8
but be a source of loss to them, and in consideration of it some compensation ought to be granted. This is quite a different matter from the establishment of a Société de Commerce dans le but d'exercer un monopole sur le commerce."
"I would request the Board to consider the above points when replying to the British Minister's note."
I have the honour to communicate the above reply for your information.
Inclosure 8 in No. 1.
COAST-TRADE DUTY.
I avail, &c.
Précis, Extracts from Correspondence, and References, 1856–1880.
1856.
Foreign Office to Sir J. Bowring, No. 61, February 21, 1856.
THE situation regarding the coasting trade before the Treaty of Tien-tsin (1858) is explicitly laid down in the instructions given to Sir John Bowring in Lord Clarendon's despatch of the 21st February, 1856, from which the following is an extract:—
"1. Can British merchants claim, under the existing Treaty, a right to carry on a coasting trade in China in native produce?
"With respect to this point, there does not appear to His Majesty's Government to be anything in the Treaty to warrant any such claim, nor can such a claim be maintained on the ground that some Chinese officers have permitted such coasting trade to be carried on without objection. It seems to be clear that in so doing they have violated the existing law of China."
After the 1858 Treaty the question was raised by a note of the 1st July, 1861, from Prince Kung to Mr. Bruce.
1861.
Prince Kung to Mr. Bruce, July 1, 1861.
"It would appear that while the Treaties contain nothing explicit regarding the reimportation into the open ports of produce that has been exported (by the foreigner), it has been usual, on the other part, for the native dealer carrying (such produce) to pay into each custom-house the duty leviable thereat; and as it is become essential that some regulations for the open ports, which shall adequately secure equality to the merchants and prevent inconvenience to the revenue, should be agreed to, it is proposed that all native produce exported after payment of the Tariff duty, shall, on reimportation into any open port, be made to pay either a full Tariff duty, or a transit due that is a half Tariff duty. If it pay a full Tariff duty the collection will be liable to the deduction of the paid towards the indemnity. If it pay only the sum equal to a transit duty, this will not amount to much, and will not be liable to the deduction, The right rule no doubt would be that, as it is native produce reimported, and as there is. more duty to be paid on it, it should pay a full import duty, and that this should become liable to the deduction. But whichever it is, whole duty or half duty, that reimports are to pay, produce so reimported will fall when resold after entry, no matter by whom sold, under the laws prescribing payment of so much duty at each customs station, and will continue to pay the old 'octroi.""
Prince Kung requested Mr. Bruce to cousider this important point,
Mr. Bruce to Prince Kung, July 5, 1861.
Acknowledges Prince Kung's despatch of the 1st July, and promises to consider the question without delay, but stipulates that, "until the question be definitively adjusted, the Customs authorities at each of the open ports be instructed to adhere to what- ever usage is at present in force in their jurisdiction respectively."
9
147
Mr. Bruce continues: I find that at Canton, Swatow, and Shanghae, if at no other ports, it has been for some time past the practice to admit produce, if accompanied by an exemption certificate, duty free; and with produce exported for importation to other open ports to issue exemption certificates. These latter have in some instances been ignored by the Customs at ports where the practice had not been introduced, and I have now before me two despatches from Her Majesty's Consul at Tien-tsin complaining of the levy of a duty on a box of silk, the property of Meadows and Co., shipped with an exemption certificate at Shanghae, and on a cargo of sugar similarly cleared at Swatow by Dent and Co. I need not point out to your Highness that the repudiation by the Customs of Tien-tsin of a document formally issued by the Customs of Shanghae or Swatow, independently of any other inconvenience that may attach to such a proceeding, cannot fail to seriously embarrass the operations of the foreign merchant, and it is my duty to request that instructions be sent to the Tien-tsin Customs to refund to Messrs. Meadows and Dent the amounts that have been levied on them in defiance of the protection to which under their certificates they were entitled."
Prince Kung to Mr. Bruce, July 9, 1861.
Reply to Mr. Bruce's despatch of the 5th July
"It appears to his Highness that the clause in the Treaty concluded last year, which provides that goods are to pay duty but once, refers to foreign goods, and that, inasmuch as the Treaty and Tariff contain nothing specific regarding the course to be pursued with reference to native produce reimported, while, on the other hand, no regulations had been framed on this subject, the Tien-tsin Customs, in levying the duty they did, were simply carrying out the Chinese law, under which particular duties should be collected at particular custom-houses, and consequently did not surcharge (or levy more than one duty)."
Prince Kung, however, said he had written to the Minister Superintendent of Trade at the three northern ports to manage the matter satisfactorily," and he pressed Mr. Bruce "to conclude some arrangement respecting the duties on native produce reimported by an early day," in order to obviate such cases.
Mr. Bruce to Prince Kung, July 10, 1861.
Reply to Prince Kung's despatch of the 9th July.
He had already taken steps to obtain the necessary information to enable me to decide what arrangement can be made.” As regards the proceedings of the Customs at Tien-tsin, his "request was founded not on any express stipulation in the Treaty, but on the broad principle of justice, that when a document conferring a right is issued by an official authority it ought not to be repudiated by another official of the same country."
Prince Kung to Mr. Bruce, July 19, 1861.
Minister Superintendent of Northern Trade will issue drawbacks to Messrs. Meadows and Dent on production of exemption certificates for inspection.
British Chamber of Commerce, Shanghae, to Mr. Bruce, August 26, 1561. Transmits under flying seal an address to Lord John Russell. (There is no copy of this address in the Peking archives, but it would appear to have contained some remarks on the coasting trade.)
Mr. Bruce to British Chamber of Commerce, Shanghue, September 23, 1801.
The privilege of sharing in the coasting trade, which was granted under different conditions at different ports, exemption certificates being recognized at some and not at others, is not a right which, according to my construction, can be claimed by Treaty,
[2164 k-2]
D