The Sun.
London, England, 1857-01-07 00:00:00

In 1848 there was a long controversial correspondence on
this subject between my predecessor Leu and the British
Plenipotentiary, Mr. Bonham ; and Mr. Bonham being satis-
fied that an interview within the city was utterly out of the
question, addressed a letter to Leu ou the April, 1849, in
which he said—" At the present time I can have no more* (or
still less can I have) discussion with your Excellency on this
subject." He further issued a notice from the factories to the
effect that no foreigner was to enter the city, which was in-
serted in the papers, and he communicated this to the Bri-
tish Government. t There was not a Chinese or foreigner of
any nation who did not know that the question was never to
be discussed again ; and is shown by the records. His Ma-
jesty the Emperor was informed in a memorial, drawn up by
myself, the then governor of the province, together with the
late Commissioner Leu, that Mr. Bonham had stated in his
correspondence that this question could not be discussed,
and had issued a notice prohibiting foreigners from entering
the city.

Assiiming that your Excellency has long been aware of
this, I am utterly unable to explain what is meant in the
letter under acknowledgment by the statement that the pre-
sent demand is in no way connected with the negotiations of
former years, and it is only for the admission of foreign offi-
cials into the city.
As to former negotiations, Mr. Bonham stated in corre-
spondence, that discusiion of this question could net be re
newed, and issued a prohibitory notice on the subject.
Your Excellency's proposition having reference to the very
same question (as that mooted by Mr. Bonham), how can it
be said to have no connection with it ? And when Mr. Bon-
ham has said that this question could be no more discussed by
him, it is to be inferred that it can still less be discussed by
your Excellency. '

To conclude, our two countries have been many years on
friendly terms. Without cause you have in one day come
upon us with hostilities, the result of which has been intoler-
able misery to the people. Let your Excellency ponder well
what is no vain fiction of mine, that hundreds and thousands
of them have been for days past clamorously tendering their
services, ardent and nitited for the defence of the city.
I accordingly reply, availing myself of the occasion to wish
your Excellency prosperity, ctc.
A necessary communication addressed to his Excellency Sir
Michael Seymour, Naval Commander-in-Chief.
• Hien-fung, 6th year, 10th month, 6th day (3d November,
1856.) Translated by
(Signed) THOMAS WAD; Chinese Secretary.

British Consulate, Canton, Nov. 4, 1856.
Sir,—l am in receipt of your Excellency's letter of yester-
day, referring me to the correspondence between your Excel-
lency's predecessor and Mr. Bonham, our late plenipoten.
tilry. The perusal of all that is on record will show you that
although, when the Chinese Government refused in 1849 to
fulfil the promise given iu 1847, the right of entry into Can-
ton was for the moment waived, it was distinctly informed
at the time and since, that our claim was in no respect aban-
doned. My demand, however, as I have already told you, is
entirely distinct from any former proposition on the subject.
It is useless to restate my reasons for insisting upon it, and I
have only to add until it is acceded to I have no alternative
but to persist in the course you have compelled me to adopt.
--I have, &c.,

(Signed) M. SEYXOI7IC.
His Excellency Yeh, Imperial High Commissioner, &C.

Encounter, at Canton, Nov. 3, 1856.

Sir,—Since my letter of proceedings of the 311th ult., I
have confined my operations to maintaining the breach in the
city wall, which the Chinese have continually evinced a dis-
position to close; also to clearing away the Chinese buildings
in the rear of the factory.
On the 30th ult. and Ist inst. I wrote the two letters to the
High Commissioner of which your Excellency has received
copies from Mr. Consul Parkes, as well as a copy of the High
Commissioner's reply to the first ' The result has been my
resuming offensive operations this day against the govern-
ment buildings in the city, from the Encounter, Sampson,
and the Dutch Folly,which, as far as cam. be at present ascer-
tained, will be continued to-morrow.—l have!.,
_&c
(Signed) M. SEYMOUR.
His Excellency Sir John Bowling, LL.D., her
Majesty's Plenipotentiary, Hong Kong.

