china — Page 26

& c. & c. & c.
 ( 33 )
Enclosure 6, in No. 20. Encl. 6 in No. 20 ,
(No. 188.) Colonial Secretary's Ofice, Victoria, Hongkong,
SIR , March 20, 1856.
On Dr. Harland's certificate, his Excellency sanctions your leave of absence to
Macao for 10 days, as applied for by you in your letter, No. 19, of this date.
Before your departure ,however, I shall be obliged by your giving me further particulars
about the ship “ Levant," in addition to those furnished in your letter, No. 17, of 18th
instant
It is necessary to know what steps you took on iearning that the “ Levant ” bad no
regular papers ; at what date you ascertained that she had Chinese passengers on board ;
whether inquiry (and of what nature, and when ) was made by you into the peculiar
position of this ship ; and if she complied with all the harbour regulations previously to
her leaving the harbour and dropping down to Green Island, on the 15th, as reported by
you on the 18th .
It is of great importance that you supply, without delay, a detailed account of the
movements and transactions of this ship while under your authority in this harbour, and
the measures adopted by you, from time to time, withreference to her.
I have, &c.
( Signed ) W. T. MERCER ,
Captain Watkins, R.N., Colonial Secretary
Harbour Master.


Enclosure 7 in No. 20 . Encl. 7 in No. 20.
(No. 7.) Emigration Office, Hongkong,
SIR, March 21 , 1856 .
I HAVE the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter, No. 185 , of 19th
instant, and, from inquiries made on board the " Levant ” and elsewhere, am enabled to
report, for the information of his Excellency the Governor, as follows:
The “ Levant," a ship of 382 tons, sailed under the flag of the United States of America,
and was recently sold to James McCormick , an American citizen, naturalized , under the
Government of the Sandwich Islands, who chartered her to a Chinese named Chong Ahoy,
for the conveyance of emigrants to Melbourne. I have seen the bill of sale and a com
munication from Mr. Jardine, the Hawaian Consul, to the effect that a sailing letter
will be granted as soon as the usual documents are presented for verification .
It was arranged that she should prepare for sea in this harbour, get a clearance for
Macao, take herpassengers on board in the vicinity of this city, beyond the limits of the
port, then proceed for emigration papers to Macao, and thence to Melbourne. Through a
mistake of the mate , she sailed beyond these limits and took on board her passengers
before she had obtained a port .clearance from the harbour master, and this document
being, in consequence, refused, she returned to the harbour with her passengers on board.
It is stated that a portion of these were, through inadvertance, embarked within the
limits of the port ; but of this I have not yet been able to obtain any certain information .
No notice was given to the emigration officer that the ship wasfitting for passengers.
Mr. McCormick informs me that he despatched the Hawaian ship “ Emma ” from this
place under similar circumstances,and intends to pursue the same course with the ship
ás General Blanco ,” sailing under the same flag, being assured by his legal adviser that by
so doing he does not infringe the provisions of the Chinese Passengers'Act of 1855.
Under these circumstances, before attempting to move his Excellency the Rear-Admiral
to so serious a measure as the seizure of the vessel, I beg for the opinion of the legal
adviser to the Government whether, on the facts stated, this ship has become liable to
forfeiture, under the 8th section of the Chinese Passengers' Act.
I have, & c.
The Hon. W. T. Mercer, Esquire, (Signed) C. B. HILLIER,
& c. & c. &c. Emigration Officer.
( Copy .)
I see nothing in the circumstances above detailed to warrant a delay. No time should
be lost in seizing the vessel for the purpose of forfeiture, under the Chinese Passengers
Act. The harbour regulations ordinance, which has been violated, as appears by Captain
Watkins' letter, ought also to be enforced. I cannot advise the postponement of process
until to -morrow , as it is doubtful how far it can be legally executed on a Sunday. Easter
Monday, again , is a close holiday. If the vessel proceeds to sea in the meantime, it will
be hard to clear the Executive of the laches which will have enabled her to do so.
( Signed ) T. CHISHOLM ANSTEY.
Attorney -General's Office, March 22, 1856.
The emigration officer must act on the Attorney -General's opinion.
By order,
( Signed ) W. T. MERCER ,
Colonial Secretary.

E
(250. )
 ( 34 )
Encl. 8 in No. 20. (No. 22.) Enclosure 8 in No. 20 .
SIR , Victoria, Hongkong, March 21 , 1856.
In reference to your letter of the 20th instant, No. 188, I have the honour to
report ,
1st. That I was not aware, nor had I any suspicion, that the “ Levant ” had no regular
papers : some time after the vessel's arrival from Whampoa the crew were discharged,
and ,when the master came to enter a fresh crew , he brought the ship’s register to the
office, merely that the tonnage might be taken from it and inserted in the new articles ;
being under a foreign flag, with a Consul at the port, he is the person in whose custody
the papers ought to be placed, and who would judge as to whether they were correct and
regular or not; the articles were brought to the shipping office at the request of
Mr. Jardine, simply for the convenience of entering the men there at once, until the crew
was completed, instead of giving the men the trouble of going to East Point.
2nd. The date I first ascertained that the “ Levant ” had Chinese passengers on board
was Sunday last, the 16th instant, communicated by the note of Mr. Murrow enclosed in
yours of that date.
3rd . On Monday, the 17th instant, I sent to ascertain the position of the “ Levant,"
what Chinese passengers she had on board, and the reason for her moving down , but was
unable to remain at office, and for hours totally unequal to any effort or exertion from
il severe attack of diarrhea and fever ; the “ Levant was then within the limits of the
harbour, and had a number of Chinese on board .
4th. Before the “ Levant ” dropped down to Green Island on the 5th instant, she had
complied with all the regulations of the port as far as I have any means of judging.
5th . During the night of the 18th instant, the “ Levant " left the harbour and returned
again on the 19th , as reported in my letter of that date : after office hours on that day,
application was made to the acting chief clerk for a clearance, and refused on the ground
of her not having the emigration officer's certificate : on the following day the application
:

was renewed for a clearance for Macao, and again refused ; the circumstance being re
ported to you, as I understand, by the acting chief clerk.
I have, & c.
( Signed ) THOS. V. WATKINS,
Hon. W. T. Mercer, Esquire, Harbour Master.
Colonial Secretary.



