68
(Enclosure No.2 to Mr.Pelham's despatch No.57 of 5th July,1934).
COPY OF LETTER ADDRESSED TO THE "HONGKONG TALEGRAPH' BY SIR WILLI ́M SHENTON, IN REPLY TO MR. DOD"ELL'S REMARKS AT THIE ANNUAL MEETING OF THE HONGKONG BREWERS AND DISTILLERS LIMITED,
JUNE 16th, 1934.
Dear Dodwell,
As regards your Brewery speech, I now propose to deal
in detail with Page 8, as requested by you.
Your proposal raises a very important issue, which calls
for very careful enquiry and a great deal of deep thinking. Your
suggestion entails giving up the free port status of Hongkong
and instituting, presumably for the whole Colony, high protective
tariffa, in addition, of course, to the revenue tariffs which we
at present have. At the moment we tax opium, wines, spirits,
beer, tobacco and petrol for revenue purposes, a form of taxation
which is internationally recognised as not being contrary to
free trade principles.
All nations recognise the necessity of revenue tariffs,
but protective tariffa are placed in an entirely different
category and are brought into being so as to enable a country to
be or become highly industrialised, or for the purpose of correctin
the balance of trade.
Bilateral trade agreements have not always the
-
benefite they at first appear to have "the most favoured nations
clause" so often crops up, taking away what at first appeared a
real advantage.
The early declarations of Captain Elliot and others
when taking over the Colony in 1842 cannot be lost sight of. The
Port of Hongkong was declared free to the flags of all nations
and a general indication of free port status given. I can give
you details, should you so desire.
I can see the advantage of high protective tariffa
in a Colony such as Ceylon or the Straits Settlements (in which I
include Singapore, the Federated Malay States and the Unfederated
States) because in both osses they have a big hinterland, large
natural/