The Press. — London, England, 1857-02-28 00:00:00

FEBRUARY 28, 1857. curred in the opinion of Commissioner Yeh that Sir J. Bowring and Consul Parkes had deter. mined beforehand that they would not consent to anything proposed, but would tack to the lorcha grievance Sir J. Bowring's monomania for obtaining admission to the city. He proved by extracts from the reports that the operations were advised and planned by Consul Parkes within twelve days of the cause of quarrel; that every overture for peace by the Chinese was evaded, and that at a very early period after hostilities commenced the desire to settle the long-vexed question of access was avowed : The two subjects (observed Lord Derby) may np• pear dissimilar, but I will show that in the mind of Sir J. Bowring they were connected together. On the 20th Mr. Consul Parkes attends at Hong Kong, where there is a conference, and Mr. Consul Parkes then lays down very broadly and very distinctly the whole plan of the campaign as it was to be conducted in case of the continued refusal of the Chinese Government; and hire is that plan:— I advise, therefore, and I do so with ell the deference due to the superior judgment of your Excellency and the naval com mander-in-chief, and with a deep sense of the responsibility which I, as the officer charged with the care of British interests at Canton, in offering this advice incur, that, as we hare searched the river and found no war junks (and anything less than the seizure of a fleet would. I am now convinced, have had no effect on the Imperial Commissioner), our operations should now be directed against the forts between Whatupoa and Canton. The Imperial Commissioner, I submit, should again be sum moned to grant the satisfaction already demanded within twenty• four hours, failing which we should then take possession of the four Barrier Forts. I cannot conceive it possible that his Ex cellency will then withhold compliance with our demands ; but, should he still continue contuur pious, a similar course should then be pursued with the forts at Canton, and it would be ex ceedingly advisable, I think, that the residence of his Excel lency, which is not far rota the wnter•sido, should also in that case feel the effects of the bombardment. ( Hear, hear.) Now, listen ! I advocate attack on the Barrier Forts In the Bret instance, because they stand by themselves. and are not surrounded, as are those at Canton, by the dwellings of the people. In the first instance he recommends the destruction of the Barrier Forts, but in the next of the town forts. Although he knows the latter are surrounded by the dwellings of the people, lie coolly and deliberately advises that those forts should be attacked and captured, and, if that should fail to produce any effect, that the next step should be to bom bard the private residence of the Commissioner him. self. We find the plan of operations laid down by Mr. Consul Parkes as early as the 20th of October —only twelve days after the first cause of quarrel. I said T could connect these two apparently very various subjects, the seizure of the twelve men and the entrance of foreigners into the city. As early as the 15th of October Sir John Bowring says, " I await the development of events "—I beg your lordships to observe that expression —" I await the development of events, in order to decide on our future mode of proceeding." The campaign pro• ceeds according to the plan laid down by Mr. Consul Parkes. The Barrier Forts are taken without casualties, and the town forts without resistance. The Barrier Forts are taken on the 24th, and on that day Sir John Bowring writes:— I have conveyed to Sir Michael Seymour an opinion that, if his Excellency and yourself agree on :he fitness of the opportu• nity, it would be well if the ee.rakt quastio of our entrance into the city should now be settled— As soon as he has picked a quarrel, nominally about the affair of the lorclia. he takes advantage of the quarrel as he wished to take advantage of peace and tranquillity. (A laugh.) It would be well if the vexata <literati° of our entrance into the city should now be settled, at least es fur as to secure us an official reception there. This would be a crowning result to the successful operations of her Majesty's naval forces. The vexes& querstio was initiated, but able diplomatist as Sir J. Bowring was, and ably seconded as he was by the con. sul, he found himself detected in the delicate initiation of the question of entrance into the city. Commissioner Yeh says : But 1, the Minister, also know full well what you, the said consul, have in view. (A laugh.) For a certainty, it is nothing less than a desire on your part to imitate the course taken by the Envoy Davis in the spring of 1(347. The mine was sprung Wher sooner than was intended, and consequently, I must say, Sir J. Bowring rather lust his temper, for this was the answer he gave to the notification that the Chinese Commissioner had some idea of what he was driving at : I notice in the declaration of his Excellency, dated the 2Gth inst., that a reference is mode to the proceedings of Sir John Davis in 1847. You may find a proper opportunity of reminding the Imperial Commissioner that if, instead of being shamefully violated, the premises end engagements then entered into by the Chinese authorities had been faithfully and honourably kept all the existing calamities would have been avoided. " If the promises and engagements then entered into by the Chinese authorities had been faithfully and honourabl3 kept,"— The Earl of ll•nr.ownv: Well, what then? The Earl of DERHT : The noble earl the Lord Privy Seal says, " Well, what then ?" Why, then, all these digi• culties did not arise out of this affair of the lorcha. ( Cheers.) "If the promises and engagements then entered into by the Chinese authorities had been faith fully and honourably kept instead of being shamefulh• violated, all these calamities would have been avoided:" ►hen