Encl. 9 in No. 20. Enclosure 9 in No. 20.
(No. 190.) Government Offices, Victoria, Hongkong,
SIR , March 22, 1856.
In acknowledying your Excellency's reply of the 20th to mine of the 19th instant,
I beg to inform your Excellency that in my opinion, confirmed by that of the Honourable
the Attorney -General, there is no authority here to whom I could, under the Chinese
Passengers' Act, and the circumstances of this case , delegate authority to seize or detain
the ship “ Levant," until at least after an appeal for this service to your Excellency ,
That appeal I have now the honour to make, and I am informed that the ship in
question is expected to leave the harbour instantly.
I have, &c.
(Signed ) JOHN BOWRING ,
His Excellency Rear -Admiral Sir James Stirling, Governor, &c.
&c. &c. &c.




Encl. 10 in No. 20. (No. 8.) Enclosure 10 in No. 20.
SIR “ Winchester,” at Hongkong, March 22, 1856.
I HAVE the honour to inform you that in compliance with the requisition for
assistance contained in your despatch of the 19th instant, and still further urged in your
>
communication of to -day, I have caused the Hawaian ship “ Levant ” to be seized and
detained this evening, and for further security removed to an anchorage near this ship.
Having taken these steps solely with a view of giving effect to your Excellency's
application for aid, and having no intention on my own part to proceed against the vessel
seized, and it being necessary that the officer and seamen of the “ Winchester,” at present
in custody of the "“ Levant,” should return to the “ Winchester ” as speedily as possible,
I request you will give directions for such proceedings to be taken as you may see fit
to adopt, in order that the naval department may be relieved of further charge.
I have, & c.
(Signed ) JAMES STIRLING ,
Governor Sir John Bowring, Rear- Admiral and Commander-in-Chief.
&c. & c.
 ( 35 )
Enclosure 11 in No. 20. Encl. 11 in No. 20.

(No. 8.) Emigration Office, Victoria, Hongkong,
SIR , March 22, 1856.
I HAVE the honour to report for the information of his Excellency the Governor
that, immediately on the receipt of the Attorney -Generals opinion covering the facts
detailed in my letter, No. 7, of 21st March, I waited on his Excellency the Rear-Admiral,
placed these documents in his hand, and said that I had been instructed by his Excellency
the Governor to ascertain the circumstances attending the departure of the “ Levant,” and
to request that the law might be enforced against her in conformity with the 10th section
of the Chinese Passengers' Act, 1855. That these circumstances were as stated in my
letter, with the difference that, after further enquiry, I had no longer a doubt that the
vessel had embarked a considerable portion of her passengers within the limits of the
port, and had sailed beyond the limits with these on board . I added that, although the
Act conferred on me no power to seize, I was quite ready to point out the vessel, and to
accompany for this purpose any force that might be sent in execution of the law ; and,
lastly , I suggested the probability that, unless the measures taken were of a very prompt
character, endeavours would be made to withdraw the ship from British jurisdiction.
To all which, after a conversation of some length, his Excellency finally replied that he
was willing to enforce the law if the Colonial Government would assure him that they
had no officer of their own competent to this service ; that he had already written to his
Excellency the Governor to this effect, and now awaited aa reply.
Soliciting, therefore, the further instructions of his Excellency the Governor,
I have, & c.
The Right Hon . W. T. Mercer, Esq., (Signed) C. B. HILLIER,
Colonial Secretary. Emigration Officer.

Enclosure 12 in No. 20. Encl. 12 in No. 20.

(No. 192. ) Government Offices, Victoria, Hongkong,
SIR , March 24, 1856.
I HAVE the honour to acknowledge the receipt, on Saturday evening, of your
Excellency's letter, informing me of the seizure and detention of the ship “ Levant," in
compliance with my requisition for assistance from the naval authorities.
In furtherance of your desire that the naval force in charge of this vessel be relieved
without unnecessary delay, I have consulted the Honourable the Attorney -General, who
advises that the naval officer making the seizure apply to Mr. Gaskell, Queen's Proctor,
under sections 10 and 11 of the Chinese Passengers' Act.
The Proctor will thereon apply to the Marshal of the Vice-Admiralty Court to take
charge of the ship, and your Excellency will not be troubled with the further custody
of her.
The Attorney-General shall be instructed to look after the subsequent proceedings, and
the Colonial Secretary has communicated with Mr. Gaskell.
I am , & c.
Rear -Admiral Sir James Stirling, (Signed ) JOHN BOWRING,
&c. &c. & c. Governor, & c.

Enclosure 13 in No. 20. Encl. 13 in No. 20.

(No. 193.) Colonial Secretary's Office, Victoria , Hongkong,
SIR March 24, 1856.
The ship “ Levant” has been seized, at the request of his Excellency the Governor,
by the naval authorities for breach of the Chinese Passengers' Act, 1855.
His Excellency the Rear- Admiral is anxious to be relieved from the charge of her as
soon as possible, and I am instructed to desire that you will place yourself, as Queen's
Proctor, in communication with the Honourable the Attorney -General, and take, without
delay, the necessary steps for bringing the case into the Vice-Admiralty Court, and placing
the vessel in custody of the Marshal .
The Admiral is anxious that the depositions be taken to -day.
I have, &c.
William Gaskell, Esq ., (Signed) W. T. MERCER ,
Queen's Proctor. Colonial Secretary .

Enclosure 14 in No. 20. Encl. 14 in No. 20.
(No. 195.) Colonial Secretary's Office, Victoria, Hongkong,
SIR . March 24, 1856.
WITH reference to your letter No. 22, in reply to mine, No. 188, I have the honor
to make the following observations :
You say that the master of the “ Levant” brought the ship's register to your office.
But it was at your office that I learnt that the ship had no register, and from subsequent
inquiry I am led to think still that she has none.
( 250.) E 2
 ( 36 )
Again, you say that the ship was under a foreign flag, with a consul at this port. I
must point out that this Government is not aware of any Hawaian Consul at thisport, so
that, even admitting the “ Levant’s” right, which is more than doubted , to fly the
Hawaian flag, it is in your office that her papers would be properly deposited.
And , again, you state that the “ Levant,” before dropping down to Green Island, had
complied with port regulationsas far as you had the means of judging. As the harbour
master is fully furnished with these means, it is presumed that the blue-peter was hoisted
as required by section 9 of the Harbour Ordinance ; but it is to be regretted that you did
not ascertain the circumstances under which the “ Levant was leaving, and make these
known at once to the emigration officer or myself.
As the matter stands, a flagrant breach of the Chinese Passengers' Act has been, to all
appearance, deliberately committed or planned in this harbour, and no notice has been
taken of it by the proper authorities.
However, the vessel is now seized, and will be brought into the Vice -Admiralty Court
for adjudication, so it is only necessary for me to call your attention to the point I have
first above mentioned, and request to know if a register was at any time produced to you
by the master of the “ Levant."
I have, & c.
Captain Watkins, R.N. , ( Signed ) W. T. MERCER,
Harbour Master. Colonial Secretary.


