33
Sir Henry Pottinger (vide Parliamentary Papers, Lord Palmerston to Sir Henry Pottinger, 1st May, 1841). If proper and justifiable then for all goods, how much more proper and justifiable now in the case of opium, a special commodity, and the subject of a special international compact.
4. As regards the rule proposed in section 5, viz., that, from Indian and British ports between India and China, none but British, or Treaty Power vessels which accept the Additional Article, shall convey opium to China, such a rule is defensible:-
(1.) Opium is a British product;
(2.) Opium is the subject of a special compact between England and China;
(3) Formerly only British vessels conveyed opium to China, and to-day the only other vessels which get opium freights are the French mail-steamers, for vessels of any flag which does not accept the Additional Article to now take opium freights would simply mean an attempt to either frustrate the objects of the Additional Article or commence a new and unfair competition with British vessels and dealers otherwise heavily handicapped by the provisions of that Article;
(4.) Such a rule will hurt no existing interest; will defend British vessels and traders against the unfair competition of outsiders and new-comers; is quite within the power of the British Government to enact and enforce; and is an absolutely necessary assistance or co-operation which China looks for from England in order to the proper working of the international compact contained in the Opium Additional Article.
October 31, 1885.
R. H.
Inclosure 2 in No. 51.
(Extract.)
Lord Palmerston to Sir H. Pottinger.
Foreign Office, May 31, 1841. IT is understood that the Chinese Government has consented to cede the Island of Hong Kong to Great Britain; and that island is supposed to be in many respects well qualified to become a commercial station of some importance for our trade with China.
Her Majesty's Government have reason to suppose that Hong Kong has been ceded with the condition that British and other foreign merchandise imported into Hong Kong should there pay to Chinese Custom-house officers the usual and established import duties which such goods would pay on being imported into China, and that such duties having been so paid, and the merchandise being duly stamped by the Chinese Custom-house officers at Hong Kong, there should be full liberty to all persons to carry such merchandise away to any port in China without its being liable to any further payment in such ports or elsewhere on account of import duty.
Such an arrangement would no doubt be anomalous as far as it involved the presence of Chinese Custom-house officers, and the collection of Chinese customs duties, in a possession of the British Crown; and, moreover, there might be some difficulty in practically carrying into execution that part of the arrangement which would exempt such goods from any subsequent payment in a Chinese port. But there are similar instances in Europe of duties collected in the territory of one Power by the agents of another Power. The transit duties which shipping and goods going up the Scheldt are liable to pay to the Dutch Government are collected, not at Flushing, but at Antwerp by a Dutch agent stationed in that Belgian town; the duties which the Hanoverian Government levies upon shipping and goods passing by the fort of Stade in their way up the Elbe are levied, not at Stade or Brunhausen, but by a Hanoverian agent in the city of Hamburgh; and a plan has for some time past been under discussion between Denmark and other Powers by which, if it were adopted, the tolls which Denmark is entitled to levy upon ships and merchandise passing the Sound would be levied, not at Elsinore, but in the several Prussian, Russian, and other ports in the Baltic, by Danish agents stationed at those ports for such purpose.
It is possible that British commerce might be much encouraged if goods which had once been landed at Hong Kong could be carried from thence to any Chinese ports without being liable for any further payment on account of duty; and the Chinese Custom-house officers in Hong Kong would be less likely than the Chinese authorities at other ports to attempt to levy exorbitant and illegal duties.
[256]
K
10
33
Sir Henry Pottinger (vide Parliamentary Papers, Lord Palmerston to Sir Henry Pottinger, 1st May, 1841). If proper and justifiable then for all goods, how much more proper and justifiable now in the case of opium, a special commodity, and the subject of a special international compact.
4. As regards the rule proposed in section 5, viz., that, from Indian and British ports between India and China, none but British, or Treaty Power vessels which accept the Additional Article, shall convey opium to China, such a rule is defensible :-
(1.) Opium is a British product;
(2.) Opium is the subject of a special compact between England and China; (3) Formerly only British vessels conveyed opium to China, and to-day the only other vessels which get opium freights are the French mail-steamers, for vessels of any flag which does not accept the Additional Article to now take opium freights would simply mean an attempt to either frustrate the objects of the Additional Article or commence a new and unfair competition with British vessels and dealers otherwise heavily handicapped by the provisions of that Article ;
(4.) Such a rule will hurt no existing interest; will defend British vessels and traders against the unfair competition of outsiders and new-comers; is quite within the power of the British Government to enact and enforce; and is an absolutely necessary assistance or co-operation which China looks for from England in order to the proper working of the international compact contained in the Opium Additional Article.
October 31, 1885.
R. H.
Inclosure 2 in No. 51.
(Extract.)
Lord Palmerston to Sir H. Pottinger.
Foreign Office, May 31, 1841. IT is understood that the Chinese Government has consented to cede the Island of Hong Kong to Great Britain; and that island is supposed to be in many respects well qualified to become a commercial station of some importance for our trade with China.
**
*
*
Her Majesty's Government have reason to suppose that Hong Kong has been ceded with the condition that British and other foreign merchandize imported into Hong Kong should there pay to Chinese Custom-house officers the usual and established import duties which such goods would pay on being imported into China, and that such duties having been so paid, and the merchandize being duly stamped by the Chinese Custom- house officers at Hong Kong, there should be full liberty to all persons to carry such merchandize away to any port in China without its being liable to any further payment in such ports or elsewhere on account of import duty.
Such an arrangement would no doubt be anomalous as far as it involved the presence of Chinese Custom-house officers, and the collection of Chinese customs duties, in a possession of the British Crown; and, moreover, there might be some difficulty in practically carrying into execution that part of the arrangement which would exempt such goods from any subsequent payment in a Chinese port. But there are similar instances in Europe of duties collected in the territory of one Power by the agents of another Power. The transit duties which shipping and goods going up the Scheldt are liable to pay to the Dutch Government are collected, not at Flushing, but at Antwerp by a Dutch agent stationed in that Belgian town; the duties which the Hanoverian Government levies upon shipping and goods passing by the fort of Stade in their way up the Elbe are levied, not at Stade or Brunhausen, but by a Hanoverian agent in the city of Hamburgh; and a plan has for some time past been under discussion between Denmark and other Powers by which, if it were adopted, the tolls which Denmark is entitled to levy upon ships and merchandize passing the Sound would be levied, not at Elsinore, but in the several Prussian, Russian, and other ports in the Baltic, by Danish agents stationed at those ports for such purpose.
It is possible that British commerce might be much encouraged if goods which had once been landed at Hong Kong could be carried from thence to any Chinese ports without being liable for any further payment on account of duty; and the Chinese Custom-house officers in Hong Kong would be less likely than the Chinese authorities at other ports to attempt to levy exorbitant and illegal duties.
[256]
K
10
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.