Superintendency of Trade, Hong Kong, Nov. 4, 1856.
Sir,--I have to acknowledge your Excellency's despatch of
yesterday, announcing the resumption of offensive operwieus.
I think, under present circumstances, it is desirable to
convey to your Excellency copy of a communication drafted
at the Foreign-office, and sent by Sir George Bonham, under
Lord Palmerston's instructions, to the Imperial Commissioner
on the 21st August, 1849.
In a communication dated 6th July, made to the India and
China Association by order of Lord Palmerston, it is stated
" her Majesty's Government have no intention to renounce
the right of entering the city of Canton."—l have. &c.,
(Signed) JOHN BOWRING.
His Excellency Sir Michael Seymour, K.C.8.,
Naval Commaader-in-Chief, Canton.

Victoria, Hong Kong, Aug. 21, 1849.
The undersigned, &c., has been instructed by her Majesty's
Government to make to the High Commissioner the following
communication :

The British Government has learnt with surprise and dis-
pleasure that the Government of China has declined to fulfil
the engagements of the treaties by which British subjects
were to be admitted free accers to the city of Canton.
In the treaty of Nankin, of the 29th August, 1842, it was
stated that " his Majesty the Emperor of China agrees that
British subjects, with their families and establishments, shall
be allowed to reside for the purpose of carrying on their mer-
cantile pursuits, without molestation or restraint, at the
cities and towns of Canton, Amoy, Foochow-foo, Ningpo, and
Shanghae."
In the supplementary treaty of Hoomun-Chae of the Bth Oe-
tober, 1843, it was again recorded that " The treaty of per-
petual peace and friendship provides for British subjects and
their families residing at the cities and towns of Canton, Foo-
chow, Amoy, Ningpo, and Shanghae, without molestation
and restraint."

(Signed) JOIIN BOWRING,
His Excellency Rear-Admiral Sir M. Seymour,
K.C.8., Nara' Commander-in-Chief, &c.,
Canton.

In the further treaty, signed at Bocca Tigris on the 4th of
April, 1846, it was said,—" Hi, Majesty the Emperor of
China having en his own part distinctly stated that when in
the course of time mutual tranquillity shall have been in-
sured, it will be safe and right to admit foreigners into the
city of Canton ; and the local authorities being for the pre-
sent unable to coerce the people of that city, the plenipoten-
tiaries on either side mutually agree that the execution of the
above measure shall be postponed to a more favourable period ;
but the claim of right is by no means yielded or abandoned
on the part of her Britannic Majesty."
And, finally, in the article agreed upon at Canton, on the
6th April, 1847, it was stated, as recorded in Keying's note
of that day to the British plenipotentiary, " The intention of
returning my visit to the city is excellent, but the time for it
ought still somewhat to be delayed.

" It is therefore now agreed that two years from this day's
date British officers and people shall have free entrance into
the city."

These engagements, thus solemnly recorded, the Chinese
government has now declined to fulfil. But the faithful per-
formance of treaty engagements by sovereigns is the security
for peace between nations. The Queen of England has ful-
filled her treaty engagements to the Emperor of China. The
Emperor of China has not fulfilled his treaty engagements to
the Queen of England. Why has the Emperor broken his
word ? Is it because he is unwilling to keep his engage-
ments, or because he is unable to do so? If he is unwilling
to keep his engagements, how can the British government
trust to the Emperor's word, and how can there be lasting
peace between the twe governments ? If the Emperor is
unable to keep his promise, because his word and his orders
are not respected by his subjects, how could he expect that
foreign governments should show him more respect than his
own subjects are willing to show him ? And will not foreign
governments be obliged to inflict on the Chinese people, in
order to repress their violence, those punishments which the
Emperor is too weak to be able to award ?

(Signed) MICHAEL SEYMOUR,
His Excellency Yeh, Imperial High Commissioner,
Governor. General of the Two Kwans,,, dvc., &C.

