# China: Its State and Prospects/Chapter 3

CHAPTER III.
CENSUS OF THE POPULATION.
But we have somewhat more than probability to guide us, in endeavouring to ascertain the population of China. We have the evidence of men who have long resided in the country, and a variety of estimates taken by the natives themselves, and published by imperial authority. While the learned of Europe are sitting at home, and calculating what may or may not be, which they decide according to their several hypotheses and partialities; we have the testimony of eye-witnesses and actual residents, as to what really exists. Between these bare supposers and personal enquirers there can be no difficulty in determining on whom most reliance is to be placed. The speculators on China's population, however, aware that facts are against them, have sought to throw discredit on the witnesses produced on the other side, by bestowing on them the most opprobrious epithets, and calling their veracity into question on every occasion. The authorities most likely to furnish ​information on the subject of China are the catholic missionaries, and the Chinese themselves. The former, who penned the "Edifying and curious letters," are sometimes spoken of jocularly as "reverend gentlemen" telling their "pleasant stories;" at other times more cavalierly, as "stupid and lying missionaries, who contrived to impose upon Europeans with their absurd and ridiculous notions." Malte Brun, however, describes them as "weak and credulous, rather than wilfully mendacious." It must be confessed, that these are rather hard terms to bestow upon men who have left their native land, and ventured all, to spread what they conceive to be the truth; men, at the same time, of much learning, and, one would hope, of some sincerity—who have deserved better than to be denounced as downright liars, in matters where they had neither interest nor inclination to deceive. Their opportunities for ascertaining the fact, were many and great, as they were engaged, by imperial authority, in travelling through the various provinces, and drawing up a statistical view of the empire; so that they were not likely to be easily imposed upon by accounts inconsistent with truth.
The Chinese authorities have been treated in a still more unscrupulous manner, and the estimate given by a principal mandarin, to Sir G. Staunton, is described as complete an example of Chinese mendaciousness, as any ever afforded; and, as a document, bearing on its very face, the marks of fabrication. It is comparatively easy to get rid of adverse testimony, by throwing discredit on the judgment or veracity of the witnesses; but though the Chinese may be, generally, given to ​fabrication and exaggeration, yet, in a matter where the only trial of veracity is to transmit returns from the people to the government, and to record them in public documents, we do not see why they may not be believed. The documents, thus drawn up and published by the Chinese executive, are not intended for the eyes of foreigners, or meant to exalt native resources in the estimation of surrounding nations; on the contrary, the emperor, in the edicts referring to the population, does not speak of its amount in a boasting, but a complaining tone; for, like another Malthus, he is afraid lest the increase of population should entrench on the means of subsistence, and a famine be produced; he, therefore, exhorts the people to diligence in husbandry, that they may raise as many of the necessaries of life as possible, and to economy in their expenditure, that they make them go as far as they can.
Now, however mendacious the Chinese may generally be, we can only expect them to gratify their lying propensities when interest allures, or when they have no means for ascertaining the truth. That they can have no interest in deceiving the world, is evident from their unconsciousness of these statements being published to the world; and that they have every possible means of ascertaining the amount of the population, will appear from the manner in which those returns are made, and the census obtained. The law on this subject, is as follows:—
"All persons whatever shall be registered, according to their respective professions or vocations. When a family has omitted to make any entry in the public register, the master thereof, if possessing lands chargeable with contributions to the revenue, shall be punished ​with one hundred blows; but if he possess no such property, with eighty blows. When any master of a family has among his household strangers, who constitute, in fact, a distinct family, but omits t make a corresponding entry in the public register, or registers them as members of his own family, he shall be punished with one hundred blows, if such strangers possess taxable property; and with eighty blows, if they do not possess such property; and if the person harboured is not a stranger, but a relative, possessing a separate establishment, the punishment of the master so offending, shall be less than as aforesaid by two degrees, and the person harboured shall be liabl to the same punishment. In all these cases, the register is to be immediately corrected. In all the districts of the empire, one hundred families shall form a division, in order to provide a head and ten assessors, whose duty it is to assist and oversee in the performance of all public matters. These 'elders' must see that all the families in their respective divisions have been registered, and failure in doing this, exposes them to the bamboo. The returns of population are to be made annually."
