ENG-1952 — Page 236

HISTORY

Finally there was the important "law and order" argument. The British constitutional system demands. that executive action can be taken only in accordance with law, and in case of dispute, can be enforced only in a court of law. The weakness of the Superintendents of Trade was that they had little executive authority over the merchants, and no method of making that little effective. It was therefore argued that it would be to the advantage of both Britain and China that a British law court should be set up to control the British merchants. It could not of course be established on foreign soil, and therefore an island should be secured for this purpose.

The situation between 1834 and the outbreak of hostilities in 1839, which was already strained, was made worse by the opium trade. Opium smoking had become a Chinese habit, in spite of its being forbidden, and the import of opium from India increased enor- mously. The contraband trade in opium therefore flourished, with the connivance of the local Chinese officials. The British merchants tended to defend themselves by saying that if they did not import the drug, the merchants of other nations would, and by declaring it to be a purely commercial matter, subject to the usual economic laws of supply and demand which needed no interference or defence; the moral aspects being not their concern. The British Govern- ment adopted a very correct policy. The Chinese Government was entitled to pass any edicts it chose, and it was no part of the British Government's business to interfere, or to make Chinese laws effective. The Superintendents were told that they had no authority over the British merchants who, if they engaged in the opium trade, did so at their own risk. The British

191