Encl. 15 in No. 20. Enclosure 15 in No, 20.
(No. 198. ) Colonial Secretary's Office, Victoria, Hongkong,
SIR, March 25, 1856 .
I have to request that you will forward to me, under sealed cover, the ship's
articles of the “ Levant," of which I verbally directed you to retain possession.
I should wish these by llam. to-morrow at latest.
I have, & c.
H. Gunthorpe, Esq. (Signed) W. T. MERCER ,
Harbour Master's Office. Colonial Secretary.




Encl. 16 in No. 20 . Enclosure 16 in No. 20 .
(No. 199.) Colonial Secretary's Office, Victoria, Hongkong,
SIR , March 25 , 1856 .
In reply to your letter, No. 8 , of 22d instant, this day received, I have the honor
to inform you that steps have been already taken to place the ship “ Levant” in the Vice
Admiralty Court.
Should further instructions to you be necessary , you will either hear from the Queen's
Proctor, or I shall have the honor of again communicating with you.
I have, & c.
The Hon. C. B. Hillier, Esq ., (Signed) W. T. MERCER,
Emigration Officer. Colonial Secretary.


Encl . 17 in No. 20. Enclosure 17 in No. 20.
Harbour Master's Office, Victoria, Hongkong,
SIR, March 26. 1856.
In conformity with request, communicated by your letter, No. 198,of yesterday's
date, I have the honor to enclose herewith the articles belonging to the ship “ Levant.
I have, & c.
The Hon . W. T. Mercer, Esq., Colonial Secretary, ( Signed ) HENRY GUNTHORPE.
& c. & c. &c.



Encl . 18 in No. 20. Enclosure 18 in No. 20.
(No. 201.)
Government Offices, Victoria, Hongkong,
SIR, March 27, 1856.
I have the honour to bring to your Excellency’s notice another flagrant case of
violation of the Chinese Passengers’_Act, 1855, similar in all respects, save one,to that
of the ship " Levant,” in which your Excellency has already rendered the colonial authorities
your valuable assistance .
The “ General Blanco ” belongs to the same owner as the “ Levant, ” is said also to Hy
the Hawaian flag, without any papers, and to huve embarked here a large number of
Chinese passengers for the colony of Victoria .
 ( 37 )
I am given to understand that it is intended to land these men at a place on the coast
called Twofold Bay, a considerable distance from Melbourne, which city there will be no
probability of their reaching from the bay in question.
If this be true, nothing but death by starvation awaits these unfortunate men.
C
1 The case of the “ General Blanco ” differs from that of the “ Levant ” in this,-she is
lying just outside this harbour, whereas the “ Levant,” though she proceeded outside, was
induced to return, and was thus brought within the jurisdiction of the colony.
With the “General Blanco," however, we have no means of interfering, and I have no
alternative but to bring the above facts to the notice of your Excellency, in the hope that
your Excellency will exercise your authority and prevent the prosecution of this disas
trous voyage by seizing the “ General Blanco," which, as I have said, is reported to be
possessed of no papers, and consequently of no national rights or privileges, and bas on
board a very large number of natives of Asia .
It is given out that this ship intended to make for Macao in the first instance.
I have, & c.
His Excellency Rear -Admiral (Signed ) JOHN BOWRING .
Sir James Stirling, Knt.,
&c. & c.



Enclosure 19 in No. 20. Encl. 19 in No. 20.
Winchester,” at Hongkong,
SIR, March 28 , 1856 .
I HAVE the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your Excellency's Despatch of
yesterday, in which you call my attention to the case of the “ General Blanco," a ship
which you represent to be under the Hawaian flag, and at present lying just outside this
port, and beyond the jurisdiction of this colony ; and in which you inform me that, as,
under the circumstances stated , you have not any means of interfering with the “ General
Blanco , " you entertain a hope that I will exercise my authority and seize her, and thereby
prevent her from proceeding on the disastrous voyage she is supposed to have in con
templation.
I have the honour to inform your Excellency, in reply, that I have no authority to
seize and detain a ship for having violated the Chinese Passengers' Act, even when proof
of such violation may be exhibited to me, such ship not being a British ship, and not
within Her Majesty's dominions.
I have, &c.
Governor Sir John Bowring, ( Signed ) Js. STIRLING ,
&c. & c. Rear-Admiral and Commander -in - Chief.



Enclosure 20 in No. 20. Encl. 20 in No. 20.

(No. 210.) Government Offices, Victoria, Hongkong,
SIR, March 28, 1856 .
I HAVE the honour to bring to thenotice of your Excellency that the ship “ General
Blanco ” has left this harbour for Macao, on her way to the Australian colonies, with a
cargo of Chinese passengers.
She quitted this port without the emigration officer's certificate, or a port clearance
from the harbour master, and is understood to be possessed of no legal papers, and to have
no claim to the rights and privileges of any national flag.
As I have reason to fear that fraud and injury to the unfortunate emigrants are con
templated, I beg that, should the “General Blanco" come within your Excellency's
jurisdiction, your Excellency will take such steps in the matter as the claims of humanity
may dictate and the laws of Portugal permit.
I have, & c.
His Excellency Governor Guimarães, ( Signed) JOHN BOWRING.
&c. &c. & c.



Enclosure 21 in No. 20. Translation .) Encl. 21 in No. 20 .
Most ILLUSTRIOUS AND MOST EXCELLENT SIR,
I HAVE the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your Excellency's despatch of
of the 28th ultimo, informing me that the ship “ General Blanco," had sailed irregularly
from the port of Hongkong, and that she was bound to Macao.
Whilst thanking you for this information, I have to state that the ship in question
actually appearedat anchor in Macao Roadsa yesterday morning. The master landed
and applied at the harbour master's office for a clearance, but this was refused him by my
orders until he had produced papers authorizing him to sail lawfully. The master showed
only a clearance from Macào from the harbour master of Hongkong, a deed of sale of the
( 250. ) F 3
 ( 38 )
vessel, and some kind of register signed by Mr. Jardine as consul for the Sandwich
Islands, the flag of which islands the ship was flying. When the master was asked
respecting the cargo of the vessel, he at first hesitated to give an answer, but afterwards
stated that he had some Chinese passengers on board , but not Coolies.
Having received the harbour master's report of what was taking place, I desired him
to proceed on board the ship and inquire into the description of her passengers, and to take
such measures as humanity and the laws dictated in respect of Chinese emigrants ; and
also to ascertain all further particulars connected with the ship ; but this inspection could
not be effected, as the vessel set sail the same evening, and , as it appears, and is reported,
has proceeded to Hongkong.
God preserve your Excellency,
Macao, April 2, 1856.
(Signed ) ISIDORO F. GUIMARAES.;
The most illustrious and most excellent Sir John Bowring,
Governor of Hongkong and Her Britannic,
Majesty's Plenipotentiary in China.
True translation .
(Signed ) L D'ALMADA E CASTRO.