Yeh, Imperial Commissioner, Governor-General of the Two
Kwang Provinces, &e., makes communication in reply :
On the 10th inst. I received a letter from your Excellency,
dated the 9th inst., with a copy of a proclamation appended
to it.
As to the imputation that I am vainly seeking to incite the
people to a rupture, in, support of an unjust and per-onal
policy, I would ask by what person have they really been
incited to a rupture in this case ?
The seizure of some criminals on the part of the Chinese
Government, a small matter, having been misrepresented as
a hauling down of your flag ou the 23d, 24th, and 25th ult.,
you opened fire on the diffrent forts of he city. To this, in
consideration of the peaceful relations s) many years subsist-
ing between us, I made no rejoinder whatever. Had I not re-
ferred myself to the higher principles, which your letter
accuses me of not keeping in view, I should have shown
no such forbearance. But when, foll ming up this, on the
27th and 28th, you opened a fire on the city, by which
numberless houses were consumed, with considerable loss
of life, the whole population, thus subjected to calamity,
gnashed their teeth in anger. At the time you took pos-
session of the forts, although the gentry and the mercan-
tile community of the whole city put forth placards, I. did
not issue any proclamation. But when you had continued
firing on the old city and the new, from the 27th October to
the sth instant, the people came crowding to my court in
hundreds of thousands, demanding why, after all the
years that the English had traded at Canton, to their
great advantage, without any cause of complaint against
them, the people of Canton, they should be subjected sud-
denly to such suffering at the hands of the English, declaring
that they were ready and eager to subscribe funds, to be de-
posited iu the public hall, for the provision of the necessaries
of war, and of the expenses of rewarding merit, and requir-
ing me with instance to publish a scale of rewards.
With the public mind thus impatient (of your acts) I could
not but concede what was requested, and accordingly, on
the 27th I issued my proclamation. But did the idea ori-
ginate with me ? The people's placards were out before my
proclamation was issued. Wherein then have I been moving
the people ?
As to another observation in your letter, let your Excel-
lency well remember, that without any injury done to the
English by the people of Canton, your Excellency fired at
once into the city, and ask yourself whether this consists
with the forms of war, as waged by a great state, or whether
this is the practice of civilisation.

But is this the way to secure tranquillity to the Chinese
People ?

Let the Chinese Government well consider these things;
and whatever may happen in future between the two coun-
tries that may be disagree able to China, let the Chinese Go-
vernment remember that the fault thereof will be upon them.
Let the High Commissioner send this communication to
he Imperial Government of Pekin.
The undersigned, (to.,
(Signed)

S. G. BONHAM.

A true copy.

(Signed) GEo. S. MORRISON.

Yeb, Imperial Commissioner, Governor-General of the Two
Kwang Provinces, &c., makes a communication in reply..
On the 4th inst., I received your Excellency's communica-
tion of the 3d, and have acquainted myself with its contents.
As to the question of admission into the city your Excel-
lency is already aware that, a long correspondence having
passed on the subject, between my predecessor Leu, and the
British Plenipotentiary, Mr. Bonham, it was with the full
conviction that the temper of the Canton people is fierce and
violent, and, in fact, different from the people of the other
ports, thet Mr. Bonham writes the words, " henceforth the
matter shall be no more discussed," and issued a notice, pro-
hibiting foreigners from entering the city, which was in-
serted in the newspapers—the above being truths and not in
any way false averments of mine (when therefore) the letter
under acknowledgment states that "although when the pro-
mise given in 1847 was broken in 1849, the claim of the Bri-
tish Government was, for the moment, waived" (I must ob-
serve) this was all owing to the fact that the Kwang-tung
people were unanimously opposed to (your admission). The
Kwang-tong people of the present day are the Kwang-tun peo-
ple of 1849. If admission into the city had been practicable
in 1849, there would have been no occasion for the prohibit-
ing notice of VII.. Bohnam. Your Excellency's proposition
being identical with his will not bear discussion. I would
have you ask yourself, if the question of admission to which
the Kwang-tong people were opposed before be, in all likeli-
hood, less easy now, when they have been subjected to grie-
vous affliction, than it was in 1849.
As to the correspondence of which your Excellency's letter
says, " A perusal of all that is on record will show," &c.,
there is no part of it with which I am not conversant, and I
am regarding as final the latest decision arrived at therein.
In the administration of all matters in China the rule ad-
hered to is that which heaven (or nature) shows is the right
one to pursue ; the chief consideration is the people.
It is said in the Book of History, " Heaven sees as
i my peo-
ple see, Heaven hears as my people hear ;" that s to say,
that what the people are averse to Heaven (the Deity) is
averse to.
Is not this an additional reason why I should
is the
unable to
constrain (the people)? I must add, that as it the habit of
your. Excellency's nation to adore the spirits of heaven, it
behoves you, in my opinion, so much the more to conform in
your actions to the principle given us by heaNren.t.
Let your Excellency maturely consider this !
I accordingly reply to you, availing myself of the opportu-
nity to wish your Excellency prosperity, &c., (ire.
A necessary communication addressed to his Excellency Sir
Michael Seymour, Naval Commander-in-Chief,
Hien-fung, 6th year, 10th moon, Bth day (sth November,
1856.) Translated by
(Signed) Tuomas WADE, Chinese Secretary.

