The Sun.
London, England, 1861-06-01 00:00:00

....---...—.....„.
to the smuggler. The opium trade, so long a smuggling
traffic, had tended greatly to inoculate the Chinese people
with a taste for contraband. The English merchants were
chargeable with that traffic, but in other matters they were
as fair and honourable a class of men as any in the world.
There was one point in which the new customs system would
injuriously affect the British trader. The assessors were
joint, namely, English, American, and French, and the two
latter would have ample means of obtaining an insight into
all the secrets of our trades. He thought it was the height
of simplicity in our Government to consent to such an ar-
rangement. Another defect was that the British merchant
was to be deprived at all the Chinese ports of his natural
protector, the consul. Mr. Bruce had declared that the

consul was not to interfere with trade questions, which were

all to be referred to himself.

Mr. S. FITZGERALD said that a good deal had fallen
from the bon, gentleman who had just sat down with which
he entirely concurred, but he thought that to the rights and
the wrongs of the quarrel between the Emperor of China
and the rebels it was not expedient for us to pay much at-
tention. The complaint of the hon. gentleman, that the
British Goternment had not observed the strictestneutrality

between the contending parties was, he thought, most un-
founded. The hon. member said we were guilty of a breach

of neutrality in collecting the customs dues of the Chinese
Government. But he begged to state that we did nothing of
the kind ; the British Government had nothing more to do
with the collection of the customs dues in China than it had
with the customs duties in France. At the present moment,
however, by the regulations of the British authorities in
China, an English vessel proceeding to one of the open ports
in the possession of the rebels was bound to go into one of
the ports in the possession of the Imperial Government, and
pay dues to them. Such a regulation as this placed the Bri-
tish merchant in a very unfair position, and it was quite
Blear that sooner or later it must bring us into collision
either with the Chinese authorities or the rebels. If the
Chinese Government were in a position to compel us to go

into one of their ports before a ;went to one of the ports of
the rebels we should not be in a condition to complain ; but
the fault he found was this, that it should be by a regula-
tion of our own Government in China that an English ves-
sel was compelled to go an imperial port before she pro-
ceeded to an open port in the possession of the rebels. He
also thought our position at Shanghae was a very peculiar
and dangerous one. It appeared the British troops ware kept
at Shanghae for the protection of the place against any at-

