PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
C.O.
Reference :-
882
3
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC-
COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO
42
force of it a little outside the limits of the Harbour, Moreover, there was no allegation made that the weather was bad, the petitioner merely said that the sea was rough.
The Hon. the Colonial Secretary,
&c.
&c.
&c.
Kong Taz Saú states :--
I have, &c. (Signed) M. S. TONNOCHY,
Inclosure 6 in No. 23.
Acting Registrar-General.
I AM a partner in the Maú Wo Cheung Hong, in No. 40, Wing Lok Street, I recollect bringing a petition to this Office in the month of April last year, praying the Government to recover for me certain cargo, consisting of more than 40 bales of cotton, which had been seized in junk called the Wing Cheung Lung, which was arrested by the Customs' authorities at Cheung Chau about the end of March, on an alleged charge of smuggling.
letter from Canton from one of the crew of the
C
I was the shipper of the cargo and I paid the Captain the full amount of Customs' duty. More than a month after I had presented the petition to this Office, I received a Wing Cheung Lung Junk," named Wong Kam Wo, in which he sated that he was in confinement in the gaol attached to the Hoppo's Yamun, and that he was receiving very bad treatment, and being sick asked me to request the Government of Hong Kong to save him. I immediately reported the matter to the Registrar-General and delivered the letter to him. The following day I was directed to proceed to Canton. I ought to have taken a despatch with me, but it had by mistake been taken on board the Canton steamer.
I went up and saw the British Vice-Consul at the Consulate. I told him that Wong Kam Wo was sick and had been ill-treated in gaol, and asked him to release him as soon as he could. He replied, through an interpreter, "Very well, you need not be afraid, your case will be inquired into; do not not go away and you will be informed when you will be wanted." Three or four days afterwards I received notice and appeared at the Consulate, when Wong Kam Wo was brought out. I was told that I could take the man away, but could not get the goods until an investigation had been held, that I could go about my business, and that notice would be given to me when I would be required. I signed a paper, and Wong Kam Wo was released. I was not asked, nor did I say anything about the man's ill-treatment. I did not say that I did not take a letter to the Registrar-General about the man's ill-treatment. The Consul spoke to Wong Kam Wo, but I did not hear all he said, as I was engaged talking to the gaoler, who wanted me to pay him 30 dollars for Wong Kam Wo's keep in gaol for thirty-three days. He said that two men had to be employed to guard him. I did not hear the Consul ask Wong Kam Wo if he had been ill-treated, nor did I hear Wong Kam Wo say he had been well-treated. When I got outside, being very much pressed, I had to pay the gaoler 7 dollars. I came to Hong Kong. More than a month afterwards I again went to Canton by order of the Registrar-General. I went to the Consulate, and an investigation was held at the conclusion of the investigation; after examining several witnesses, including myself, I was told that I could get my goods, and a delivery order was accordingly given to me. Nothing was said to me about the junk.
(Signed in Chinese.)
Interpreted by Mr. Osmund, and signed by Kong Tsz Saú, in my presence, this 26th day of June, 1876.
(Signed) H. E. WODEHOUSE, Chief Clerk, Colonial Secretary's Office, and Justice of the Peace.
No. 24.
Governor Sir A. E. Kennedy, K.C.M.G., C.B., to the Earl of Carnarvon.—(Received
(No. 127.) My Lord,
September 4.)
Government House, Hong Kong, July 13, 1876.
IN my despatch No. 126, of yesterday's ¡date, I had the honour to call your Lordship's attention to certain facts which appeared in evidence in our local Courts in
• No. 23.
43
connection with the prosecution of some offenders, who were finally convicted of accusing of murder with intent to extort money.
2. After the receipt of the Chief Justice's letter on that subject as adverted to in No. 126, I thought the opportunity a favourable one of submitting to the Unofficial Members of Council the correspondence which took place between your Lordship's Department and the Foreign Office in reference to the question of permitting the Hoppo's cruizers to anchor in this harbour,* and with the other papers mentioned in the margin,t handed them a copy of Sir Brooke Robertson's despatch to Sir Thomas Wade of the 18th January last, a despatch which is stated to have had its origin in certain remarks which were addressed by me to the Legislative Council on my return here last December from England.
