6
In due course we presented a claim through His Britannic Majesty's Consul- General in Canton. It consisted of our actual out-of-pocket expenses, amounting to some 6,000 dollars, and an indemnity for the outrage in the form of a claim for 150,000 dollars consequential damages.
We are now in receipt of a reply from His Britannic Majesty's Consul-General in Canton, in which he informs us that our claim for consequential damages cannot be supported by the British Government. He further informs us that he is instructed to convey to us the opinion of His Majesty's Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs that a claim for our direct losses and for those of passengers would, however, in his view, be reasonable."
At a meeting of the joint owners' representatives, convened to consider the above, it was unanimously decided to decline to accept as final the above decision as regards the owners' claim, and to appeal to you to assist them in bringing pressure to bear on the British Government to reconsider their decision.
As regards the claims of the captain, officers, and passengers, it was decided to render their claims at once to His Britannic Majesty's Consul at Canton, with a request that they be considered and paid as soon as possible in order to avoid further loss and hardship to the unfortunate people who suffered from the outrage.
With regard to own own claim, it was decided not to separate our actual losses from that of the claim for consequential damage on the ground that, were we to accept the former, it would probably be considered sufficient reason by the British Government to treat the incident as closed, and to ignore our further representations for reconsideration of our claim for consequential damages.
Our claim for consequential damages was not made without careful consideration. It was, first of all, based upon the opinion of the owners that great injury had been done to a trade which they had pioneered at great loss, and which had just begun to show signs of giving some return. This has been borne out by our experience since the outrage in several ways, rendering our position seriously injured and more difficult, and from the following causes :—
1. The difficulty of now retaining masters, officers, and crew on the line. Their dislike to the employment because of the risks attendant thereon. The owners' con- sequent expense of meeting such a situation. Captain Joslin, who was in command of the Sainam" at the time of the piracy, has since bad to be sent home suffering from illness pointing to a breakdown of his nervous system.
2. The great decrease in foreign passenger traffic-only those who are forced by circumstances to travel do so now; tourists from oversea and Hong Kong residents avoid the West River.
3. The general arrest of the trade. It was a gradually increasing quantity up to the time of the piracy, since then it has become stationary-this can be proved by figures. When the prosperity of a trade which is only in its infancy and expanding is suddenly interrupted, and we can point to the immediate cause, surely we have good reason for claiming reparation.
4. The insecurity of life and property ou the West River which causes us to maintain a staff of watchmen on the steamers, an expense incurred solely because the Chinese Government, through maladministration, are unable to control their people.
5. The serious handicap to what should be a flourishing and lucrative trade, restricted at every point by the gross persistent indifference and carelessness of the Chinese Government, acting in violation of all Treaty obligations, causing serious loss to those who have spent large sums of money in trying to develop the trade relying on the good faith of both British and Chinese Governments.
The British Government may be under the impression that we are taking advantage of the situation to force an unreasonable claim on the Chinese Government, but this is not so. We have based our claim on what we consider moderate lines, taking into account the nature of the crime. There is no doubt that the Chinese Government, by their scandalously lax administration, are primarily responsible for the "Sainam" and all other outrages; and we believe, and not only believe but know from long experience, that it is only through the pockets of the Chinese Government one can ever hope to make them realize their responsibilities. As, however, there may be a question as to our bona fides in the matter, we beg to state most emphatically that it is the principle of the safety of property flying the British flag we are fighting for, and not for the amount of the claim. We are willing to forgo our right to consequential damages if the British Government will agree to insist on obtaining an indemnity from the Chinese Govern- ment, such amount to be entirely at the discretion of the British Government, whether
7
to allot a part to us or devote the whole to some charitable object in Hong Kong. The main point is that, without some adequate punishment in the shape of a fine payable by the Chinese Government for their share in the insult to the British flag, British enter- prise in this part of the world will receive a check which will in all likelihood lead to graver consequences in the future.
We have, &c.
(Signed) JARDINE, MATHESON, AND Co., General Managers, Indo-China Steam Navigation
Company (Limited).
BUTTERFIELD AND SWIRE, Agents, China
Navigation Company (Limited),
The Hong Kong, Canton, and Maçao Steamboat
Company (Limited),
W. CLARKE, Acting Secretary.
◊
373
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.