No. 21 . No. 21 .

Copy of a DESPATCH from Governor
LAB
Sir John Bowring to the Right Hon .
H. OUCHERE.
Government Offices, Victoria, Hongkong,
( No. 109. ) July 5, 1856.
Sir, (Received Sept. 5, 1856.)
I had the honour in despatch No. 59, of 11th April last, to report the
seizure of the ship “ Levant," forviolation of the ChinesePassengers'Act, and
I mentioned that after adjudication of the case by the Vice-Admiralty Court
I should again have the honour of addressing you on the subject.
I have now to state that on the 17th ultimo the Judge condemned the ship
to a fine of 1001. and costs, and I enclose a letter from the Attorney -General in
which that officer complains of the inadequacy of the punishment, in opinion
as to which I myself concur, when I consider the nature of the offence, and the
expediency if not necessity of making severe example of the first case occurring
under the Act.
I have, &c.
The Right Hon . H. Labouchere, ( Signed ) J. BOWRING .
&c. &c . &c.




No. 22. No. 22.

Copy of a DESPATCH from Governor Sir John Bowring to the Right Hon .
H. LABOUCHERE, M.P.
Government Offices, Victoria, Hongkong ,
( No. 113. ) July 8, 1856.
SIR, ( Received Sept. 5, 1856.)
* Page 43. Since writing my despatch, No. 109,* of 5th instant, I have learnt that
an attempt was made, on behalf of the owner of the “ Levant,” to procure the
remission of that part of the Judge's decree which condemned him in costs.
The motion was heard yesterday and failed , as will be seen from the en
closed letter of the Attorney -General, and the case may now be considered
finally settled.
I have, &c.
( Signed ) JOHN BOWRING .
The Right Hon . H. Labouchere, M.P.,
& c. & c. &c .
 1
( 39 )
Enclosure in No. 22. Encl. in No. 22.
The " Levant."
Attorney -General's Office, Hongkong,
SIR , July 8, 1856.
This case was again brought on yesterday by the advocate for the claimant, who
moved that so much of the Chief Justice's decree as gave costs should be rescinded , as
being contrary to the common law principle that “ the Crown neither pays nor receives
costs." The unskilful language of the “ Chinese Passengers Act ” I have more than once
had occasion to point out to you, and in no instance is it more apparent than in this.
Fortunately I was able to satisfy the Chief Justice that principle and authority supplied
what was wanting in that enactment ; and it may be that the consciousness of the
inadequacy of the trifling penalty ( 1001.) imposed by him to meet the costs and charges,
if they were to be defrayed by Government and not by the claimant, contributed to the
decree being pronounced once more in my favour.
The motion was refused with costs.
I have, &c.
The Hon. W. T. Mercer, Esq ., (Signed) T. CHISHOLM ANSTEY,
Colonial Secretary. Attorney -General.


No. 23. No. 23.

Copy of a DESPATCH from the Right Hon . the Earl of CLARENDON to
Governor Sir John BOWRING.
( No. 95. )
SIR , Downing Street, Aug. 11 , 1856.
1. I HAVE to acknowledge the receipt of your despatch , No. 59,* of the * Page 36 .
11th of April, with its enclosures relative to the seizure of the “ Levant ” and
the contemplated seizure of the “ General Blanco,” for violating the Chinese
Passengers’ Act.
2. It appears that these vessels belong to a Mr. McCormick, who is said to be
a subject of the HawaianItRepublic, and that they are sailed under the flag of
the Sandwich Islands . further appears to be the object of the owner to
carry on a passenger traffic from Hongkong or its vicinity without complying
with the provisions of the Chinese Passengers’ Act. With this view his vessels
take their passengers on board beyond the limits of the colony, and clear out
for Macao only , which being less than a seven days' voyage they are not re
quired by the Act to obtain a clearance from the emigration officer or to pro
vide themselves with emigration papers or to give a bond to the Crown. They
contemplate taking a further clearance from Macao for their ultimate destina
tion, or, as would appear from the case of the “ General Blanco ,” sailing from
Macao without any such clearance.
3. The “ General Blanco " is said to have taken on board aa number of Chinese
passengers in Hongkong, but proceeded beyond the jurisdiction of the colony
before this was discovered, and afterwards sailed for Macao without having been
cleared by the emigration officer or given bond, and without any “ emigration
>

papers. While she was still in the vicinity of Hongkong, but beyond the
limits of the colony, you applied to Admiral Sir J. Stirling to seize her, on the
ground that she had violated the Chinese Passenger Act. Sir J. Stirling
declined to comply, observing that he had no authority to seize and detain a
ship for violating the Chinese Passenger Act , such ship “ not being a British
ship, and not within Her Majesty's dominions.
4. On this point I feel no doubt that Admiral Stirling was right. The
authority to enter and search Chinese passenger ships is strictly limited by the
sixth section of the Act to British ships or ships within British jurisdiction .
The “ General Blanco ” fell within neither of these categories. Whatever her
nationality she was certainly not a British ship, while the ground of your
application to the Admiral was that she was not within British jurisdiction . If,
therefore, Sir J. Stirling had seized the ship on the ground of her having
violated the Chinese Passenger Act, he would unquestionably have exceeded
the powers vested in him by the Act 18 & 19 Vict. c . 104 .
5. If a foreign ship, though fitted and prepared in Hongkong, do not take
passengers on board till she is beyond its limits, she does not so much evade
the law as avail herself of aa liberty which the Legislature has not attempted,
and I think could not have ' attempted, to control. If she take passengers on
(250. ) E 4
 ( 40 )
board in Hongkong, but, in order to evade the Act, take out a fraudulent
clearance for Macao, it is for the authorities of Hongkong to consider whether
the proof of fraud is sufficient to justify them in detaining the ship before she
gets beyond the colonial jurisdiction, and to ensure success in legal proceedings
against her. When she has once left the colony she is beyond the power of
arrest until she come again within British jurisdiction .
6. In the case of the “ Levant,” you and the Attorney -General were satisfied
that there were sufficient grounds to go upon, and accordingly seized the ship.
I hope that the proceedings in that case will lead to the effectual vindicationof
the law which the owner of that vessel has sought to evade ; but whatever the
result may be, I anticipate that the course thus adopted will deter foreign
owners ormasters from attempting to take passengers on board in Hongkong
unless they are prepared to comply with the Chinese Passengers’ Act.
7. Before closing this despatch , I may advert to a point which, though it has
no bearing on the general question, it is as well to setright. In yourletter to
the Admiral you state that you had been informed that the passengers in the
“ General Blanco ” were to be landed at Twofold Bay in Victoria, which, being
distant from Melbourne, nothing but death from starvation awaited them . I can
inform you that no such misfortune need be apprehended. Twofold Bay,
though distant from Melbourne, is the port of a large pastoral district, and was
of sufficient importance to induce the Emigration Commissioners to dispatch a
ship to it direct from this country as far back as 1848.
I have, &c.
Governor Sir John Bowring , ( Signed ) CLARENDON.
&c . &c .


