CO129-266 - Governor Sir Robinson - 1895 [1-3] — Page 651

f

( 10 )

Mr. ALABASTER made some suggestions as to the means of remedying the evil complained of, but these require careful consideration. His report has been referred to Sir J. WALSHAM for his observations and opinion.

I am, in the meanwhile, to assure you that the matter will not be lost sight of-I am, &c.,

T. H. SANDERSON.

E. MACKINTOS6, Esq.,

Chairman, HONGKONG GENERAL CHAMBER OF COMMERCE.

HONGKONG GENERAL CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, HONGKONG, 6th April, 1892.

MY LORD, The Committee of this Chamber has the honour to acknow- ledge the receipt of the three letters dated 13th and 29th January and 6th February which your Lordship caused to be written, having reference to the action of the Hoppo of Canton in levying lower duties on cargo carried by Chinese junks than on similar cargo shipped by vessels of other nationalities.

The Committee desires to convey to your Lordship its best thanks for the prompt consideration which this matter has received at your Lordship's hands, and for the information contained in your despatch of 6th February as to the steps which were being taken by Her Majesty's Minister at Peking to secure a favourable decision on the part of the Tsung-li Yamen.

In accordance with your Lordship's request, the last letter dated 6th February will be treated as confidential.

It is observed--"Sir JoHN WALSHAM points out that there are in China two distinct Customs services: the Maritime Customs consisting entirely of Foreigners under the direction of Sir ROBERT HART, which deals at the open ports with foreign vessels and their cargoes under the provisions of the treaties existing between China and foreign countries and the tariffs attached to such treaties, the other, which is purely administered by the natives and deals exclusively with Chinese vessels and cargoes under a native tariff drawn up independently of the treaties-and that he farther expresses a doubt whether the differential treatment of native junks by the Hoppo of Canton can be objected to as a violation of Article 3 of the commercial treaty

(11)

between China and the United States of 1880; inasmuch as neither that treaty, nor any other, takes cognizance of any other tariff than the treaty tariffs."

In reply, my Committee submit that though the United States have wever themselves claimed the full execution of the third article of the treaty of 1880, that fact does not in any way invalidate its operativeness when appealed to, either by that country or any other under the favoured nation clause. The dual nature of the Customs services exercised in China, at treaty ports, is thoroughly recognized by my Committee, but, in their judgment, where contact between the native Customs and the Imperial Maritime Customs occurs, cargo purely Chinese (ie., intended to be dealt with solely between natives and in transit to non-treaty ports) is, and should be, controlled by the Chinese native customs, but all other cargo, native or foreign, is under the direction of the Imperial Maritime Customs, whose tariff is regulated by treaty, Otherwise it seems to my Committee that all advantages of treaty tariff can be abrogated by the simple action of the Chinese Government, at will, electing to favour its nationals by levying duties on their produce under a favourable tariff; and does not the fact that such a favoured tariff exists, to benefit native traders only to the detriment of foreign, suggest a breach of the favoured nation clause? The latter provides that all treaty rights shall be equal to all, even, it may be inferred, against China's own subjects when the dual Customs control comes into question. So that it is imperative and equitable that in cases of contact, in treaty ports, between the two Customs services, the treaty tariff shall prevail and be applicable to foreigners and natives alike, when the trade is not solely and purely Chinese. In the latter case, purely Chinese trade, the Chamber recognises that China is a law unto itself and can impose any duties it pleases,

My Committee is very glad to learn that your Lordship is satisfied that Sir JOHN WALSHAM has given and is continuing to give the matter his careful attention, but I am requested to state that no relief is yet apparent notwithstanding the fact that a change of Hoppo was effected in December last. I have, &c.,

To the MARQUESS OF SALISBURY, K.G.,

E. MACKINTOSH, Chairman.

Her Majesty's Frincipal Secretary of State

for Foreign Affairs, §c., §c., $o., Foreign Office, London.

647