tack of the rebels.
Lord J. RUSSELL—It is for the protection of British
property.
Mr. S. FITZGERALD—WeII, it came to this that we
maintained a force there to protect British interests against
—whom ? Against those who were in arms in opposition to
the Imperial Government. He hoped the attention of her
Majesty's Ministers would be directed to this subject, be-
cause everybody must agree in the absolute necessity of ob-
serving the strictest neutrality between the contending
parties. He trusted these facts would be attended to by the
noble lord, because the doctrine—and the true doctrine—
had been laid down that it was our duty to maintain the
strictest neutrality.
Lord PALMERSTON said he thought his hon. friend
who spoke last but one had not sufficiently listened to the
statement of his noble friend the Foreign Secretary, with
regard to the arrangements between our Admiral and the
Taepings for the observance of the strictest neutrality, be-
cause many of his observations applied to a very different
state of things. He really thought they might dismiss that
part of the subject, since what his noble friend had read
from the papers before the house must have satisfied them
we were observing the strictest neutrality between the con-
tending parties. Then, what had been stated by the hon.
gentleman opposite seemed to him utterly unanswerable
with regard to the policy we had hitherto pursued in that
country. As long as a sovereign reigned over a country,
and his authority was in force, especially in those parts
where we traded, we had no choice but to regulate our inter-
course according to the imperial will. If we had said, be-
cause there was a rebellion in many of theprovinces of China,
and because the Emperor was not able to put it down, we
should leave British property and British subjects to the
mercy of the rebels, there would have been an outcry from
one end of this country to the other. The violation of the
treaty of Tien-tsin rendered it necessary to have recourse to
hostilities, and Lord Elgin, at a great sacrifice to his health,
went out, and eventually succeeded in negotiating another
treaty which gave full force and effect to all the securities
provided for our commerce which the first treaty had failed
to make. He thought it was totally unnecessary to enter
upon any justification of the Government for having entered
into treaty arrangements with the existing Imperial Govern-
ment of China, or to maintain that having done so was no
breach of neutrality between the two contending parties.
Mr. BUCHANAN explained that his observations went
to show that he considered the imperial authorities the only
de facto government.
Lord PALMERSTON was glad to accept the admission
of the hon. gentleman. On the one hand they had proved
that their policy was to maintain the strictest and bona fide
neutrality, and it had been admitted, on the other hand,
that they were perfectly right in negotiating with the exist-
ing government. This disposed of a good many of the
observations made in the course of the present discussion.
But great fault had been found with the arrangement made
by which British subjects were employed by the Chinese
Government in the collection of their customs. He thought
the objections were nut well founded. In the first place,
those British subjects were not acting under the authority
of the British Government, but were lent to the Chinese
Government, and were responsible to the Chinese authori-
ties for their conduct. It had been complained that they
were not placed under the authority of our consuls, but he
did not see there was great fault to find in that respect. It
was thought best to place them immediately under the au-
thority of Mr. Bruce. Generally speaking no doubt it was
an unusual course that British subjects should be chosen to
collect the customs of the Chinese Government, but the fact
was that not only could. no dependence be placed on native
officials, but we had a direct interest in seeing these customs
duties properly levied, because out of them was to be paid
the indemnity stipulated to be handed over to England by
the Chinese Government. It had been contended that the
present system tended to indirect smuggling. Certainly it
was a very ingenious mode of reasoning, that if there was
any one argument strong against you, the best course was
to affirm directly the contrary. That was the course of
logic which his hon. friend had adopted, because unless the
Government were exceedinglc misinformed, the present sys-
tem had a direct tendency to check smuggling. (Hear.) It
was said the Chinese authorities had been accustomed to
receive bribes from the British merchants, and that if they
were deprived of those fees they would be compelled to resort
to other means to make up the deficiency. No doubt this
was a system which tended to establish a regular and legal
system of customs, but he could not believe that the fact cf
there being a regular system by which the legal dues, and
no other, were collected, should induce British merchants
to smuggle at other ports where no custom-houses were
established. His belief was that this system was a fair and
equitable arrangement—that it would be advantageous no
doubt to the Chinese Government, but also productive of
immediate benefit to us, inasmuch as it would secure to us
tie gradual payment of those indemnities which were stipu-
lated by the treaty of Pekiri> With regard to the point
adverted to by the honourable gentleman opposite (Mr. S.
Fitzgerald), that British vessels were compelled to go to
ports where duties were paid to the Imperial Government,
although they might be destined for ports in the possession
of the rebels, he (the noble lord) was not aware of any in-
formation on the subject, but certainly it was one worthy
of consideration and inquiry. With regard to Shanghae,
everybody knew that it was a most important settlement,
and that it had gradually superseded Canton as a great mart
of British commerce. It was also well known that towns
unfortunately occupied by the Taepings had not afterwards
presented the appearance of wealth and comfort which they
presented before such occupation, and undoubtedly the occu-
pation of Shanghae by the rebels was not a thing which the
English community at that place would very much desire.
He believed it was of great importance to keep a British
force at Shanghae, for the purpose of detecting British pro-
perty in that town from any attack by the rebels. It had
been urged that great advantages would arise from the
establishment of several free towns in different places on
Chinese territory. If we were masters of China we might
establish free towns in certain places, but the Chinese ter-
ritory belonged to the Emperor of China or to the rebels,
and certainly not to us, and therefore we had no power to
make any such arrangement. All they could do was to
Englisht
hs, eries
act
ncterow pe:
itohi
ntanahr
Secretary
one
hsK
.ot
EnglishaEt State
weref soar
avail themselves of the privileges which this treaty gave
them. They had no right to assume that the Chinese
Government had.ceascd to exist, so long as it continued to
govern a large and important part of the empire, and espe-
cially the seaport towns, in which our intercourse prevailed.
All her Majesty's Ministers could be expected to do was to
take care not to give either party cause to complain, so that
so far as hostilities were concerned we should preserve the
strictest neutrality. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. WHITE thought that the regulation with regard to
vessels,otihfepecrosnitsetenddiinng, must lead us into some con-
iadGFvo tovahres
Foreign
Government
speech cf
ft hahi
of
dsf
hadot
bh s the e
failedry
ecnobledo
Rars t
:pl
soot
satisfyr:
ndi
e yt hooeff
slt,hoS:Ye
DndureLmollpliothnes,n7bityhlEzeynacifillitihopenehsooopufest:er,
perfect neutrality. Our object ought to be to conciliate the
one
armed men.
his
motion.

I SuLRAIN
mD
vOe Fd fJo
rE to
IS-PesYof correspondence
Mr. S. ESTCO
with the authorities of the Isle of Jersey on the subject of
the report of the Royal Commission.
Sir G. C. LEWIS had no objection to produce the corre-
spondence referred to by the right hon. gentleman.
An HON. MEMBER moved that the house be counted.
There were not 30 members present when the motion was
made; but before the sand had run its course, there was a
considerable accession to the forces on the Treasury bench,
and the benches below the gangway on the Liberal side
having received a small reinforcement, the requisite 40 were
present when the Speaker proceeded to count.
THE NAVIES OF ENGLAND AND FRANCE.
Sir J. PAKINGTON—Sir, I now rise to call attention
to a subject the importance of which no one will deny. I
have received information with respect to the progress of
the French Government in building armour-covered ships,
to which I think it ray duty to call the attention of the