No. 24.
No. 24.

Extract of a DESPATCH from Governor Sir John Bowring to the Right
Hon. H. LABOUCHERE, M.P.
Government Offices, Victoria, Hongkong,
July 26, 1856.
( Received October 11 , 1856. )
( No. 121. ) ( Answered November 20, 1856, No. 32, Page 41.)
“ I have attentively read the communication from SirGeorge Bonham to
Mr. Merivale,* on the subject of Coolie emigration from China.
“ In the general views of Sir George Bonham I cordially concur. I think
there is a great superfluity of labour in China which might advantageously be
transferred to the colonies , and the condition of the emigrant might be greatly
benefited if proper security could be obtained,-Ist, as to the honest purposes
and proper fulfilment of the original contract ; 2nd, fitting arrangements for the
sea voyage; and, thirdly , security, when the period of the contract is expired,
for the return of the emigrant ( should such be his wish ) to his native
country.
“ But I am afraid no adequate security can be found for giving effect to any
of these three conditions . The shipment of Coolies is now almost wholly con
fined to unlawful ports where there exists no consular control, and where there
can be no doubt shocking abuses and abominations prevail. The crimps em
ployed in the collection of emigrants have been hitherto people of the very
worst character, and are frequently sacrificed to the vengeance of the people,
and of late, in several cases, have been put to death by the mandarins. The
profits of the trade, the enormous premiums given for the collection of emi
grants, naturally and necessarily create agents of the lowest and most worthless
description. As regards contracts entered into between planters and emigrants
in our own colonies, no doubt local authority might give them full effect; but
in most other countries the correspondence of the Foreign Office will, I appre
hend, show that legislation does not provide any sufficient protection for the
emigrant labourer.
"The securities for the proper treatmentof Coolies during the voyage might
be satisfactorily provided, if vessels, let them have collected their emigrants

* This communication will be found printed at page22 of the Papers presented to Parliament
by Her Majesty's Command, “ Emigration from China,” 1855.
 ( 41 )
where they may, were compelled to clear out at a port where an emigration
office and functionaries are established. But since the existence of the Chinese
Passengers' Act, which, from the 1st January last, compels all British emigrant
ships to come to Hongkong, in order to have their papers examined, I am
»

aware of only one instance (the “ Henry Miller,”, now in harbour, bound to
Havanna) in which a cargo of emigrants has been brought to Hongkong in
order to fulfil the conditions of the Act, though I have reason to believe many
shipments have taken place from Swatow, Cumsingmoon, and Macao, in none
of which is there any British official to control or prevent irregularities.
“ I attach much importance to the condition, as referred to by Sir George
Bonham, that after the period of contract is expired, there should be an obli
gation to convey the emigrant home. This condition has been invariably *
repudiated by contractors, but I think it should be enforced .
“ No doubt it would be desirable to circulate among the Chinese all possible
information which could attract them to the places of their destination ; but
such information would be infinitely increased in value if it were furnished by
their own countrymen who have preceded them in the countries to which they
are invited . If the reputation of a British colony were well established in a
district of Kwantung or Fookein no local opposition would prevent emigra
tion to that colony . The Hongkong government might be an auxiliary of
great value to the colonies if emigration could be placed on proper foundations,
and if it were really in a condition to secure fair contracts, comfortable pas
sages, fit treatment, and ultimate restoration of the emigrant to his native soil ;
but it is impossible to close one's eyes to the difficulties of the whole question ,
whether in reference to the character of the agents employed or to the nature
of the competition with the vessels ofall nations, and, above all, to the tempta
tions which large profits offer to the violation of law . "


No. 25. No. 25 .

Copy of a DESPATCH from the Right Hon . H. LABOUCHERE , M.P., to
Governor Sir John BOWRING .
( No. 132. )
SIR , Downing Street, November 20, 1856.
I have received and considered your despatch,* No. 121 , of the 26th of Page 40 .
July last, on the subject of emigration from China.
I have to acquaint you that unless such means as would meet the approval of
Her Majesty's Government can be devised for securing a due proportion of
females, it is not contemplated to make any endeavour to set on foot an
emigration of Chinese to the British Colonies at the public expense.
I have, &c .
Governor Sir John Bowring, ( Signed) H. LABOUCHERE.
&c. &c. & c.



No. 26. No. 26.

Copy of a DESPATCH from the Right Hon. H. LABOUCHERE, M.P. , to
Governor Sir John BOWRING .
( No. 111.)
SIR, Downing Street, September 25, 1856.
I HAVE received through the Foreign Office the copy of a letter*
addressed to yourself by Her Majesty's consul at Manilla, dated the 28th June
last, regarding the application of the Chinese Passengers' Act to voyages
between China and the Philippines, and I transmit herewith for your informa Sept. 15, 1856.
tion the copy of a report from the Emigration Commissioners on the subject.
I have, &c.
Governor Sir John Bowring, ( Signed) H. LABOUCHERE.
&c . & c.




( 250.) F
 ( 42 )
Encl. in No. 26 . Enclosure in No. 26.

