159
to resort to and trade at the port of Hongkong, where they will receive full protection from the high officers of the British nation." This promise was needed for at the time China and Britain were in conflict over the opium questions.
The principle of a free port was set forth: "Neither will there be any charge upon imports and exports to the British Government.
In the light of the strained relations between the two nations, Charles Elliot threatened China with "an immediate embargo upon the port of Canton and all the large ports of the Empire if there be the least obstruction to the freedom of Hongkong."
Conditions had altered considerably from 1841. At that time, any Chinese trading in or with Hongkong would have been traitors to the Chinese Government.
Only because of China's humiliation on the field of battle was Hongkong ceded to Britain. Time and financial interests had blurred the national pride of the Chinese merchants in Hongkong.
The signers of the petition may also have been connected with the opium trade. Their names are not given in the published petition. Even the consul at Canton, when he sent a copy of the petition to the British Minister at Peking, did not know the names of the signatories.
The "blockade" had made it increasingly difficult for the opium smugglers to escape the surveillance of the Chinese armed cruisers. The smugglers equipped their own vessels with ever larger armaments that they might emerge victorious in a shoot-out with the cruisers.
The picture of the situation the merchants painted for Her Majesty was a dark one. The villains in the scene were the Chinese officials.
The petitioners informed the Queen that, “during the past five years, some of the mandarins in authority at Canton, actuated, as your petitioners believe, by avarice and jealousy, and presuming
159
to resort to and trade at the port of Hongkong, where they will receive full protection from the high officers of the British nation." This promise was needed for at the time China and Brit- ain were in conflict over the opium questions.
The principle of a free port was set forth: "Neither will there be any charge upon imports and exports to the British Government.
In the light of the strained relations between the two nations, Charles Elliot threatened China with "an immediate embargo upon the port of Canton and all the large ports of the Empire if there be the least obstruction to the freedom of Hongkong."
Conditions had altered considerably from 1841. At that time, any Chinese trading in or with Hongkong would have been traitors to the Chinese Government.
Only because of China's humiliation on the field of battle was Hongkong ceded to Britain. Time and financial interests had blurred the national pride of the Chinese merchants in Hongkong.
The signers of the petition may also have been connected with the opium trade. Their names are not given in the published peti- tion. Even the consul at Canton, when he sent a copy of the peti- tion to the British Minister at Peking, did not know the names of the signatories.
The "blockade" had made it increasingly difficult for the opium smugglers to escape the surveillance of the Chinese armed cruisers. The smugglers equipped their own vessels with ever larg- er armaments that they might emerge victorious in a shoot-out with the cruisers.
The picture of the situation the merchants painted for Her Maj- esty was a dark one. The villains in the scene were the Chinese officials.
The petitioners informed the Queen that, “during the past five years, some of the mandarins in authority at Canton, actuated, as your petitioners believe, by avarice and jealousy, and presuming
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.