271
This opinion was given in January 1860, after the signature of the Treaty of Tientsin (though before its ratification), and the names attached to it are those of Lord Westbury (then Sir Richard Bethell), the late Sir William Atherton, and the late Sir J. D. Harding; and the Executive of this Colony acted upon the opinion, the proceeds realized by the sale of these Chinese Vessels and cargoes (some $85,000) being divided amongst the captors without any investigation, judicial or otherwise. In this opinion the following passage occurs :-
"We are of opinion that, as between H. M. Government and the Government and subjects of China (a Country which neither acknowledges nor follows the Jus Gentium of European States under which the necessity for Prize Court condemnation arises) no condemnation as prize is either necessary or expedient."
Distinction between "Privilege" and "Right" to appoint Consuls.-9. Your Memorialists would point out that if China's not recognizing the "Jus Gentium" be a sufficient reason for refusing to her what is a right or necessity under the Law, the obligations of that same "Jus Gentium" cannot be said to render a grant of what is only a privilege imperative." It may be said that, since that opinion was given, China has entitled herself to be considered as within the pale of nations, but sad experience has taught Your Memorialists that, instead of progressing towards that desirable end, China is even further off now than she was then; and of this, Your Memorialists would point out, no better proof can be required than the very words of the second clause itself; which says that "China having agreed that England may appoint Consuls to reside at every Port open to trade," it is then further agreed that "China may appoint Consuls to reside at all ports in the British dominions." The Reciprocity which alone entitles a nation to seek for International Concessions is singularly wanting here.
Special Circumstances of Hongkong. --10. Bearing upon this claim of China to bare concessions which she does not earn, there is one reason which is applicable only to the Colony of Hongkong as distinguished from every other British Port. In this Colony there are upwards of 120,000 Chinese residents, all of whom are Colonists, subject to our laws, the great majority of them taxpayers, and a very large number of them landholders, and entitled as such to Colonial Registers for vessels (owned by them) flying the British Flag, who have been for many years peaceable, well-conducted citizens, with a considerable stake in the welfare of the Colony, and who, by being the promoters and managers of the large emigration to the United States and the Australian Colonies, the principal exporters and traders, shareholders in our Banks, Steam, Insurance, and other public Companies, and eager adventurers in new manufacturing projects, do more to civilize China than fifty Treaty Ports would do. These people live contentedly under our rule, and are free, at present, from the extortions and squeezes to which they would indubitably be subjected, through their families or relatives living in China, if a Chinese Consul were placed here, and against which, intangible as it would be, the Government here could not protect them, nor for which could it give them redress. To say nothing of the complications of jurisdiction that would arise, it is enough to say that the Chinese residents here, now a well-ordered community, are unanimously opposed to the introduction of a Consul who will, to a certain extent, bring them under the power of their own corrupt officials.
3
11. Your Memorialists submit that, while China only permits the residence of Consuls at certain specified places, she cannot in reason expect greater privileges than she concedes, and that, in allowing her to have the power of placing Consuls at some ports, we are only acting in strict reciprocity if we confine such privilege to ports selected by ourselves.
Advantages offered by Convention for proposed concession.-12. Assuming that Your Memorialists have established the position that the abstract rule of International Comity does not fairly necessitate such an unlimited concession, can it be said either that China has done anything to induce us to step over the line in her favor, or that policy and a consideration for British interests require such a measure?
Your Memorialists with some confidence submit that both these questions must be answered in the negative. The Convention gives but little to Great Britain that we did not already possess under the Treaties of Nankin and Tientsin, with the single exception of acknowledging the right of transhipment of duty paid goods at Hongkong, in transit from one Treaty port to another, upon the same terms as if transhipped at an intermediate Treaty Port. The other clauses in the Convention, so far as the Chinese are concerned, are principally but renewed promises in detail to do that which, both by the Treaty of Nankin and that of Tientsin, they had already undertaken to do in the spirit, if not in the letter, and these advantages are but small compared with the evil of a Chinese Consul being placed in the Colony, to avoid which Your Memorialists would gladly give up any of the advantages which erroneously seem to have been looked upon as an equivalent.
Result as regards efforts by China to establish efficient Revenue Service.-13. The end and aim of British diplomacy in China is, without doubt, the ultimate opening up of the whole of the Empire to commerce, and unrestricted intercourse with its people, and the principal reason why this is not now insisted upon is that we admit it would be hard to expect a nation to do so against the spirit of her traditional policy until, at least, she has established a Revenue service efficient enough to enable her to collect and protect her Revenue along her seaboard; but Your Memorialists submit that China will never take the necessary steps to create or maintain such a service, if we enable her to place a Consul here, to secure the taxation of the great bulk of the foreign trade of her people, without the necessity, responsibility and expense of such a Revenue Establishment. The opposition shown by Provincial Governors and authorities to any measure which, by strengthening the power of the Central Government at Pekin, weakens their own irresponsible power, and menaces their corrupt gains, as the Establishment of a Revenue service along the seaboard would undoubtedly do, is one of the main reasons why it does not already exist, and why the Government grasp at any expedient which may even partially attain their end and secure for the Imperial Exchequer the duties and squeezes now levied by the Provincial Mandarins as their own perquisite. So long as the present want of centralization in the Government, and their consequent inability to carry out Treaty obligations, exists (as they themselves allege) so long will progress be retarded, and, on this ground alone, policy should dictate a refusal to permit a Consul to be placed at Hongkong.
14. Hongkong has always been a free port, and, as such, has attracted a mass of Chinese traders hither, and a consequent expansion and development of trade that, but for this circumstance, would never have existed, and which sound policy would suggest...
