LETTERS TO THE EDITOR.
CHINA AND GREAT BRITAIN.
(TO THE EDITOR OF THE "SPECTATOR."1
Sin,—The Standard informs us :—
" The year has seen the settlement of the very serious difficulty with China caused by the murder of Mr. Margary, and the attack on the expedition commanded by Colonel Browne. Twelve months ago, it seemed as if that difficulty would not be peacefully arranged. It is trite, indeed, that the Chinese Government professed its readiness to give all the requisite reparation. But at the same time, it evasively put off making good its professions. The prospect thus opened up was serious, not for any doubts that we should be able to exact the redress due to us, but because•of the probability that our success would be more complete than we should wish ourselves, and that, in fact, if once we began hostilities, we should break up the Chinese Empire. In spite of the vitality the Mongol Government is proved still to possess, by the suc- cess with which it has suppressed the formidable insurrections that during the past quarter of a century have threatened to tear away some of its most valuable provinces, all who understand the condition of the country are aware that there are forces at work which, in the event of a disastrous foreign war, would probably rend asunder the empire. But whatever faults the Chinese system of government may possess, at least it has the merit of maintaining tolerable order and a certain degree of well-being and civilisation among a population larger than any subject to a single sceptre, save only that which owns the sway of our Sovereign. But with a knowledge of what followed the dissolution of the Mogul monarchy in India, it was a serious responsi- bility to undertake the overthrow of so vast an empire. Fortunately, we have been spared the necessity. Owing to the skill and firmness of Sir Thomas Wade, the Chinese Government has been induced not only to give us full satisfaction for the murder of Mr. Margery and the attack on Colonel Browne's expedition, but also to yield on all the other points in dispute between us. It has thrown open additional ports. It has agreed to the opening-up of Yunnan. It has recognised by public proclamation and made known to the provincial Mandarins the treaty rights of foreigners; and it has conceded the right of the European Ambassadors to have audiences with the Emperor. On every point, in fact, we seem to have obtained full satisfaction."
Now, what are the facts ? The Chinese Government have not given " full " or any satisfaction for the murder of Margery, and the attack on Colonel Browne's expedition ; on the contrary, the " inquiry " into the affair has been a farce from the beginning of it to the end. If ever Mr. Grosvenor's report sees the light it will satisfactorily establish this, and now, although the Chinese Government pretends that it has hit upon the real criminals, it coolly says,--and I believe the Treaty itself embodies the senti- ment — " that the maintenance of good relations between
countries is better than vengeance," and therefore, the guilty are to go unpunished.
Then the public are told that the Chinese Government has -" yielded all other points in dispute between us." It would be much nearer the truth—if indeed it would not be the truth—to say that the English Government has so yielded. For thirty-five years we have insisted that the Chinese have no right to impose " Leikin " duties on British goods over and above import and transit duties, and yet the Treaty in which the latter are said to have yielded everything provides that the Chinese Government may in the future levy " Leikin " duties on all British goods outside the foreign settlements, so long as they do not levy them inside. Now, as there is not a foreign settlement in the whole of China that is a mile broad by a mile long, and as British goods are not con- cerned in the foreign settlements, so far from the Chinese having yielded anything, it is the English Government that has legalised the imposition of duties that for thirty-five years it has in- sisted were a gross infraction of Treaty rights.
Again, since the Treaty of Tientsin, the claims of British sub- jects on the Chinese Government for actual losses sustained by them in consequence of infraction of Treaty rights, of illegal confiscations, of robbery of goods and money by Imperial officers and soldiers, of destruction of property, and in respect of many other matters, amounts at the least to two millions sterling, and if interest was added, to a very great deal more. Yet by the Treaty, all these claims, together with the indemnity for the Margery murder and the expenses of the expedition from India, are fixed at 200,000 taels, about £60,000. If those claims were fair and proper claims, and they have been sifted and sifted ad nauseam, and admitted to be right, such a compromise is a gross wrong to the British claimants ; but it is as a matter of policy even worse, for it establishes as a principle that the Chinese Government may plunder foreigners, may infringe treaties to their own benefit, and then, when brought to book, compromise all their iniquities for a trifle, —for an amount, in fact, barely appre- ciable. It is notorious that the Chinese Government has repaid itself over and over again, by deliberate and systematic violation of the Treaty of Tientsin, the indemnity it had to pay to the British Government for previous infractions. In other words, it has made British goods pay every farthing of the fine inflicted on it, and a great deal more, and has pocketed thousands of pounds sterling besides. So much for the points yielded by the Chinese in the Treaty just settled between the British Minister and Li-Hung-Chang. Then we are told that the Chinese Government has recognised the " Treaty rights" of foreigners, and made them known by proclamation to the provincial Mandarins.
Why, it did this fifteen years ago ! Is this another specimen of yielding points in dispute, that it should be accounted a merit to recognise that which was solemnly recognised fifteen years ago, and to proclaim again what was then proclaimed ?
Finally, we come to the last concession, viz., that the Chinese Government has ceded the right of the " European Ambassadors " to have audiences with the Emperor. " Ambassadors " have always had this right. So there is nothing new so far, but there is something peculiarly ludicrous at the present moment in putting this forward as a concession—if ever it was one—inasmuch as the present Emperor is almost a baby, and therefore neither Am- bassadors nor Ministers would take much by an audience with him.
" On every point, in fact," says the Standard, " we seem to have obtained full satisfaction." My answer is, it is untrue, for on no one point have we obtained a single concession. We have failed in the Margery affair, we have failed in the settlement of bond fide British claims ; we have failed in procuring the abolition of the " Leikin " duties ; and we have done worse, for we have admitted their legality, and thus enabled the Chinese Government to ruin British trade at any moment it thinks fit, by over- weighting British goods with these duties. We have allowed them to increase the import duties on opium, thus protecting the native article, and encouraging its more extended growth. We have been satisfied with the opening of two or three ports of no great moment, when we ought to have insisted upon the opening of the whole country to trade, a privilege enjoyed exclusively by Russia, to the terrible injury of our commerce. We have failed in getting the Chinese Government to sanction the building of railroads or the opening of mines, and as a matter of fact, so far from the negotiations of the past year being satisfactory, they are just the reverse. We have been played with and humiliated, and the Chinese Government has gained a real diplomatic triumph, which entitles it, from a Chinese point of view of course, to all the credit, which we, in our incredible folly, presumption, and ignorance, claim for our own proceedings.—I am, Sir, &c., X.
Previous page