On this subject, Dr. Morrison observes:—
"In the Chinese government, there appears great regularity and system. Every district has its appropriate officer; every street its constable; and every ten houses, a tything-man. Thus they have all the requisite means of ascertaining the population with considerable accuracy. Every family is required to have a board, always hanging up in the house, and ready fur the inspection of authorised officers, on which the names of all persons, men, women, and children, in the house, are inscribed. This board is called a mun pae, 'door tablet,' because where there are women and children within, the officers are expected to take the account from the board at the door. Were all the inmates of a family faithfully inserted, the amount of the population would, of course, be ascertained with great accuracy. But it is said, that names are sometimes omitted, through neglect or design; others think that the account of persons given in, is generally correct."
The census thus annually called for, by the Chinese ​government, and published in their official accounts of the empire, is demanded with the view of enabling the ruling powers to ascertain the state of the country, in order that they may apportion the due amount of government officers, and police force, to each district, and make suitable provision for the necessities of the people, in case of famine. According to the system adopted by the reigning dynasty, a considerable proportion of money and grain is retained in the provinces for the service of the state, and the exigencies of the people; and it would ]3e difficult to know what amount should be reserved, unless the average number of the inhabitants were ascertained. It is, then, to assist the government, in making proper arrangements for the home administration, and not to impose either on themselves or foreigners, that this census is taken. It is published in a work, given out by imperial authority, called the Ta-tsing-hwuy-tëen, or "Collection of statutes for the present dynasty," where the various arrangements, for the direction of the six tribunals, are fully particularized. Under the item of revenue, the account of the population occurs; and as this work has been published at different periods, it affords a criterion to judge of the state of the population through successive years.
Now the question occurs. Are these official documents to be believed, or are they not? When any European government orders a census to be made, and publishes a state paper, declaring that such and such is the result of their researches and calculations, it is generally believed. No one objects to the statement, on the ground of that government professing the ​religion of the Romish or Greek church, or professing no religion at all; but since it is a matter of mere civil polity, with which they must have a much better acquaintance than others can possibly have, they are allowed to make their own statement, and are believed accordingly. In negociating with foreign powers, or in managing matters which immediately concern their individual interests, the Chinese do sometimes practise deception; but, in matters of sober fact and actual calculation, we do not see why the Chinese should not be credited as well others. We receive, without scruple, their account of the number of their provinces, counties, and districts; the aggregate of their officers, and the amount of their revenue; and why not take their estimate of the population? at least, until we can find one made by those who have better opportunities of ascertaining the fact. It will not do for us, who have only supposition to guide us, to contend with those who are in the habit of counting the people every year, and have such efficient means for arriving at the truth. We may make some deductions for the extravagance of eastern nations, and receive with caution the statements of different years, which we can compare together, and endeavour to ascertain the rate of increase; but we are not at liberty to call them liars, till we can prove them to have erred wilfully in this matter.
