(July 15, 1899.]
· CIHNA OVERLAND TRADE REPORT.
asked. “Why do you catch the dog?" The police constable replied: "No license." She then said,
Do not catch the dog. I will tell the master to get a licence.” The police constable said. “Go to the Station and get a license." Major Morris then came with another gentleman and a lady. Mujor Morris called to me in Hindustani and asked who was the man with the bombon. I replied, “He is a Chinese constable who is here to catch dogs." He asked me who had sent him there and I said the Inspector. The lady with Major orris also asked me, "Will he catch my dog ?" and I told her that if the dog had no license he would catch it. I told the lady to go to the Station and get a license. Major Morris then beckoned to the Chinese, and defendant took away the bamboo from the Chinese and threw it down the hill Defendant told him to go away. De- fendant then came to Hongkong.
By Captain Superintendent May-Perhaps defendant spoke to the Chinese in English; I did not understand.
By Major Long-I understand very little English. I cannot repeat anything of what I heard. Defendant did not speak to me. I do not know to whom the dogs belonged. I did not think they belonged to the poople in the chair.
Major Long having addressed the court. The Chinese Constable was recalled, and he said—I did not tell defendant I was a police constable. I wished to tell him I was a police constable, but he would not listen to me. I had a whistle and a truncheon under my clothes.
The case was dismissed.
|
51
Tls. 100,000. Practically no notice was given | travene the Treaty rights of foreigners, so that and it was impossible to find other employment this Chamber are strongly of opinion that it is for the steamers. After strong protests had a matter that calls for strict investigation, and been made by the British Consul and appeals | trust therefore that the Consular Body will made to Peking, five of the steamers have been emphatically object to the abuses brought about allowed to load after lying idle in port for a by this action on the part of the native officials. week, but permission has been refused for any The Committee address you on this question more, notwithstanding the fact that they had on the broad grounds that the check to trade been fixed weeks before the prohibition was that has been occasioned by the action of the notified.
Chinese authorities constitutes a legitimate matter for protest, and furthermore they are decidedly of opinion that if for economic reasons it was necessary to peremptorily prohibit the shipment of grain, the native authorities should be prepared to compensate those who, like Messrs. Butterfield & Swire, suffered loss through their action.—I have the honour to be, sir, your obedient servant,
WD. LITTLE, Chairman. J. M. T. Valdez, Esq., Consul-General for Port-
ngal and Senior Consul.
The whole question is one which calls for the close attention of your Chamber and we hope that you will take up the matter and protest most strongly against the arbitrary interference with legitimate trade which the above facts disclose. Such interference, and withdrawal of Treaty rights should not be tolerated without | paramount necessity exists, and in no case should such arbitrary powers be exercised without rea- sonable notice and prior approval of Treaty Powers. Moreover, if the public emergency be such that it be thought absolutely necessary to forbid the export of Grain then all interests which suffer from such prohibition should be compensated, at all events to the extent of their commitments at the time the prohibition is published. This is in accordance with the prae- tice in all civilised countries, We do not he- sitate to state that these arbitrary powers are frequently made use of by unscrupulous officials for purposes of speculation and personal benefit and not from any public necessity. In the present instance there was nothing in the state of the Rice market to justify such an inter- ference with trade.
There is another phase of the matter to which Some argument took place between Captain we think attention should be given, and that Superintendent May and Major Long. The is the issue of what are known as Huchaos. latter asked His Worship if he could not take These are documents issued by the Taotai which out a summons for malicions prosecution, and permit of the export of rice to certain ports duty His Worship referred him to the Chief Clerk. free, The power to issue such permits gives The Captain Superintendent asked His Wor-rise to many abuses, as they are sold by the ship to make an order for the recovery of the dogcatching pole which Major Long took from the constable and threw away, as the police were now one short, but the application was refused.
officials to the highest bidders and are a source of considerable profit to the officials concerned, who are therefore led to impose restrictions on the export to other ports; they are also enabled, through having the control of the issue, to Captain Superintendent May applied for a manipalate the market to their own advantage. re-hearing on Thursday morning is Wor-Huchaos are frequently issued when export ship said he would consider the application. through the ordinary channels is prohibited and this, as you will readily perceive, can be made use of by unscrupulous officials to enable them to derive a large profit from the issue. The remedy for this state of things lies in the direc- tion of placing the whole control of the export under the I.M. Customs; on occasions when through scarcity or high prices, it be thought desirable to permit duty free export, the Cas- toms should allow anyone to pass rice during a given time so that no one may be unduly fav- oured.
ABBITRARY PROHIBITION OF THE SHIPMENT OF GRAIN AF
CHINESE PRTS.
The following correspondence is published with the last minutes of the Committee of the Shanghai General Chamber of Commerce --
Shanghai. 9th June 1899.
Sir. We beg to bring to your notice a mat- ter seriously affecting the interests of the shipping trade and which involves a breach of Treaty on the part of the Chinese Authorities. The matter we refer to is the prohibition of the export of rice and other grain from Chinese ports.