SIR, Emigration Office, September 15, 1856.
We have to acknowledge your letter of the 6th instant, enclosing the copy of a
letter addressed by Her Majesty's Consul at Manila to the Governor of Hongkong,
18 & 19 Vict.c. 104. relative to the application of the “ Chinese Passenger Act ” to British vessels carrying
Chinese emigrants from China to Manila.
2. By the 1st section of the Act, a “ Chinese passenger ship ” is defined to be “ every
ship carrying from any port in Hongkong, and every British ship carrying from any
“ port in China or within 100 miles of the coast thereof,more than 20 persons, being
“ natives of Asia . ” There cannot be a question , therefore, that a British ship carrying
passengers between Amoy and Manila is in the meaning of the Act a “ Chinese pas
senger ship .” By the 4th section it is provided that no “ Chinese passenger ship ” shall
proceed to sea on a voyage of more than seven days without emigration papers,, and any 1



Chinese passenger ship proceeding on such a voyage without such papers, is, by the 8th
section, forfeited to the Crown. By a proclamation issued by Sir J. Bowring on the
26th January last, under the 3rd section of the Chinese Passenger Act, the length of
voyage from Hongkong to Manila is declared to be 20 days, but we are not aware
whether any proclamation has been issued by him declaring the length of voyage from
the ports of China to other places. We presume, however, that, even without such a
proclamation, any Court before which the question might be raised would have no
difficulty in deciding that a voyage from the coast of China to the Philippines was a
voyage exceeding seven days.
3. It follows that the " Fortuna,” as a British ship carrying more than 20 Chinese
passengers on a voyage exceeding seven days, was clearly a Chinese passenger ship, and
as such required to be furnished with emigration papers, and that she might have been
seized for the want of them by the British Consul at Manila, or by the commander of any
of Her Majesty's ships by whom she might have been met at sea. She will be equally
liable to forfeiture whenever she may return to any port in Her Majesty's dominions,
provided sufficient proof of her neglect of the law can be produced. We think it probable
that Sir J. Bowring, who has evinced anxiety to enforce the provisions of the Chinese
Passenger Act, will, if he has had the opportunity, have taken steps to enforce the law
against the “ Fortuna.” We do not doubt that he is fully alive to the exact state of the
law in regard to her.
We have, &c.
( Signed ) T. W. C. MURDOCH .
H. Merivale , Esq. FREDERIC ROGERS,
&c. &c.




No. 27. No. 27.
Copy of aa DESPATCH from the Right Hon. H. LABOUCHERE, M.P., to
Governor Sir John BOWRING .
( No. 130. )
SIR, Downing Street, 14th November 1856.
Sir E. Buxton , I TRANSMIT herewith the copy of a letter and enclosure from Sir E.
October 18, 1856. Buxton , together with two reports from the Colonial Land and Emigration
Emigration Com- Commissioners, on the subject of the mortality reported to have occurred >
missioners. among the Chinese passengers on board the “Duke of Portland ” and the
October 30,1856. “ John Calvin " on the voyage from Hongkong to Havana.
Ditto, ditto, As the mortality on board these vessels appears to have been of deplorable
November 6, 1856. extent, I request that you will furnish me with any information which may
exist respecting them at Hongkong.
I have, &c.
( Signed ) H. LABOUCHERE.

Eacl. 1 in No. 27 . Enclosure 1 in No. 27.
My LORD , Cromer, October 14.
I HAVE the honour to enclose for your Lordship's information an extract from the
“ Shipping and Mercantile Gazette,” which gives a dreadful account of the consequences
that result from the ill -treatment of Asiatics in their voyage from Hongkong to Cuba.
I have the honour to request, as President of the Strangers' Home for Asiatics, that
your Lordship will cause an inquiry to be made into the truth of the fact stated, and as
to the condition of the Coolies after their arrival in Cuba.
I am , & c.
The Earl of Clarendon . (Signed ) EDWD. N. BUXTON ,
President.
 ( 43 )
Sub -Enclosure to Enclosure 1 in No. 27.
EXTRACT from the “ Shipping and Mercantile Gazette," Friday, 3rd October 1856. Sub - Encl. to
Encl. 1 in No. 27.
A New York paper mentions the arrival at Havana of four British ships with
cargoes of Coolie labourers. One of the ships, the “ Duke of Portland ,” is reported to
have sailed from Hong Kong with 500 of these people on board, out of which number she
has landed but 202 ; 130 are said to have died by natural death upon the voyage, and the
residue to have drowned themselves. Another vessel, the “ John Calvin ," lost 110 by
“ natural death and suicide ” in a passage of 185 days, making a total loss in both ships
of 240 Coolies. If the information in our American contemporary be correct the affair
demands the prompt attention of the Foreign Office. The unfortunate survivors were, it
appears, at once drafted upon estates on contracts of eight years' service. We take it for
granted that these poor people were voluntary emigrants, and that they simply fell victims
to brutal treatment on the voyage. But even this aspect of the affair, if correct, is bad
enough, for more reasons than one. Great efforts have been made, more especially of late,
to procure a supply of labour for our West India colonies. The scarcity of that com
modity lies at the root of the West Indian difficulty. It is advisable by every means to
encourage immigration from the East, or from any other quarter where it may be legiti
mately procured.
In a recent article we dwelt at some length upon the efforts which have been made to
procure an adequate supply of labour, more especially in British Guiana, on the results
which have followed those efforts, and on the interest attending the discussion of the
labour question throughout the West India Islands. It is of the last importance that
emigrationtothe West should not get into disrepute with the labouring classes of British
India and China, from which countries large supplies have been heretofore drawn ; and
nothing is more likely to discourage it than the barbarities which seem to have attended
the transport of these recent cargoes to the shores of Cuba. But what if it turns out that
they were cargoes of veritable slaves, captured or kidnapped in the Bay of Bengal or the
Bay of Hong Kong instead of in the Bight of Benin or the Mozambique Channel and
conveyed by Britishvessels to the slave mart of Havana ? So valuable is the trade which
the Cuba planters are now driving at the expense of our colonies that they can afford to
pay almostfabulous prices for labour, and would risk almost anything to procure it. We
take the report we have referred to for as much as it is worth, but we shall watch the
progress of the necessary inquiry respecting it with some interest.

Enclosure 2 in No. 27.
Encl. 2 in No. 27
SIR , Emigration Office, October 30, 1856.
We have to acknowledge your letter of the 25th instant, enclosing one from
Sir E. Buxton, with an extract from the “ Shipping and Mercantile Gazette,” and desiring
us to report what information we may have respecting the two ships the “ Duke of
Portland," and “ John Calvin,” said therein to have sailed from Hongkong to Havana
with Chinese passengers, and to have incurred a inost frightful mortality on the voyage.
2. In reply , we have to state that we have received no information whatever on the (
subject of these ships. We have, however, communicated with the owner of the “ John
Calvin ," with whom we are acquainted, and shall endeavour to communicate with the
owner of the “ Duke of Portland ,” to ascertain whether they have received any informa
tion on the subject.
We have, & c.
( Signed ) T. W. C. MURDOCH .
T. F. Elliot, Esq. C. ALEXANDER WOOD.