It is now time to introduce to the notice of the reader, the various estimates which have been given by the Chinese themselves, with the authorities on which they rest, in order that a complete view may be formed of the gradual growth, and present state of the Chinese population. ​
The above items are taken from regular Chinese works, and depend on the authority of official documents. By these, it will be seen, that before the Tartar conquest, when the Chinese dwelt under their native emperors, the population amounted to 60,000,000: and that after the invasion of the empire, by the rulers of the present dynasty, the population suddenly fell off to twenty or thirty millions; at which state it continued for fifty years, when it gradually rose, till it reached a hundred, and, subsequently, three hundred and odd millions. In order to account for this, it may be necessary to observe, that the wars which took place on the transfer of the empire into new hands, greatly diminished the number of the people: that, for scores of years, a great part of the empire remained unsubdued, on which account, the Tartars could not reckon on the inhabitants of the southern and western provinces as their subjects; and that, at the commencement of the present dynasty, the revenue was levied in the shape of a capitation tax, which, of course, led a great number to evade enrolment, lest they should be held responsible for the impost demanded by the government officers. Hence, it is not difficult to account for the great falling off in the population, during the first years of the ​present dynasty, and for the amazing difference between the forty-ninth and fiftieth year of Kang-he, when the capitation tax was removed, and converted into a land tax. Indeed considering the change of measures, adopted by the government, it was rather to he expected that the returns for the following year would exhibit an increase of twenty instead of five millions, as all those who had been previously deterred from giving in their names, had now every motive to concealment removed, and would willingly allow the registration of their signatures.
From the year 1711 to the year 1753, a period of forty-two years, the population appears to have advanced, from twenty-eight millions and a half to a hundred and three millions. This may be accounted for, partly in the way above mentioned, and partly by the gradual increase of the population. This increase will not appear very great, if it be considered, that an excess of three per cent, per annum, of the births over the deaths, will make the population treble itself in the time specified. The next increase, according to the official returns, is of a like character: viz. from 102,328,258 in 1753, to 307,467,200, in 1792; or a triple sum in about forty years. And, when we consider, that during these two periods of forty years each, the dominions of the Tartar-Chinese monarch were extending, and more and more persons were inscribed on the population list; besides the perfect tranquillity which the empire enjoyed during the whole series of years, it is not be wondered at, that the population should advance at such a rapid rate.
The customs and institutions of the Chinese, doubtless, contributed much to this increase; for, according ​to the precepts of Confucius, "of the three degrees of unfilial conduct, to be without posterity, is the greatest;" hence the Chinese of every class and degree marry when quite young, and rejoice in nothing so much as in the increase of their families. Added to the strong desire of issue, we may allude to the bounties offered by the Tartar rulers, when fully established in the dominion of the empire, proposing grants of the land which had been previously deserted by the terrified population, to any who would settle down and cultivate it; which has induced many to spread over the country and to prosecute the quiet and healthy arts of husbandry; by which their industry has been exercised, and their increase promoted; until now the whole land is full of inhabitants, and they are bursting their bounds on every side.
From 1792 to 1812, a period of twenty years, the increase has been inconsiderable compared with former years, being only one-sixth of the whole, and scarcely an addition of one per cent, per annum. This diminution in the rate of increase, during the last twenty years, previous to 1812, may be accounted for, partially by the growth of emigration, and, more fully by the introduction of opium, which, since the latter part of the last century, has been smuggled into the country, at an enormous rate. Those who have not seen the effects of opium smoking, in the eastern world, can hardly form any conception of its injurious results on the health, energies, and lives of those who indulge in it. The debilitating of the constitution, and the shortening of life, are sure to follow, in a few years, after the practice has been commenced; as soon and as certainly if not much more so, than is seen to be the case with ​those unhappy persons, who are addicted to the use of ardent spirits. The dealers in opium are little aware how much harm they are the instruments of doing, by carrying on this demoralizing and destructive traffic; but, the difference between the increase of the Chinese people, before and after the introduction of opium, ought to open their eyes, and lead them to ask themselves whether they are not accountable for the diseases and deaths of all those, who have suffered by its introduction. And if it be true that the Chinese increased at the rate of three per cent, per annum, before the commencement of the traffic, and at the rate of one per cent, per annum, since, it would be well for them to consider, whether the deficiency is not to be attributed, in some degree, to opium, and the guilt to be laid at the door of those who are instrumental in introducing it. They may flatter themselves, that if the growth of population were not thus checked by the introduction of opium, its increase would be curtailed by wars or pestilences; or the superabundant populace would perish by famine, and starvation effect what opium would not accomplish. Still, whatever cause might contribute to the balancing of the population with the means of subsistence, human life could not be sacrificed, without blame being attached somewhere; and blame, in proportion to the greatness of the evil which might result from the measure.