Trusting to receive the powerful support of your Chamber. We are, sir, your obedient
servants,
H.M.F.M.'s Consulate-General,
Shanghai, 3rd July, 1899. Sir.-At their meeting of 27th of June last, my Colleagues desired me to acknowledge the reseipt of your letter dated 19th of June, re prohibition of export of rice by the Chinese authorities, and to state in reply.
That they fully endorse your and Messrs. Butterfield and Swire's protest against the prohibition edicted by the Chinese local autho rities, and that the said protest will accordingly be forwarded by me to the Doyen of the Diplo matic Body at Peking. I have the honour to be, sir, your obedient servant,
Joaquim Maria Travassos Valdez,
Consul-General for Portugal
and Senior Consul. To W. D. Little, Esq., Chairman of the Shang-
hai General Chamber of Commerce.
i
RUSSO-SIAMESE: TREATY,
The Imperial Government of Russia and the Royal Government of Siam, desiring to facilitate relations between the two countries, have mutu- ally agreed upon the conclusion of a treaty of friendship and commerce, as follows:
That in everything relating to jurisdiction, commerce, and navigation, Russian subjects in Siamese territory and Siamese subjects in Rus sian territory will enjoy henceforth until the expiration of the present arrangement, all rights and privileges accorded to subjects of other nations in Russia or in Siam, by the treaties that may be made in future.
This arrangement will apply to both parties from the day of signature and up to the expira- tion of six months from the day on which one of the High contracting parties shall denounce it.
The present declaration, having been made in the Russian, Siamese, and French languages, and the three versions having the same bearing and the same meaning, the French text shall be Gen-official and shall be law in all its aspects.
BUTTERFIELD & SWIRE, Agents, China Nav. Co., Ld. W. D. Little, Esq., Chairman, Shanghai
eral Chamber of Commerce.
Sir,
Shanghai General Chamber of Commerce,
Shanghai, 19th June, 1899.
In faith of which the undersigned, -duly authorised to this effect, have arranged the present declaration and signed and sealed it with the goals of their respective Governments.
Dous at Bangkok, the 1st June, 1899, of the Russian Calender, equivalent to the 23rd of June of the year 118 of the Siamese Era.
The export of grains by foreign merchants between any of the open ports is permitted by the Treaty under certain conditions; these conditions being the giving of a Bond to return within 6 months to the Customs at port of shipment the certificate issued by him, with an acknowledgment from the Customs at port of destination of the due receipt of the grain at that port. Under these conditions the carriage of rice and other grain between open ports has been carried on for many years and this busi- ness constitutes a large and most important part of the trade which gives employment to the large fleet of river and coast steamers trad. ing here. In late years it has become the practice for the Chinese Authorities to pro- hibit the export, sometimes entirely and to all ports, and on other occasions the export is per- mitted to some ports while forbidden to others. We cannot better illustrate what takes place than by narrating what has happened lately. On the morning of the 27th May we received a telegram from our Agent at Wuhu dated 6 p.m the previons evening, informing ns "Grain export stopped after to-morrow. This was the first intimation we had that this important branch of the carrying trade was to be stopped and at the time we had 13 steamers, 5 of which were leaving in the next two or three days, to Chinese for the shipment of rice show that it ship. Her speed trials have proved her to be
have now the honour to enclose you copy of a letter that has been addressed to this Chamber by Messrs. Butterfield and Swire, calling attention to certain arbitrary proceed- inge on the part of the Chinese Authorities at Wahu in preventing, with practically no notice,
The Japanese belted cruiser Tokiwa, Captain the shipment of grain from that port in Dewa, arrived at Singapore on the 2nd July contravention of Treaty rights, and whereby from England on her way to Japan. She is a the firm in questiou is put to serious loss. screw steel vessel, 408 feet long by 67 feet As Messrs. Butterfield and Swire point out, beam, and displaces about 9,750 tons at her "such interference and withdrawal of Treaty mean draught of 24ft. 8in. The armament rights should not be tolerated without para-includes 48-inch quick-firing guns, mounted in mount necessity exists, and in no case should such arbitrary power be exercised without rea- sonable notice, and the prior approval of Treaty Powers."
under charter to load at Wuhu and Chinkiang, the amount of freight involved being about
With these remarks the Chamber entirely conour, and trust that yon and your Colleagues will firmly support the protest they make against such arbitrary action, especially as it is not shown that there is any necessity for such pro- hibition of the shipment of grain. In reference to this, the remaks made by Messrs. Butterfield and Swire as to the practice of issuing Huchaos
is one that is often made use of improperly by interested officials, and that it goes far to con-
pairs in 6 inch Harveyed steel turrets fore and aft, and 14 6-inch quick-firing guns, arranged 2 on each side forward and 2 on each side aft one over the other, in pairs-and 3 on each broadside, of which one is carried in a casemate on the main deck, and the other 2 in shields on the upper deck. There are also 12 12-pounders and 71-ponude que ring, and the end on fire, to which so much attention is now being paid, is exceedingly heavy Altogether about 2,100 tons of armour have been worked into the one of the fastest first-class cruisers in existence, She was to sail for Yokosuks on the 3rd.
quickfirers. The whole of
the
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.