198
were named the "South-west militarists".
Concerning how these governments sustained themselves, I have selected four possibilities for discussion. They are taxation and provincial remittances, customs surplus, foreign loans, and internal loans.
1) Concerning provincial remittance and taxation, the government in Beijing enjoyed a limited amount from those provinces it managed to control. The southern government, however, failed to get any taxation from other provinces.
2) About customs surplus, collected by foreign authorities to guarantee payment of the Boxer indemnity, this was returned only to the Beijing government, the only legitimate government recognized by the foreigners. In the South, when Sun Yat-sen threatened to seize the customs in Guangdong, Canton was surrounded by British and American gunboats.
3) Foreign loans were monopolized by a "Financial Consortium", formed by major western banks aimed at avoiding mutual competition. As the consortium recognized only the Beijing government, all foreign loans to China were monopolized by Beijing. This picture, however, was upset by the outbreak of the First World War in 1914. Money was then moved away from the Far East to Europe again. As a consequence, by about 1915, the Chinese governments, in Canton and in Beijing, were increasingly dependent on domestic loans. The Chinese merchants were a major source for these domestic loans.
4) Domestic loans are where the role of Chinese merchants came into play. Generally, three important groups of financiers can be identified. They centred around Tianjin, Shanghai, and Canton-Hong Kong. One common feature of these regions was the foreign presence, which secured a base for final retreat. Understandably, many Chinese companies were registered in the foreign concessions even though they operated outside them.
Political Investment in the Hong Kong - Canton Region
Against this background, I will focus the second part of my article
198
were named the "South-west militarists".
Concerning how these governments sustained themselves, I have selected four possibilities for discussion. They are taxation and provincial remittances, customs surplus, foreign loans, and internal loans.
1) Concerning provincial remittance and taxation, the government in Beijing enjoyed a limited amount from those provinces it managed to control The southern government however, it failed to get any taxation from other provinces.
2) About customs surplus, collected by foreign authorities to guarantee payment of the Boxer indemnity, this was returned only to the Beijing government, the only legitimate government recognized by the foreigners. In the South, when Sun Yat- sea threatened to seize the customs in Guangdong, Canton was surrounded by British and American gunboats.
3) Foreign loans were monopolized by a "Financial Consortium", formed by major western banks aimed at avoiding mutual competition. As the consortium recognized only the Beijing government, all foreign loans to China were monopolized by Beijing. This picture, however, was upset by the outbreak of the First World War in 1914. Money was then moved away from the Far East to Europe again. As a consequence, by about 1915, the Chinese governments, in Canton and in Beijing, were increasingly dependent on domestic loans. The Chinese merchants were a major source for these domestic loans.
4) Domestic loans are where the role of Chinese merchants came into play. Generally, three important groups of financiers can be identified. They centred around Tianjin, Shanghai and Canton-Hong Kong. One common feature of these regions was the foreign presence, which secured a base for final retreat. Understandably, many, Chinese companies were registered in the foreign concessions even though they operated outside them.
Political Investment in the Hong Kong - Canton Region
Against this background, I will focus the second part of my
article
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.