PROGRESS OF TRADE WITH CENTRAL ASIA.:
[COMMUNICATED.]
A paper of considerable interest with this title was read by Sir Douglas Forsyth at the Indian Section of the Society of Arts last week, and the discussion that followed elicited the opinions of Sir George Campbell, Mr. Brian Hodgson, Sir Charles Trevelyan, and others, bringing personal knowledge of the Indian frontier to bear on the main question involved,—" Is this trade with Central Asia worth striving for ?" To this the writer of the paper replies emphatically, " Yes, it is ?" and in justification of this decided epinion he observed that,-
" We have seen that with all the, drawbacks arising from deficient means of transport, heavy rates of carriage, and undue exaotions in Afghanistan, commerce through that country has doubled within the last ten years, and there is now a total yearly trade with the countries_ between Indio. and Russia proper of aboutfour millions.sterling, of which Manchester goods to the value of about a quarter of million cross the frontier from Kurrachee and the Punjab, and wool, to the extent of one million is exported from India, the bulk of which comes from across then frontier."
Sir George Campbell seemed to entertain considerable ,doubt to the prospective increase, and to question the value of any trade_ with the border States and central Khanates, beyond the frontiers of Nepaul and Afghanistan, or at least to doubt if it were worth any considerable effort or risk of political complications. But Sir Douglas Forsyth's arguments in support of continuous and vigorous efforts to remove the political barriers, maintained chiefly by the Chinese, and seconded, as far as their power extends, by the Russians, are such as must carry great weight with a country so essentially commercial as England must ever be, if its power and wealth are to be maintained. These are summed up in his concluding paragraph, where he says :— " One of the leading journals has pointed out that the English commercial interests at stake in the Eastern Question in its broadest sense, and not merely confined to Turkey, are as far as possible from insignificant. The great peculiarity in English manufacturing industry is, that it depends so largely for the sale of its products on countries which are forcibly kept from establishing protective tariffs, or which have not yet reached that half-civilisa- tion which produces a belief in the virtues of protectionism. India, China, the interior of Asia and Africa, and the Ottoman dominions, are the true markets which preserve us from the commercial distress or rain with which we are constantly threatened by the economical policy of the Continental and North-American States. The States of the European Continent do indeed show a slightly increasing tendency to become our customers, but there is one country which has never for a moment relaxed its commercial hostility, and this is Russia. Every portion of the Ottoman dominions, or any other part of the world ab- sorbed by Russia, is absolutely lost to English trade, and the pretended civilising mission of Russia is everywhere an errand of destruction to our manufactures. If this be true, then, the whole of our trade with countries across the border along the whole line of territory extending from Kurrachee round by Kabul, Thibet to Lhassa, which has doubled within the last ten years, and already exceeds two millions sterling, is in danger of being lost to us, if the wishes of those who desire to see the Russian boundary in Asia march with ours are ever fulfilled, or if we do not take steps to induce Russia to relax her protective policy, which is, in fact, prohibitive ; and encourage, by every means in our power, the introduction of British manufactures into the markets of Central Asia."
The possibility of ever inducing Russia to change her policy or relax her prohibitive and protectionist system must be very re- mote. There is, on the contrary, little doubt that Mr. Wallace has correctly described, in his recent work on " Russia," which Sir Douglas quotes, not only "the peculiar views of the Russians on the subject of trade " (if properly they may be called •' peculiar " when they prevail so largely in the United States, our own Colonies, and even in European States), but their jealousy of England ; and still more graphically in the passage quoted from Mr. Terentieff, a Russian writer :—
" ' Great Britain, by her politique dexploitation, is looked upon as the bloodsucker of less advanced nations. Having no cause to fear com- petition, she advocates the insidious principles of free-trade, and deluges foreign countries with her manufactures to such an extent that native industries are inevitably overwhelmed. But the Russians think that the fallacies of free-trade have been exposed, and the nations have found in the beneficent powers of protective tariffs a means of escape from British thraldom.' Carrying out these views into practice, a rigid blockade is maintained against the entry into Russia of foreign manu- factures. ' Thus,' says Mr. Wallace,' they protect their newly-adopted subjects from the heartless exploitation of Manchester and Birmingham, and consign them to the tender mercies of the manufacturers of Moscow and St. Petersburg. The economic influence of Moscow, which sells dear, is somehow infinitely less baneful and burdensome for the native populations than that of Manchester, which sells cheap.'"