1
271
This opinion was given in January 1860, after the signature of the Treaty of Tien- tsin (though before its ratification), and the names attached to it are those of Lord Westbury (then Sir Richard Bethell), the late Sir William Atherton, and the late Sir J. D. Harding; and the Executive of this Colony acted upon the opinion, the pro- ceeds realized by the sale of these Chinese Venaels and cargoes (some $85,000) being divided amongst the captors without any investigation, judicial or otherwise. In this opinion the following passage occurs :-
"We are of opinion that, as between H. M. Government and the Government aud subjects of China (a Country which neither acknowledgea nor follows the Jes Gon tium of European States under which the neces- sity for Prize Court condemnation arises) no condemnation as prize is either necessary or espedient."
Distinction between "Privilege" and Right" to appoint Consuls.-9. Your Me- morialists would point out that if China's not recognizing the "Jus Gentium" be a sufficient reason for refusing to her what is a right or necessity under the Law, the obligations of that same "Jus Gentium" cannot be said to render a grant of what is only a privilege imperative." It may be said that, since that opinion was given, China has entitled herself to be considered as within the pale of nations, but sad experi ence bas taught Your Memorialists that, instead of progressing towards that desir able end, China is even further off now than she was then; and of this, Your Memoria. lists would point out, no better proof can be required thau the very words of the second slause itself; which says that "China having agreed that England may appoiut Consuls to reside at every Port open to trade," it is then further agreed that "China may appoint Consuls to reside at all ports in the British dominions." The Reciprocity which alone entitles a nation to sek for International Concessiona is singularly wanting here.
Special Circumstances of Hongkong. --10. Bearing upon this claim of China to bare concessions which she does not earn, there is one reason which is applicable only to the Colony of Hongkong as distinguished from every other British Port, In this ! Colony there are upwards of 120,000 Chinese residents, all of whom are Colonista, subject to our laws, the great majority of them taxpayers, and a very large number of them landholders, and entitled as such to Colonial Registers for vessels (owned by them) flying the British Flag, who have been for many years peaceable, well-con- ducted citizens, with a considerable stake in the welfare of the Colony, and who, by being the promoters and managers of the large emigration to the United States and the Australian Colonies, the principal ex- porters and traders, shareholders in our Banks, Steam, Insurance, and other public Companies, and eager adventurers in new manufacturing projecta, do more to civilize China than fifty Treaty Ports would do. These people live coutentedly under our rule, and are free, at present, from the extortions and squeezes to which they would indubitably be subjected, through their families or relatives living in China, if a Chinese Consul were placed here, and against which, intangible as it would be. the Government here could not protect them, nor for which could it give them redress. To say nothing of the complica tions of jurisdiction that would arise, it is enough to say that the Chinese residents here, now a well-ordered community, are unanimously opposed to the introduction of a Consul who will, to a certain extent, bring them under the power of their own corrupt officials.
3
11. Your Memorialists submit that, while China only permits the residence of + Consuls at certain specified places, she can- not in reason expect greater privileges than she concedes, and that, in allowing her to have the power of placing Consuls at some ports, we are only acting in strict recipro- city if we confine such privilege to ports selected by ourselves.
Advantages offered by Convention for pro- posed concession.-12 Assuming that Your Memorialists have established the position that the abstract rule of International Comity does not fairly necessitate such an unlimited concession, can it be said either that China has done anything to induce us to step over the line in her favor, or that policy and a consideration for British in- terests require such a measure }
Your Memorialists with some confidence submit that both these questions must be answer- ed in the negative. The Convention gives but little to Great Britain that we did not already possess under the Treaties of Nankin and Tientsin, with the single ex- ception of acknowledging the right of trau shipment of duty paid goods at Hongkong, in transit from one Treaty port to another, upon the same terms as if transhipped at an intermediate Treaty Port, The other clauses in the Convention, so far as the Chinese are concerned, are principally but renewed promises in detail to do that which, both by the Treaty of Nankin and that of Tientsin, they had al- ready undertaken to do in the spirit, if not in the letter, and these advantages are but small compared with the evil of a Chinese Consulbeing placed in the Colony, to avoid which Your memorialists would gladly give up any of the advantages which erroneously seem to have been looked upon as au equi- valent.
Result as regards efforts by China to esta- blish efficient Revenue Service.-13. The end and aim of British diplomacy in China is, without doubt, the ultimate opening up of the whole of the Empire to commerce, and unrestricted intercourse with its people, and the principal reason why this is not now insisted upon is that we admit it would be hard to expect a nation to do so against the spirit of her traditionary policy until, at least, she has established a Revenue ser vice efficient enough to enable her to collect and protect her Revenue along her sea- board; but Your Memorialists submit that China will never take the necessary steps to create or maintain such a service, if we enable her to place a Cousul here, to secure the taxation of the great bulk of the foreign trade of her people, without the necessity, responsibility and expense of such a Reve- nue Establishment. The opposition shewn by Provincial Governors and authorities to any measure which, by strengthening the power of the Central Government at Pekin, weakens their own irresponsible power, and menaces their corrupt gains, as the Esta- blishment of a Revenue service along the seaboard would undoubtedly do, is one of the main reasons why it does not already exist, and why the Government grasp at any expedient which may even partially attain their end and secure for the Imperial Ex- chequer the duties and squeezes now levied by the Provincial Mandarins as their own perquisite. So long as the present want of centralization in the Government, and their consequent inability to carry out Treaty obligations, exista (as they themselves al- lege) so long will progress be retarded, and, on this ground alone, policy should dictate a refusal to permit a Consul to be placed at Hongkong.
14. Hongkong has always been a free port, and, as such, has attracted a mass of Chinese tradera hither, and a consequent expansion and development of trade that, but for this circumstance, would never have existed, and which sound policy would sug. |
1
X
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.