The Sun.
London, England, 1840-04-08 00:00:00

EVENING EDITION•

of October, 1835, relative to the case of Mr. Simes,
you express en opinion that the power gi,ei=
by the Act 26th George 111., cap. 57, sec. 35,
to the supercargoes of the East India Company to arrest
and send to England persons resident at Canton, may now
be lawfully exercised by the Superintendent of British
trade in China, by virtue of the Order in Council of the
9th December, 1533, which transfers to the Superinten-
dent all the powers and authorities which were by law
vested in the Supercargoes, at the date of the termination
of the exclusive rights of the East India Company. As a
misconception on this point might give rise to much ern-
harassment, both to his Majesty's Government and to the
Superintendents personally, I have to state to you for your
guidance, that the clause of the Act of 26 Geo. 111., upon
which you rest your opinion, was repealed by the 146th
clause of the Act 33 Geo. 111 , c. 52, and further that the
only power exercised by the supercargoes was that of re-
moving unlicensed persons. But as no license from his
Majesty is now necessary to enable his Majesty's subject;
to trade with or reside in China, such power of expulsion
has altogether ceased to exist with respect to China.
" I am, &c., " PALMERSTON."
After this Captain Elliot, in his honest desire to check
practiaes incompatible with the British interests in China,
framed regulations for the maintenance of a police in the
inner waters of a Canton—he acts upon them--he sends
them home to the Noble Lord, and this is the answer of
the Noble Lord at pages 317 and 318 :
" VISCOUNT PALMERSTON TO CAPTAIN ELLIOT.
" Foreign-office, March 23, 1839:
" Sir—Your despatch of the 18th of April last, relating
to certain regulations which you had thought it advisable
to establish with a view of controlling the conduct of the
crews of British merchant vessels trading with Canton, has
been submitted to her Majesty's law officers, with a re-
quest that they would take the same into consideration and
report their opinion, whether those regulations are in any
sway at variance with the laws of England, or inconsistent
with the territorial rights of China. The law officers
have accordingly reported that the regulations in question
are not in any way at variance with the laws of England,
provided that they be duly made and issued by her Ma-
jesty, according to the Act 3 and 4 Wm. IV, c. 93, s. 6,
but that you have no power of your own authority to make
any such regulations. With respect to the territorial rights
of China the law officers are of opinion that the regula-
tions, amounting in fact to the establishment of a system
of police at Whampoa, within the dominiona of the Em-
peror of China, would be an interference with the abso-
lute right of sovereignty enjoyed by independent States,
which can only be justified by a positive treaty, or implied
permission from usage."
And then the Noble Lord gives Captain Elliot an instruc-
tion which the Noble Lord must have known would be im-
possible to execute, " to obtain the written consent of the
Governor of Canton." Now it is extraordinary that the
Noble Lord has produced evidence himself from the Chi-
nese of the annoyance they experienced from the absence
of the powers in question. At page 344 the House w',ll
read ax follows:
THE PREFECT AND COMMANDANT OF CANTON JOINTLY TO