This should answer all doubts as to the probability of Russia making any change in her commercial policy. Even those who would rejoice to see Russia extend her frontier to our Indian borders u a gain to civilisation must, as Sir Douglas observed, "temper their exultation with the humiliating knowledge that Russia's gain will be a loss to our trade." And it is from this point of view that we must look with increasing interest on the progress of a Chinese army across Ili towards Kasbgar and Yar- cand for the recovery of Eastern Turkestan. Its success would be the destruction of the Mahommedan inhabitants who, under the strong rule of Yakob Beg, have, during the past twenty years, done much to restore prosperity and security to the land. Nor is it without significance that these Chinese troops are aided by the supplies of corn, &c., furnished from the Russian com- missariat. Whether Russia or China gain possession of this independent territory, the ruler of which has already entered into commercial and diplomatic relations with the Indian Government, and is reported to have sent an envoy to this country, the result would be equally fatal to this opening pro- spect for trade. It would equally prevent the establishment of an intervening barrier against the progress of Russia southwards of no mean value in a political sense. There is an opportunity now, which may be of short duration, for the effective intervention of Great Britain between the two belligerents, Yakob Beg and the Emperor of China, neither unwilling to come to terms of mutual agreement, if a Power occupying the position of this country
would earnestly interpose its good offices, and thus keep both Russia and China at a safer distance. Such golden opportunities do not often occur, and it would be a subject of lasting regret if any policy of " masterly inactivity " should allow a chance of securing a great commercial and political advantage to escape. But if anything is to be done, it must be done promptly, and both our Foreign Office and the Indian Government should move at once in concert. It is impossible to do justice in a short space to the exhaustive paper read by Sir Douglas. We can only seek to direct attention to the more salient points treated in the paper, and subsequently brought out by the discussion that followed. The chairman, Sir Rutherford Alcock, alluding to the beat means of fostering and promoting a trade from India across the border States, all tributary to China, to the region of Central Asia, and through Thibet and Burmahto the west of China itself, pointed out the steps most plainly indicated, namely, the assertion at Pekin of the right of this country, by the most-favoured-nation clause of existing treaties, to such free intercourse and trade with countries adjoining our own Indian territories, whether Chinese or only tributary States. This right, which has been accorded to Russia along her vast conterminous frontier at Kiachta, Urga, and Kiuldja in Turkes- tan, are all so many undeniable concessions to this international principle and constituted treaty-right, which cannot be contested by China. The principle has, indeed, been successfully asserted, as the speaker observed, by Sir Thomas Wade, in his late conven- tion with the Chinese Government, stipulating for a right of trade across the Burmese border into Yunnan, and the long- closed territory of Thibet has at the same time been opened, so far as a right of travel and transit between India and China is concerned. The importance of these principles, and the necessity of extending their application to all the border States intervening between our Indian possessions and China or Central Asia, was insisted upon in support of the views put for- ward by Sir Douglas Forsyth in his paper, and entirely confirm- ing the correctness of the statements as to the actual relations of the Russians with the Chinese when he said :— " The importance of Kuldja and Chuguchuk have long been known to the Russians, and the first protocol of Chuguchuk with the Chinese in 1851, under which Russian factories were established in Chuguchuk, opened up to the Russians the whole of the province of Ili. The treaty of Peking contained provisions for the formation of trade in that direction, and the second protocol of Chuguchuk contained more ex- plicit stipulations with reference to that trade. The factory which was established in Chuguchuk under the first protocol was demolished in 1855 by the Tungani rebels. Though the Russians have occupied Kuldja and Ili, which they profess to hold in trust for the Chinese, it is impossible to open out trade until the question of mastery over the route has been decided. Colonel Sosnofski, who was sent in 1874 on an exploring expedition from the Zaisan Pass to examine the roads leading thence towards Western China, with a view to the re-establish- ment of the Russian Chinese trade, which ceased on the capture of tke Kuldja and Chuguchuk by the rebels in 1864-65, has reported on the feasibility of opening commercial relations with China in that direction, and proposes to establish consular agents at Ilrumtai Khamul or Hami and Guchen. M. Shishmaref, the Russian consul at Urge, proposes another route, crossing the Altai from BHA, and proceeding in the direction of the Orkhou River, and skirting presumably the track followed by Mr. Ney Elias."
In view, therefore, of those persevering efforts of Russia to pos- sess the whole region of Western and Central Asia as the exclu- sive markets of Russian trade, and the importance to us, both present and prospective, of such great fields of commercial de- velopment beingkept open, we agree with Sir Douglas Forsyth that it is an end worth atrivingfor, even at some cost. It is in theinterest of civilisation, as well as for the advantage of our country, to bind these frontier tribes to us by ties of personal profit. The politi- cal value of subsidies granted to the ruler of a country like Afghanistan may be open to serious question. We may subsidise the chief without conciliating the people. But it is otherwise with extended commercial interchange of products. These create both interests and wants not easily severed. After all the talk about the danger of advancing across the Indus and the chance of embroiling ourselves politically wherever we find access commercially in these regions, the laws of commercial activity and progress are irresistible. And in spite of Protectionist theories, as wars cease and pdpulations thrive, by the substitution of order and security for lawless anarchy and insecurity, new markets will arise, and it is not the interest of the greatest com- mercial nation of the age to allow itself to be shut out from any participation or competition. But this must inevitably follow a policy of timid indecision or "masterly inactivity,"— too often convertible terms. The old saw of " Nothing ven- ture, nothing have," applies to great affairs as well as small. Something must be risked, if we would secure free access to those great centres of undeveloped industry and fields of future commercial development. If England would be a direct loser to the extent of twelve millions sterling in the present by the absorp- tion of Constantinople and European Turkey into the Russian protectional system, to the exclusion of all competition and foreign trade, it is certain we should lose immeasurably more in the future if Russia and China, separately or collectively, were allowed to close all access to the regions north and east of the Himalayas. Beyond all doubt or question, the future of British manufacturing industry depends largely on the sale of its products in those countries and territories which are forcibly kept from establishing protective tariffs, or which have not yet reached that half-civilisation which produces a belief in the virtues of protectionism. India, China, the interior of Asia and Africa, and the Ottoman dominions are rightly pro- nounced by the writer of the paper to be the true markets which preserve us from the commercial distress or ruin with which we are so constantly threatened by the commercial policy of the Continental and North-American States, and even by our own Colonies. It is worth while, therefore, to strive vigorously, and even at some hazard of opposition or political complications, with the most formidable of our adversaries in this race of industrial prosperity and development, to beat down the political barriers Russia and China would create as obstacles to our free access across the Himalayas into Central and Eastern Asia from India.
Previous page