In addition to the official returns of the population above given, there are others furnished by different European writers, which as they appear to be derived from native sources, deserve some notice here. They are the following.
| Amiot's estimate, | for the year | 1743, | amounting to | 157,301,755 |
| Grosier's ditto | . . . . | 1762, | ditto | 198,214,553 |
| Morrison's ditto | . . . . | 1790, | ditto | 143,125,234 |
| Staunton's ditto | . . . . | 1792, | ditto | 333,000,000 |
With respect to the first it will be seen that it exhibits a greater population in 1743, than is found by the official returns to have existed in 1753. Amiot professes to have drawn his estimate of the population from the Ta-tsing-yïh-tung-che, "an account of what is essential to be known respecting China," published the eighth year of Këen-lung, A. D. 1743. Grosier, who seems anxious "to justify the assertion of the learned missionary, and to free him from all suspicion of exaggeration," enters more into detail respecting Amiot's estimate, and remarks that the Yïh-tung-che shews only the number of the jin-ting, or those who are taxable in each province, which amounted to 28,516,488; and as there are heads of families, Grosier suggests that Amiot multiplied these by five, in order to shew the number of individuals in the whole empire, thus making 142,582,440; then including the inhabitants of Fŭh-këen, about seven millions, which he had before omitted, and the civil and military officers, literati, &e., he makes the sum total amount to 157,301,755. This, however, is a very unsatisfactory method of ascertaining the population of a great country; and will not be warrant us on the ground of such calculations to call in question the authority of official returns. But it is more than likely that Amiot, or his friend Grosier for him, has entirely mistaken the case. Jin-ting is not the expression employed to designate families in Chinese statistical works, but men: the ​word for families being hoo, "doors," in distinction from kow, "mouths," which is the proper word for individuals. Again, the work to which he refers, though published in 1743, may refer to a census of the population at a previous date, and thus nearly synchronize with the census given in the year 1711, which we have seen by authentic records to have been 28,605,716.
Grosier's own enumeration was taken from an estimate of the population in "the tribunal of lands" at Peking, which was made in the twenty-seventh year of Këen-lung, A. D. 1762, and was received in France in 1779. It was written both in Chinese and French, and was translated into the latter at Peking. By this estimate it appears that the population amounted to 198,214,553. Upon this we may remark, that Grosier himself does not appear to have consulted the work referred to, but only an extract from it, or a translation of it. It is possible, therefore, that there may be some mistake, either in the number, or the date. Still as the census is placed between the years 1753, when the population was 102,328,256, and 1792, when it was 307,467,200, the intermediate number of 198,214,553 is not an unlikely estimate.
The account published by Dr. Morrison, in his view of China, for philological purposes, exhibits the population as amounting to 143,125,225 in 1790. This estimate was taken from a new edition of the Ta-tsing-yïh-tung-che, or "a complete statistical account of the empire under the present dynasty," published about the close of the reign of Këen-lung, probably A. D. 1790; which is the identical work referred to by Amiot, only a later edition. The edition which Dr. Morrison consulted exhibits the original amount of the population, ​at the beginning of the present dynasty, and then the increase since that time. The first, says Dr. Morrison, was probably about A.D. 1644, and the last about 1790. In a note at the bottom of the page, Dr. Morrison observes, "that the work itself does not state what the time of the original census was; that it was at the beginning of the present dynasty rests on the verbal authority of the natives." Neither does it appear that the work states the precise time when the second census was made; we only know that it was taken prior to the publication of the book in 1790, but how long previous to that date we are not aware. The dates, therefore, of 1644, for the first, and 1790 for the second, are merely hypothetical; and, as much depends on the period when a given census was taken, we cannot, in estimating a population which is constantly and rapidly increasing, take a census without date, and oppose it to the authority of those the dates of which are clearly ascertained. The first census quoted by Dr. Morrison is 27,241,129; while the second amounts to 143,125,225. Now if we refer to the official returns, the dates of which are determined in a foregoing page, we shall find that about the year 1711, the population amounted to 28,605,716, which is not far from the first statement furnished by Dr. Morrison; neither does it differ very materially from the number