Enclosure 3 in No. 27 .
Encl. 3 in No. 27.
SIR , Emigration Office, November 6, 1856.
WITH reference to our report of the 30th ultimo, we have to state that
Mr. Duncan Gibb, whom we bad supposed to be the owner of the “ John Calvin ,” has
informed us that he sold his vessel of that name some time ago, and that the vessel
reported to have arrived at Havana with Chinese immigrants, though bearing the same
name, is not the same vessel . As there is no vessel of the name in Lloyd's list, we are
unable to obtain any further particulars about her.
2. In respect to the “ Duke of Portland,” the other vessel mentioned in the New York
paper, we enclose the copy of a letter which we have received from the owner. It will
be seen from this letter that the whole number originally embarked was 330, and that November 1 .
of these, 130, or 2-5ths of the whole, died on the voyage. This is so shocking a mor
tality that Mr. Labouchere will probably thinkit right to endeavour toobtain, through
Her Majesty's Consul at Havana, as well as from the Governor of Hongkong, some
explanation of the causes which led to it.
We have, & c.
H. Merivale, Esq. ( Signed) T. W. C. MURDOCH .
& c. & c. C. ALEXANDER WOOD.

(250) F 2
 ( 44 )
Sub . - Encl. to Sub - Enclosure to Enclosure 3 .
Encl. 3 in No. 27.
SIR, Greenock , November 1 , 1856 .
In reply to your favour of 29th ultimo, received this morning, we beg to state
that the “Duke of Portland ” took on board 330 emigrants (not 500 as reported ); of
these 130 were lost from natural death (chiefly fever we understand ) and suicide, but we
have no particulars as to the number lost by each cause. The remainder, 200, were
safely landed at Havana.
From what we know of the master, we feel certain that no improper harshness would
be used towards the passengers. The passage was a very protracted and severe one ;
besides the severe gales in rounding the Cape of Good Hope for three weeks, three
hurricanes were encountered in the Carribean Sea in as many days. Both master and
crew were quite exhausted on their arrival ; one or two of the latter died, and the chief
mate was off duty two months.
We are, &c.
S. Walcott, Esq ., Secretary. (Signed) THOMAS HAMLIN and Co.



No. 28 . No. 28.

Copy of a DESPATCH from the Right Hon. H. LABOUCHERE, M.P., to
a

Governor Sir John BOWRING .
(No. 4.)
SIR, Downing Street, 7th January, 1857.
1. I have had before me various despatches addressed by yon to me,
and others addressed to the Foreign Department, which have been referred
from thence to this office, raising important questions connected with the
enforcement of the Imperial statute styled the Chinese Passengers’ Act.
2. The questions may be enumerated as follows :
First. The propriety of any interference by Her Majesty's cruisers, under
the provisions of this Act, whether on the high seas or in any place beyond
British jurisdiction , either with foreign vessels or with vessels not strictly
entitled to any national flag.
Secondly . The application of the Chinese Passengers' Act to vessels pro
ceeding from Chinato thePhilippine Islands.
Thirdly. The practicability of preventing anevasion of the Act, pointed out
by Mr. Robertson, Her Majesty's Consul at Shanghae, by means of Britisha
vessels conveying emigrants from Hongkong to some unauthorized port in
China, and there trans-shipping them into other vessels for conveyance to
distant countries.
November26,1856 . 3. I transmit to you an extract of aa report from the law officers of the Crown,
December 18 . dated the 20th of November, containing their opinion on the two first of these
October 31 . questions, together with an extract of another report, dated the 11th of De
cember, containing their opinion on the third question ; I also enclose copies
or extracts of two reports from the Emigration Commissioners, dated the
26th of November and the 18th of December, on the subject of emigration to
the Philippines, and of a report from them dated the 31st of October on the
subject of the evasion pointed out by Mr. Robertson at Shanghae.
4. Some of these questions have been raised by you, as Governor of Hong
kong, and others in your capacity of superintendent of trade, but seeing how
closely they are connected together, I have settled, in concert with the Earl
of Clarendon, that you should receive your directions upon the whole of them
in the present despatch. I have, therefore, to instruct you as follows:
First. No attempt is to be made to enforce the Chinese Passengers' Act
against a foreign ship, either on the high seas or anywhere else out of British
jurisdiction; neither is any such attempt to be made in respect to vessels
supposedto be not strictly entitled to any national flag.
Secondly. As regards voyages in British ships from China to the Philippine
Islands, I agree in the opinions expressed in the reports of the Emigration
Commissioners, dated the 26th of November and 18th of December ; and I have
to authorize you to take such steps as appear to you most expedient for
carrying them into effect, seeing that the law offices have reported that you
possess the requisite legal power. You will, therefore, proclaim the length of
passages from Chinese ports as well as from Hongkong under the third section
of the Imperial Act, having reference in such proclamation to the difference in
the length of voyages during the north -east and south -west monsoon ;and you
 ( 45 )

will not pass any local Ordinance which would relieve any vessels now subject
to the Imperial Act from its operation. There occurs here a subordinate
question, whether the Consul atAmoy may be appointed an emigration agent,
on which point you will receive instructions from the Foreign Department . In
the event of such an appointment being made, you will, of course, communicate
with the Consul at Amoy on all matters connected with the enforcement of the
Chinese Passengers’ Act at that port.
Thirdly. If the trans-shipment alluded to by Mr. Robertson be made from
one British vessel to another, this latter becomes immediately a Chinese
passenger ship under the terms of the Act. In sailing from a remote port,
she may , indeed, violate the Act, but she cannot be said to evade it, since its
enactments fully extend to her; and if detected in a deviation from them, she
remains liable to the penalties of the law . Should аa. British vessel, carrying
Chinese passengers, be met on the high seas without being furnished with
regular papers, the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty have hitherto been
unwilling to impose on the commanders of Her Majesty's cruisers the respon
sibility of actually seizing such avessel, unless the passengers should appear to
be suffering from ill -usage or neglect.
I have, &c.
Governor Sir John Bowring, ( Signed ) H. LABOUCHERE.
&c . &c. &c.