we hear of shameful violations of promises and engagements, I would remind the noble earl that the violation took place with the full concurrence of her Majesty's Government, on representations deemed aatis• factory—that it was no shameful mlation, but a violation on reasons assigned, in which the Government acquiesced. ( Hear, hear,) Therefore, in spite of the noble earl's "Well, what then ?" I say this language of Sir J. Bowriug THE PRESS. is neither justified by the fact nor consistent with courtesy due to a foreign power. (Loud cheers.) Tho conduct of Sir J. Bowring bad been governed by one absorbing idea—viz., his own official recep tion into Canton, in which the original cause of com plaint respecting the Arrow was speedily lost. And it was singular that at the very time the admiral was assuring the Chinese authorities that his demands were unconnected with any previous demands Sir J. Bowring, with equal perseverance and confidence, thought those demands were only the legal and necessary consequence of previous demands never abandoned, and which were now positively insisted upon : From one part of this disastrous history we proceed to another. From the destruction of the junks, the capture of the forts, the storming of a city without defence beyond an unfortitied wall, we come to the throwing shot and shell into the Commissioner's residence, the capture and destruction of the I tnperial fleet of junks, effected with a loss of one man killed and tour wounded. In all the r e miserable proceeding; we find the same thing—forts mounting 200 guns destroyed, another mounting 'AO gui.s destroyed, a hot fire kept up for an hour, and the total b.ss is one killed and four wounded. Some of these exploits were achieved without any loss, and thus it is that her Majesty's naval forces have been prosecutine the.P in. glorious operations—;Hear, hear)—and y we have SirJ. llowring writing to the admiral most fulsome and unigust ing letters, congratulating him upon the brilliant achieve ment and the glorious successes, upon the union of mili tary skill and sagacity he had displayed, the unparalleled valour of the forces, and other fulsome phrases applying to operations in which so little resistance had been off.red— the destruction of undefended forts and the capture of unfought ship. There is one passage in this book to which I must advert for a moment. This is the way Sir J. Ilowring, immediately after the capture of the city, speaks of that lamentable event. One would have thought that the Chief Superintendent would at least have ex• pressed regret at the necessary bloodshed which, although small, had accompanied the event. Not so. It appeared, that so prevalent in his mind was one idea, that every calamity, however grievous, was regarded from a single point of view,—as to how it affected his reception into Canton : Since writing the above I have received your despatch dated yesterday, containing the gratifying intelligence that the city hen been entered by her Majesty's marine f aces, the yamuu of the Imperial Commissioner visited by the admiral and yourself, and our great object of hostile action thus satisfactorily acoom• Wished. I feel every confidence iu the continued exercise of those admirable qualities, mingled sagacity and valour, which have been hitherto so remarkably displayed. The noble earl, in conclusion, quoted the memorial from the inhabitants of Canton as illustrating the peaceable disposition of the Chinese, who, after all the sufferings inflicted upon them by our bombard ments, demanded no reparation, but offered to return to peace, goodw-11, and commercial intercourse, if our authorities would only cease operations. The Americans, it was true, ha I also taken an active part in some of the proceedings, but then their flag had been fired upon ; yet they were satisfied with the destruction of one fort, and after that act of repara tion resumed friendly relations. Bat we, on the other hand, taking the question of reparation into our hands, went on from one act of cruelty to another, until we committed an amount of barbarism which would have been wholly unjustifiable under any cir cumstances whatever, which has produced feelings among tl to people of Canton against our country• which centuries would scarcely eradicate, and in consideration of which we shall have to deplore the day when such an important business was intrusted to hands so unwortl y. The noble earl then, in an eloquent peroratico,, addressed a solemn appeal to the bench of bishops t- come forward on this occasion and vindicate t!.e cause of religion, humanity, and civilisation front the outrage inflicted upon it by the British repre sentatives at Canton. He should be disappointed indeed it' the right rev. bench did not respond to this appeal ; but in any case he turned with undi minished confidence to the hereditary peers, and called upon them not to tolerate the usurpation by authorities abroad of that most awful prerogative of the Crown, the right of declaring war—not to tole rate upon light and trivial grounds the capture of commercial vessels, the destruction of forts belong ing to a friendly country, the bombardment of an undefended city, and the shedding of the blood of uuwarlike and innocent people without warrant of law and without moral justification. The noide earl concluded by moving the condemnatory vote of which he had given notice, and resumed his seat amidst loud and prolonged cheers The Earl of CLARENDoN, premising that our rela tions with the Chinese authorities previous to hostilities were of a most unsatisfactory and intoler able nature, said that with regard to the case of the Arrow a principle was involved in it, and the British authorities in Canton could not have acted other. wise. The ordinance under• which the Arrow bad hoisted the British flag was not the ordinance to which Lord Derby had referred, and it contravened no existing British law. The Arrow bad not forfeited tier