of jin-ting, or men, quoted by Amiot, and which he has mistaken for families, and multiplied to 157,301,755. The probability therefore is, that as both Amiot and Morrison consulted the Yïh-tung-che, only in two separate editions, the number quoted by the French missionary, and the first estimate produced by Dr. Morrison, refer to one and the same period; and that that period, ​instead of being 1644, as supposed by Dr. Morrison, or 1723, as Amiot imagined, was most likely the intermediate date of 1710, which would make it agree with the estimate given of the population for the following year in the Ta-tsing-hwuy-tëen, quoted above. Dr. Morrison's second estimate of 143,125,225 need not be placed exactly in 1790, because the work in which it was found appeared about that time; it might as well be assigned to the middle as the close of Këen-lung's reign, and fall more about the year 1765, which would allow for the gradual increase of the people from 102,328,258 in 1753, to 143,125,225, twelve years afterwards. Besides the indefiniteness of the dates in the account furnished by Dr. Morrison, there are some inconsistencies hard to be reconciled with other returns, or with the state of the country, which will be noticed in a subsequent page; it is due to Dr. Morrison, however, to observe, that the statements above given were published in 1817; and that in a paper drawn up by him, and inserted in the Anglo-Chinese College Report, for 1829, he has given an estimate of the population as amounting to 307,467,200, in 1792.
The account furnished to Sir G. Staunton, by the Chinese mandarin, Chow-ta-jin, has been frequently referred to, and not a little reprobated and called in question. Malte Brun thinks, that because the numbers, in each province, are given in round millions, and because, in two provinces, the number of millions is precisely the same, that, therefore, the whole document is a fabrication. But, how can these be considered as the marks of fabrication? The mandarin professed to derive his information from a particular friend at ​Peking, and merely gave it as a general estimate, without entering into particulars on the subject; and this is, by no means, an uncommon case with ourselves. The population of England, France, Germany, or Spain, is frequently given in round millions, without the specification of the units, except when a census is particularly demanded or published by government; and when a population is thus roundly stated, it does not throw discredit on the whole, to say, that two different regions, Austria and France, for instance, contain the same number of millions. With regard to Sir G. Staunton's informant, we may look upon his statement as entitled to credit, as far as general estimates go; and while it does not profess to give a particular account of the population, we may take it as corroborating or explaining some cotemporaneous statement derived from more authentic sources. Now this account of the population was delivered to Sir G. Staunton, in 1792, and does not materially differ from an official return, published in the same year, which makes the population amount to 307,467,200; and, considering that the one was a rough guess, in round numbers, and the other, the result of a minute investigation, we need not be surprised at the discrepancy that appears in the aggregate. The two together are sufficient, however, to prove that the population of China, at that period, exceeded three hundred millions.
We shall now present the reader with a comparative statement of the number of inhabitants in each province, according to the various accounts, accompanied by other statistical returns, calculated to throw light on the subject.
​With regard to the foregoing lists of the population, published at various periods, and adduced by different writers, we may observe, that the second, third, and seventh columns, being extracted from official documents with the dates annexed, may be considered as most worthy of regard: and, by a comparison of these three, it will be seen that, in almost all the items, as well as in the sums total, they advance in a progressive ratio, from 1711 to 1753, and 1812. It is a matter of regret that we are not able to furnish the particulars of the census taken in 1792, and extracted by Dr. Morrison from the Ta-tsing-hwuy-tëen, but the aggregate 307,467,200 corresponds with that system of progressive increase which has evidently been going on in China, for the last century. It will be seen also that the revenue derived from the various provinces, in the eighth, ninth, and tenth columns, is in such proportions as we might anticipate from the population of the respective regions as exhibited in the second, third, and seventh columns; considering that some of the provinces are more fertile than others, and therefore produce more, both in money and kind. From these considerations, therefore, we may venture to conclude, that the three columns above referred to, exhibit the most authentic and credible account of the population, at the periods specified.
