139
LAUS 26 MAR 21
No. 138.
Sir T. Wade to Earl Granville.-(Received March 7.)
(No. 1. Confidential.)
Peking, January 6, 1881.
My Lord,
WHEN at the Yamên yesterday, I asked the Ministers present what might be the meaning of the insertion of such an Article as that prohibiting American trade in opium inserted in the new Treaty with the United States.
I had gone thither, in fact, to ascertain whether anything had happened that might affect the arrangement proposed by the Prince of Kung, namely, that at Shanghae opium should be bonded, and the li-kin upon it collected by the Customs Inspectorate; this as an experiment, which was to be put on its trial for five years. I had received some time since a telegram on the subject from your Lordship, which led me to believe that the arrangement would not be disapproved, but I had represented, I said, that its approval, as I had more than once pointed out to their Excellencies, would be a hollow farce until all other Powers accepted it likewise. Every Treaty Power having opium in its Tariff, any British importer who objected to the bonding system would simply bring his opium into port under the flag of some dissentient Power.
All this, which they had repeatedly heard before, the Ministers of the Yamên readily admitted. I had made the question also a plea for urging the speedy settlement of the question of taxing imports and exports inland, until which was arrived at the consent of some of my colleagues to the bonding of opium in Shanghae would be certainly withheld. And on this point also the Chinese were quite at one with me.
I then passed to the Article regarding opium in the new American Treaty. The Ministers did not admit precisely that it was entirely suggested on the American side, but they said that it could be of no possible use to China, the Americans taking but very small part, if any, in the opium trade. It was necessary that they should have something to show as gain before they surrendered any part of the Burlingame Treaty; and the Commercial Treaty now negotiated is simply a set-off against the Treaty enabling the United States to regulate, in the manner agreed, the immigration of Chinese labourers.
Morally, the Article must be regarded, I think, as a blow given to the opium trade, but I shall have to trouble your Lordship at greater length upon this subject ere long.
I have, &c. (Signed) THOMAS FRANCIS WADE.
139
LAUS 26 MAR 2!
No. 138.
Sir T. Wude to Earl Granville.-(Received March 7.)
(No. 1. Confidential.)
Peking, January 6, 1881. My Lord,
WHEN at the Yamên yesterday, I asked the Ministers present what might be the meaning of the insertion of such an Article as that prohibiting American trade in opium inserted in the new Treaty with the United States.
I had gone thither, in fact, to ascertain whether anything had happened that might affect the arrangement proposed by the Prince of Kung, namely, that at Shanghae opium should be bonded, and the li-kin upon it collected by the Customs Inspectorate; this as an experiment, which was to be put on its trial for five years. I had received some time since a telegram on the subject from your Lordship, which led me to believe that the arrangement would not be disapproved, but I had represented, I said, that its approval, as I had more than once pointed out to their Excellencies, would be a hollow farce until all other Powers accepted it likewise. Every Treaty Power having opium in its Tariff, any British importer who objected to the bonding system would simply bring his opium into port under the flag of some dissentient Minister.
All this, which they had repeatedly heard before, the Ministers of the Yamên readily admitted. Í had made the question also a plea for urging the speedy settlement of the question of taxing imports and exports inland, until the which was arrived at the consent of some of my colleagues to the bonding of opium in Shanghae would be certainly withheld. And on this point also the Chinese were quite at one with me.
I then passed to the Article regarding opium in the new American Treaty. The Ministers did not admit precisely that it was entirely suggested on the American side, but they said that it could be of no possible use to China, the Americans taking but very small part, if any, in the opium trade. It was necessary that they should have something to show as gain before they surrendered any part of the Burlingame Treaty; and the Commercial Treaty now negotiated is simply a set-off against the Treaty enabling the United States to regulate, in the manner agreed, the immigration of Chinese labourers.
Morally, the Article must be regarded, I think, as a blow given to the opium trade, but I shall have to trouble your Lordship at greater length upon this subject ere long.
I have, &c. (Signed) THOMAS FRANCIS WADE.
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.