3. The Unofficial Members made a Minute on these papers, and I have the honour to transmit it to your Lordship as representing their views on the subjects of Sir Brooke Robertson's communication. For my own part, however, I confess that the oftener I read that despatch the more I am amazed at the unwarrantable claims and pretensions of the Canton authorities in relation to their rights over goods coming to, and leaving, this port-claims and pretensions, too, which receive not only the acquiescence of Her Majesty's Consul at Canton, but his active support.
4. Sir Brooke Robertson states that there are other causes besides smuggling to account "for Customs surveillance which are not so well understood," and mentions three kinds of taxes-inland, export, and "Siao hao," "which goods, transported from place to place in Chinese territory, are required to pay by the Regulations." The Tariff and these Regulations have been asked for over and over again, and as your Lordship observes in despatch of the 27th January, 1876, addressed to the Foreign Office, nothing can better prove the faults of the Chinese fiscal system than Sir Brooke Robertson's declaration of his inability to obtain the Regulations and native Tariff.
5. Your Lordship's despatch as referred to above so completely disposes of Sir Brooke Robertson's arguments on this point, and his objections to the other two proposi- tions approved by your Lordship, viz., suppression of all Customs cruizers except those immediately under the Hoppo, and the appointment of a joint Board of investigation, that I shall not attempt to combat that portion of his letter to the British Minister wherein he reiterates those objections. I may, however, observe that in his despatch to the Foreign Office of 8th October, Sir Brooke, speaking of sailing cruizers, states: "It must be remembered that the duties collected are not of foreign, or Treaty Tariff kind, but Chinese, and they have never yet employed foreigners in that Department of the Custome, &c. ;" and on the next page he states in reply to the demand for the Tariff, "at all events they assert their tariff in the same as the foreign one, and, therefore, there is no necessity for furnishing a copy." The Native Tariff is asked for, and it cannot be given because there is "no obligation to give it," and it would be used against them, and then "there is no use in giving it for you have it already." This may be satisfactory to Sir Brooke Robertson, but I doubt much if it will be so to anyone else.
6. There are at least two positions taken up in the Consul's despatch which are quite new to me, and which I shall try to state as shortly as possible.
(1) The Hoppo asserts that according to the "Regulations" goods sent to foreign ports from the four lower Prefectures of the Province pay duty according to a Tariff made by combining the native and foreign one-as a corollary he claims a right to levy taxes on all goods shipped to Hong Kong in Chinese bottoms on that scale.
In other words, if Sir Brooke's October despatch is right, the Hoppo claims to collect double duties on goods shipped to Hong Kong in native craft on the native and foreign Tariffs combined.
(2.) Sir Brooke in supporting the Hoppo in this matter says of the Treaty of Tien- tsin, "the intention of the Treaty in spirit, if not in word, is that goods exported to, or imported from a foreign market should pay duties according to a certain scale, irrespective of their being British or Chinese owned, and, in fact, that the destination, and not the ownership, governs the levy of the duties.'
7. Before discussing these two propositions, which are of the last importance to the well-being of this Colony, I shall ask your Lordship's attention to the example given by Sir Brooke as to the working of the Hoppo's scheme by a reference to the duties on sugar. According to Sir Brooke the consumer of sugar in Hong Kong ought to pay to the
* Vide Secretary of State's despatch No. 21, of February 29, 1876.
Vide letter of Chief Justice of June 18, 1876; Mr. Kingsmill's letter of June 6, 1976; Police Magia- trate' letter of May 3, 1876, forming inclosures in despatch No. 126 of July 12, 1876; Acting Registrar- General's letter of October 31, 1874, being inclosure No. 2 in this despatch.
‡ Inclosure No. I in this despatch.