Next to them in importance and credibility is the account given by Grosier, and the rough sketch brought home by Sir G. Staunton, in the fifth and sixth columns. Grosier's account exhibits a progressive increase in the various provinces, such as we might expect to find, and thus greatly corroborates the statements which precede and follow, in the third and seventh ​columns. The estimate brought home by Sir G. Staunton tends in some measure to the same end, though as a round statement, it cannot be expected to exceed in accuracy; and is merely introduced to shew the general opinion entertained by Chinese officers, respecting the population.
We are sorry, however, to observe, that we cannot derive so much advantage from the censuses in the first and fourth columns; inasmuch as, in several points, they differ from every other account of the population, and from what is known of the state of the country. In the first column, it will be observed that no inhabitants are assigned to Shan-tung, though that is so near the seat of government, and has always been considered a fertile and populous region; while, however, the first column exhibits Shan-tung as entirely destitute of inhabitants, the fourth column, derived from the same authority, presents the same province as swarming with more than 25,000,000 of inhabitants. During all this time, however, the province of Canton, which for the last century has been the seat of foreign commerce, has been nearly stationary; both columns exhibiting that province as containing little more than a million of inhabitants; when it is well known that Canton is one of the most populous regions of the empire, and possesses between the provincial city and Macao more inhabitants than are assigned to the whole province. Again, Yun-nan, which is known to be deficient in population, and which was at the beginning of the present dynasty but imperfectly subjected to the Tartar yoke, is said in the first and fourth columns to contain more than double the population of Canton; while the neighbouring province of Kwei-chow, which ​is similarly circumstanced, contained according to the first census but 51,089, and according to the next estimate of the same writer nearly 3,000,000. There is also much inconsistency with regard to the returns for Fŭh-këen; the population of that region contained according to the fourth column but 1,684,528; while we may venture to say, that there are a million emigrants from Fŭh-këen in various parts of the Chinese coast, and the Malayan archipelago, and more than ten times that number in the province itself. Lastly, the province of Hoo-pih, in the centre of China, fertile, populous, and one of the first that submitted to the Tartar yoke, is rated at 469,927 in the first column, and at 24,604,369 in the fourth column. These incongruities compel us to hesitate respecting the estimates in question, and incline us to depend more implicitly on those accounts the dates of which are certain, and the items consistent with each other.
It will easily be seen from what has been before stated, that the author inclines to receive the highest estimate that has been given of the Chinese population, and to rate it at 361,221,900: and thus after the fullest consideration of all that has been said on either side of the subject,—after the most patient investigation of native documents,—and after extensive enquiries and observations among the people for more than twenty years, he cannot resist the conviction which forces itself upon him, that the population of China Proper is as above stated; besides upwards of a million more for the inhabitants of Formosa, and the various tribes of Chinese Tartary, under the sway of the emperor of China.
