CO129-325 - Public Offices & Others - 1904 — Page 482

CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案 All AI Reviewed

Extract from letter from Mr Pearson to Mr Martineau (Dated 25th May 1904)

(2)

Please give me your opinion on another point. France or any other Convention Country imports bounty-fed sugar from Argentina, this sugar pays the proper countervailing duty and is then refined and re-exported to England. Does the fact of the countervailing duty having been paid on it whitewash it and is England bound to accept it as French sugar?

I put the French case as a supposed instance, but the question has really been raised in Hong Kong.

French Indo-China prohibits not only all bounty-fed sugar but all sugar from non-Conventional countries (certain Chinese sugars excepted). Do you agree,

A. That raw Chinese sugar (which is not bounty-fed) refined in Hong Kong can claim admittance in Indo-China as Hong Kong sugar under Article V. I think myself (and Bergne agrees) that there is no doubt about this.

B. That if Hong Kong were to impose the proper countervailing duties on all bounty-fed sugar, i.e., such as the Commission declares to be bounty-fed, this would whitewash it and that Hong Kong could then claim to have all its sugar admitted into Indo-China as Hong Kong sugar at the lowest rate of duty?

I should be very grateful if you would return the enclosed and my letter with your answer. I am also writing to Pittar.

Edit History

2026-06-02 03:01:20 · NVIDIA / meta/llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct

Live

View comparison

AI Proofread

Extract from letter from Mr Pearson to Mr Martineau (Dated 25th May 1904) (2) Please give me your opinion on another point. France or any other Convention Country imports bounty-fed sugar from Argentina, this sugar pays the proper countervailing duty and is then refined and re-exported to England. Does the fact of the countervailing duty having been paid on it whitewash it and is England bound to accept it as French sugar? I put the French case as a supposed instance, but the question has really been raised in Hong Kong. French Indo-China prohibits not only all bounty-fed sugar but all sugar from non-Conventional countries (certain Chinese sugars excepted). Do you agree, A. That raw Chinese sugar (which is not bounty-fed) refined in Hong Kong can claim admittance in Indo-China as Hong Kong sugar under Article V. I think myself (and Bergne agrees) that there is no doubt about this. B. That if Hong Kong were to impose the proper countervailing duties on all bounty-fed sugar, i.e., such as the Commission declares to be bounty-fed, this would whitewash it and that Hong Kong could then claim to have all its sugar admitted into Indo-China as Hong Kong sugar at the lowest rate of duty? I should be very grateful if you would return the enclosed and my letter with your answer. I am also writing to Pittar.

Baseline (Original)

་་་་་་་་ ぐ 479 Extract from letter from Mr Pearson to Mr Martineau (Dated 25th May 1904) T X (2) X X Please give me your opinion on another point France or any other Convention Country imports bounty fed sugar from Argentina, this sugar pays the proper countervailing duty and is then refined and re-exported to England. Does the fact of the countervailing duty having been paid on it whitewash it and is England bound to accept it as French sugar? Iput the French case as a supposed instance, but the question has really been raised in Hong Kong. French Indo China prohibits not only all boun- ty fed sugar but all sugar from non Conventional countries (certain Chinese sugars excepted). Do you agree, A. That raw Chinese sugar (which is not bounty fed) refined in Hong Kong can clain admittance in Indo China as Hong Kong sugar under Article V. I think myself (and Bergne agrees) that there is no doubt about this. B. That if Hong Kong were to impose the proper countervailing duties on all bounty fed sugar, i.e.,such as the Commission declares to be bounty fed, this would whitewash it and that Hong Kong could then claim to have all its sugar admitted into Indo China as Hong Kong sugar at the lowest rate of duty? I should be very grateful if you would return the enclosed and my letter with your answer. I am also writing to Pittar. X X X - matin That ng mga

2026-06-02 03:01:20 · Baseline

View content

་་་་་་་་

ぐ

479

Extract from letter from Mr Pearson to Mr Martineau (Dated 25th May 1904)

(2)

Please give me your opinion on another point France or any other Convention Country imports bounty fed sugar from Argentina, this sugar pays the proper countervailing duty and is then refined and re-exported to England. Does the fact of the countervailing duty having been paid on it whitewash it and is England bound to accept it as French sugar?

Iput the French case as a supposed instance, but the question has really been raised in Hong Kong.

French Indo China prohibits not only all boun-

ty fed sugar but all sugar from non Conventional countries (certain Chinese sugars excepted). Do

you agree,

A. That raw Chinese sugar (which is not bounty fed) refined in Hong Kong can clain admittance in Indo China as Hong Kong sugar under Article V. I think myself (and Bergne agrees) that there is no doubt

about this.

B. That if Hong Kong were to impose the proper countervailing duties on all bounty fed sugar, i.e.,such as the Commission declares to be bounty fed, this would whitewash it and that Hong Kong could then claim to have all its sugar admitted into Indo China

as Hong Kong sugar at the lowest rate of duty?

I should be very grateful if you would return the enclosed and my letter with your answer. I am also writing to Pittar.

CO129-325 - Public Offices & Others - 1904 — Page 482

Edit History

Comments

Private Research Note