Enclosure 1 in No. 28. Encl. 1 in No. 28 .
SIR , Emigration Office, November 26 , 1856.
We have to acknowledge your letter of 13th instant, enclosing a letter addressed
to the Earl of Clarendon by the Consul at Manila, accompanied by letters from
Sir J. Bowring and the Attorney -General of Honkgong, on the subject of the British ship
" Fortuna ” which had carried Chinese emigrants from Amoy to Manila without com
plying with the requirements of the Chinese Passengers Act.
2. In our report of the 15th September * last we expressed our opinion that the • Page 49.
“ Fortuna ” had violated the provisions of the Passengers Act in not procuring the
emigration papers ” required for vessels proceeding on a voyage of more than seven
days'duration, and that she had accordingły rendered herself liable to forfeiture. The
same opinion is expressed very decidedly by the Attorney -General of Hongkong and
Sir J. Bowring. The Consul we perceive states that the voyage from Hongkong to
Manila is sometimes made in five, and even in three days in the favourable monsoon,
and that an average voyagefrom Amoy at the same season would be seven , but against
the monsoon fifteen days. As regards a voyage from Hongkong to Manila, Sir J. Bow
ring's proclamation of 26th January last fixes it at twentydays, and as the voyage from
Amoy is longer, it is scarcely credible that any Court would assume it to be less than
seven days on the ground that it was not included in the proclamation. But to prevent
any doubt or difficulty on the matter hereafter, it would be desirable that Sir J. Bowring
should issue a proclamation under the third section of theChinese Passengers Act, defining
the length of voyages from ports on the continent of China as well as from Hongkong. And
we would suggest the questionwhether in certain cases the proclaimedduration ofthe voyage
should not bemade to vary according to the season, since the compelling a shipping agent
to put on board during the favourable monsoon a quantity of provisions which could only
be required during the unfavourable monsoon would be unnecessary in itself, and would
tend to diminish the inducement to send off emigrants during the fittest season .
We have, & c.,
Herman Merivale, Esq., (Signed) T. W. C. MURDOCH .
&c. &c. FREDERIC ROGERS.


Enclosure 2 in No. 28. Encl. 2 in No. 28.
EXTRACT of a REPORT from the EMIGRATION COMMISSIONERS to H. MERIVALE, Esq.,
dated Emigration Office, December 18, 1856.
« THE questions raised by Sir J. Bowring relate, first, to the mode of dealing with
non -British ships which fit in Hongkong, but take their passengers on board beyondthe
limits of the colony, and thus escape the operation of the Passengers Act ; and, second, to
the course to be adopted in regard to emigration to the Philippine Islands and the Indian
Archipelago.
On the first of these points we are happy to perceive that the view which we sub
mitted in our report of 28th of June last is sanctioned by the law officers of the Crown.
Upon this point, therefore, there can be no difficulty in deciding on the instructions to be
issued to Sir J. Bowring.
( 250.) F 3
 ( 46 )
“ The second question is more complicated. It is urged by Messrs. Lime, the owners of
the · Fortuna,' which has been engaged in this trade and by Messrs. Tait and Co., who
had chartered the ' Ferozepore’ for Manila, supported to a great extent by Mr. Morrison
the Consul at Amoy, that theprovisions ofthe Chinese Passengers Act are in reality inappli
cable to voyages to the Philippine Islands and the Straits settlements, that the passage to
Manila or Singapore is short, that the passengers are not ignorant Coolies but mecbanics,
who have either made the passage before, or are acquainted with the circumstances of it from
others, that they contract for their own passages andsupply their own provisions, the ship
finding only water, and in case of emergency rice; that it isthe interest ofthe master to treat
the passengers well , and that the trade has been in existence for many years without
giving rise to complaint. They further point out that tocompel British vessels engaged
in this business to proceed from Amoy or other ports to Hongkong for emigration papers
1
(as under the present arrangements they must do) would be virtually to excludethem
from the business and to throw it into the hands of foreigners ; as regards Manila
into the hands of Spaniards, and as regards the Straits settlements intothe hands of
the Dutch. It is therefore suggested that voyages from Amoy to Manila and Singapore
should be exempted from the operation of the Act by aa local Ordinance, to be passed
under the authority of the second section of it.
“ There is no doubt much weight in the above representations, but they do not satisfy 1
us thatit is necessary or expedient to exempt the passenger traffic in British vessels to
the Philippines and the Straits, from control and supervision. The passage from Amoy
to Manila or Singapore, is in the favourable monsoon about seven days, but against the
monsoon 15 days, and “ the utmost Jimit in unfavourable weather is within six weeks ; "
the emigrants are a poor and singularly penurious class, and under the present system
are left to supply their own provisions, and it is admitted that the Spanish ships are
often excessively overcrowded . Here then , as it appears to us, are strong grounds for
requiring the supervision of Government. Where a voyage is liable to such extreme
variations as between seven days and six weeks, there will always be a probability, if
the owner is left uncontrolled , that the ship will be sent to sea provided only for the
shorter, or at the utmost for an average, voyage; and this probabilty is increased where
the emigrants find their own provisions. Weknow from what occurred in the emigration
from this country, when a similar system was in force here, that many emigrants
embarked with a stock of provisions insufficient for even an average voyage, and of
course quite inadequate for a protracted one. It was because of the frequent occurrence .


of such cases, and the suffering and sickness produced by them , that in the English
Passengers Act a compulsory dietary was provided, sufficient for the maintenance of the
people, irrespective of whatever they might provide for themselves. Looking to the
penurious habits of the Chinese, it does not appear to us safe to exempt the vessels in .

which they are conveyed from that provision of the Chinese Passengers Act which requires 1


the ship to provide a sufficient dietary for the passengers.
“ Again in regard to space, it appears to us essential that notwithstanding the com .


parative shortness of the voyage, British ships engaged in the trade should be subjected
to control. The allegation that no complaint has heretofore been made, is scarcely
sufficient proof that no ground of complaint has existed, and if it is the fact that Spanish
vessels have been excessively overcrowded ,we see no reason why the samethingmight
not occur in British ships. Considering that the voyage is within the Tropics, and
during the unfavourable monsoon consists in beating to windward, it is plain that great
risk of sickness might be the result of overcrowding, even in a short voyage. And it.
cannot be forgotten that some of the most scandalous cases of abuse in Chinese emigration,
involving an excessive crowding of the passengers, and consequent mortality, have taken
place on board British ships. For these reasons we do not think it would be right to
authorize Sir J. Bowring to comply with the suggestionthat the emigration to Manila
or the Straits should beremoved from the controlof the Passengers Act.
“ But the objection urged against requiring all vessels from whatever port to proceed
to Hongkong for emigration papers, appears reasonable. In the south -westmonsoon it
is probable that a vessel would not reach Hongkong from Amoy in much less than a
week, and if destined for Manila, she would scarcely be nearer her destination at Hong
kong than at Amoy. The delay to vessels proceeding from a morenortherly port would
of course be greater. The result must be as is alleged, to drive British vessels entirely
out of the trade from those ports, unless, as is probable, it should induce them to carry
it on in defiance of the law, taking their chanceof being stopped on their voyage by any
of Her Majesty's cruizers. Nor is it inrespect to the short voyages only that this result
will follow . It will eventually be equally the case in the long voyages across the Pacific,
or round Cape Horn . But such a result is not to be desired . It would throw the
trade into the hands of foreigners, who would be under no control, or of British subjects