We cannot dismiss the preceding table, without ​adding a word or two respecting the revenue of China as therein exhibited; shewing us, at the same time, the resources of the country, and the share of the burthen of government sustained by each individual. Before making up this statement, however, it will be necessary to explain what is meant by the denominations of money, and the measures of grain employed in the table. The tael is a nominal coin among the Chinese, representing something more than an ounce of silver, and may be rated at six shillings and eight pence, or the third part of a pound sterling. The shih is a measure of grain, containing 3160 Chinese cubic inches, or 3460 English cubic inches. The Chinese frequently weigh their grain, and then the shih, in Canton, is supposed to weigh 130 catties, or 162½ pounds; while in the interior a shih weighs 180 catties, or 225 pounds. The value of such a measure of grain is generally about one pound sterling. The revenue is derived principally from the land-tax, which is paid partly in kind and partly in money; it is generally a very light impost, amounting not, as some suppose, to one-tenth, but more usually to one-fiftieth or one-hundredth of the produce. There are also taxes on pledged articles, and more particularly a heavy impost on salt; while custom-houses are established on the sea coast, and at the most important passes in hills, and junctions of rivers, so as to secure the mercantile as well as the agricultural population. Some of the revenue thus derived is kept in the provinces, to pay the army, navy, and police, and to provide against famines, while a considerable proportion is forwarded to Peking for the immediate service of the emperor and his officers. We cannot, therefore, form a correct estimate of the ​resources of China, unless we consider all that is sent to the capital and expended in the provinces, as being alike drawn from the labour of the people, and devoted to the service of the state. Thus the revenue of the Chinese empire will appear to be as follows:—
| Land-tax, paid in money, and | 31,745,966 taels, | or | £10,581,755 |
| sent to Peking | 31,745,966 taels, | or | £10,581,755 |
| Ditto paid in grain, ditto | 4,230,957 shih, | worth | 4,230,957 |
| Customs, paid in money, and | 1,480,997 taels, | or | 493,666 |
| sent to Peking | 1,480,997 taels, | or | 493,666 |
| Grain kept in provinces | 31,596,569 shih, | worth | 31,596,569 |
| Grain ditto ditto | 28,705,125 taels, | or | 9,568,375 |
| | | | £56,471,322 |
This revenue, when divided amongst 361,221,900 persons, amounts to three shillings and three halfpence per head: and if that only which is sent to Peking be reckoned, namely, £15,206,378, it will not amount to much more than ten pence per head. Some persons may doubt, how a government over so great a country can be maintained for so small a sum, and how a people under an arbitrary rule can be let off with such insignificant imposts; particularly when in a free country like our own, and in a time of profound peace, each individual contributes upwards of two pounds, annually, as his share of the public burthen. But it must be remembered, that China has few or no resources beyond itself, that her foreign commerce is limited, and compared with the population insignificant, that comparatively few subsist by manufactures, and that almost all the inhabitants are dependent on agriculture. In a country, therefore, where the consumers fully equal the capabilities of the soil, and where every production is hastily devoured by a needy ​population, there is little left for a government to glean, or, to use a Chinese simile, to squeeze, out of the already-exhausted pockets of the people. It is not unlikely, also, that the present peaceful state of the country, and the willingness with which the Chinese submit to the Tartar yoke, is to be ascribed mainly to the light and insignificant burthens pressing on the people, who would soon complain, and perhaps revolt, if more heavily taxed. But how can the government manage to maintain an immense establishment of civil and military officers, besides an army and navy of nearly a million of men, upon fifteen or even fifty-six millions of pounds sterling? To this it may be replied, that the pay of a Chinese soldier is only four pence a day; that the salary of the highest officer under government does not exceed £8,000 per annum, of which there are not many; that there is not more than one officer to ten thousand people; and, that most of these have not more than £50 per annum: thus it is quite possible for the government to manage a country so thinly officered and so poorly paid, upon a comparatively small sum of money. Besides which, there is no national debt in China, so that all that is gathered goes to the actual maintenance of the government, and is not expended in paying the interest on obligations formerly contracted, to be defrayed by future generations.
In the report of the Anglo-Chinese college, for 1829, there is an estimate of the amount of land-tax paid in different provinces, extracted from the Ta-tsing-hwuy-tëen, or "Collections of statutes of the Tartar dynasty," by which it appears that the average rate of land-tax per mow, (or Chinese acre, somewhat smaller than an ​English acre,) is from fifteen cash to one hundred, or from one penny to sixpence : this, when calculated at its highest value, and multiplied by the number of acres in China under cultivation, will amount to about £12,000,000 sterling. This statement agrees with the common report of the natives, who affirm that from one to two per cent, of the produce is the utmost of what is exacted by the government in the shape of land-tax.