licence, because, although the term had expired, the vessel was still at sea, and therefore still entitled under the terms of the ordinance to bear the British flag. As to the outrage which had been 199 committed by the' hinese, which was well authen ticated, if Mr. Parkes, whose discretion and modera tion deserved all praise, had shrunk from demanding redress, he would have failed in his duty, and have given the Chinese reason to believe that they might proceed to still greater insult. He believed that the supposed feeling of the people of Canton against the admisaion of foreigners was a mere bugbear; but, even were it not, that was no reason why we should not call upon the authorities to maintain order and he responsible for British life and property. The noble earl declared that her Majesty's Government would have permitted the question to remain in the position in which it was left by their predecssors if the affair of the Arrow had been satisfactorily arranged. At the same time they fully recog nised the importance of the entry int o C anton , an d be lieved that the Queen's officers were justified in taking advantage of the dispute about the Arrow to endeavour to procure a partial fulfilment of the treaty. So fur from being an unfavourable moment, all parties were well aware it would never be ob tained unless the people of Canton were made to feel our power. With regard to the motion, he asserted that the third resolution, as it now stood, could only be considered by her Majesty officers throughout the world as a positive prohibition against engaging in offensive operations ; and declared that such a pro hibition would endanger the lives and property of all British subjects in China, would cast dishonour upon our name and our flag, and would bring ruin upon our trade with that country. . _ Lord LYNDHURST had carefully perused the papers upon the table, and had come to the conclusion that the proceedings out of which this unfortunate dis pute arose could not be justified upon any principles either of law or of reason. As it could not be pre tended that the Chinese were to inform the British authorities before seizing a culprit on board a Chinese ship, the whole point turned on the ques tion—Was the Arrow a British ship ? I assert—and 1 assert it in the very language of the Chinese Government—that in no respect whatever was the Arrow an English ship. (Cheers.) This is the very essence and foundation of the whole question. The noble and learned lord demonstrated this poict by the illustration of certificates of naturalisation not being accepted in the original country of the person naturalised, so that the .trrow, even if clothed with the privileges of a British ship, as against ourselves, no law, ordinance, or register of ours could give her those privileges as against the Chinese authorities. Lord Lyndhurst then came to the question of the legality of the Colonial Ordinance:— What is the instrument under which it is contended there was a transfer of the character of the vessel, a transfer of ownership which converted this Chinese vessel into en English vessel? It is an ordinance of the Colonial Government. By that ordinance a Chinese why has entered into the colony, who holds land under the Crown, and is the owner of a Chinese ship or any other vessel, may apply for a register, and upon giving certain security the registry gives him a right to use an English flag. A register was granted to a man admitted to be a Chinese. There is no dispute abcut the facts that the owner was a Chinese, and the vessel a Chinese-built vessel. Now, by a law of the Colonial Legislature, a Chinese vessel cannot be converted into an English ship. I will not pretend to say rights may not be given by this colonial instrument, but I say you cannot make a vessel an English vessel by that means independently of the general principle I have stated ; you cannot make it an English ship ; you cannot give the right to hoist an English flag. That is so clear, so indisputable, that I am quite sure no lawyer will con trovert it. An Act of the Colonial Legislature can have no effect whatever against an Act of the Imperial Parlia• meat. The Act of Parliament to which my noble friend has referred says in the most precise terms that nothing but what is there set down shall be deemed a British ship. The act is not confined to England ; it is not confined to these islands; it applies to all our possessions, and it says no vessel can be deemed a British ship, or have the character of a British ship, unless it is owned by an Eng lishman, by • natural-born subject, by a naturalised sub ject, or by a person who has obtained letters of ?moralise t on— [The Earl of DERBY : And has taken the oath of allegiance)—and has taken the oath of allegiance. In the face of this Act of Parliament the ordinance of the Colonial Legislature is absolutely nothing, and altogether void as far as it relates to the point in question. You cannot by a law of the Colonial Legislature convert this vessel into a British ship. it is said, " True, it may nut be a British ship, but she had a British flax ' and sonic insult has been o ff ered to the British flag." W hy' Under the Act of Parliament no vessel can by law use the British flag but a British ship, and any one who attempts to use a British flag, except on board a British ship, is by the 133rd section subject to a very grievous penalty. There fore, both on general pr i nciples, and on the particular point of this ordinance, the justification in this case en tirely fails. (Cheers.) Lord Lyndhurst then contended that even assuming the register granted to have been legal in itself, yet it was incontestably proved that the register had ex pired eleven days before the seizure took place, so that the lorcha's legal protection had ceased:— Sir J. Bowring, who is a distinguished humanitarian as well as plenipotentiary—(a laugh )—himself admits the register is void, an 4 that the vessel was not entitled to hoist