the spot and who from his offici
position has the best means of making himself
And therefore in answer
acquainted with the facts. your letter I am under the disagrecable necessity of either abstaining from any discussion of the matter being one upon which my very partial knowledge unfi
or if I make observation to offer any observations,
or suggestions drawn from such general information experience as are at my command I shall certainly i
the charge of presumption.
In this private letter to you, however, 'shall state what occurs to me irrespective of the charges of this nature which might be brought again me if I gave official utterance to them.
I will take the objections as summarised by
Sir W. Robinson. The first one is the question of
expense
the Harbour Master estimating the cost of
compiling the statistics at 20.000 dollars a year.
Assuming that to be a fair estimate, one is led to look
at the trade of the port and when I see that vessels
use the harbour to the extent of over 6 million tons
a year and that there are ng port charges whatever I
cannot help asking whether short of imposing a, Customs
duty, there are no means of obtaining this slight sum
from so great an aggregate of shipping amongst which it
would surely not be felt.
In France a statistical fee is payable for
the very purpose of defraying the cost of statistics of
Commerce and Shipping, and glancing again at the shipping
figures of Hong Kong (I have no later ones than those of
1888) I see that if spread over all the vessels entering
the port, about 28.000 a year,- the fee would be less
than 1 dollar per vessel.
Or, if the payment were
confined