--I accordingly reply to you, availing myself of the occasion
to wish your Excellency prosperity.
A necessary communication adrdessed to his Excellency
Sir Michael Seymour, K.C.8., &c.
Hien-fung, 6th year, 10th moon, 14th day, 11th Novem-
ber, 1856. Translated by
(Signed) THOMAX WADE, Chinese Secretary.

(Summons senFtoirntstoonthtehe MandarinhcomlmBsa6ling the Bogue
The British Admiral wishes Nov., .
to spare life, and is not at
war with the Chinese ; and as it is necessary for him to
hold possession of the Bogue Forts until the conduct of
the Viceroy Ych can be referred to the Emperor at Pekin,
will be given for the Purpose
one hour of clearing out; if
this offer is at once accepted, boats will be permitted to
pass to and from the main land and the Wantuno.s. In this
case the forts will remain uninjured, ready to l'
be returned
in the same state to the Chinese when these differences
are over, and the rebels will neither be allowed to pass the
Bogue Forts nor to enter them whilst in our possession.
At the expiration of an hour his answer came. The ed,,
miral commanding the Bogue Forts cannot give them up,
as he would lose his head, and he must therefore fight.
The small mandarin who was the bearer of the message
understood English, and had been a pilot. He stated that
there were 500 soldiers in each fort.
(Signed) M. SEYMOUR;
Rear-Admiral and Commander-in-Chief
of J'ie British Forces.

Return of killed and wounded on board her Majesty's
ship Nankin, on the 12th November, 1856, at the attack
on the Bogue Forts.

British Consulate, Canton, Nov. 6, 1856.
Sir,--I am in receipt of another letter from your Excellency,
dated yesterday. I have nothing to add to what I have before
written, except that I observe with much regret that no

KILLED.
James Towey, boy, let class.

WOUNDED.
Mr. Oliver T. Lang, midshipman.
Alexander Morrison, seaman.
George Dwyer, seaman.
Thomas Kirby, seaman.
Richard Proctor, seaman.

* The Chinese will translate either way.
t The manner in which this is put is uncourteous, especi-
ally when contrasted with the form of mentioning a reference
to the Chinese Government a little farther on.
.1.- Heaven written in the translation with a capital may be
taken as a synonyme for tho Deity ; without it, for nature.

CIRCULAR.
Her Britannic Majesty's Consul has received the iostruc-

prisoners by the officer deputed to conduct it, that theierchg , satisfactory result is to be anticipated from a protracted cor-
was in no respect a foreign vessel, I maintain that there Imo resondeuce.—Accept, etc.,
no mistake committed. In the next place the twelve men (Sicced) M. SEYMOUR,
were handed back to the Constil when the examination was Naval Commander.in-Chief of the British Forces
over, but he declined to receive them ; there was not then in the Canton River.
eith_r any refusal to return the men to their vessel. 1 His Excellency Yeli, Imperial High Commissioner, &c.
As to what is said in the letter under acknowledgment re-
specting that rule of intercourse between foreign officials and
the native authorities that has always obtained at the other
ports, it has been found that the people of Kwang-tung are
extremely fierce and violent, differing in nature from people
of other provinces.

Yeb, Imperial ,Commissioner, Governor-General of the Two
Hwang Provinces, dze., makes this declaration to his Ex-

cellency Sir Michael Seymour, Naval Commander in-Chief,
I have received your Excellency's letter •f yesterday, ac-
knowledging my communication (of the sth Nov.), wherein
you state, " I have nothing to add to what I have before
written, except that I observe with much regret that no
satisfactory result is to be anticipated from a protracted
correspondence.''
This communication I have well considered, and have now
to remark that the several replies I have made to your com-
munications have been exceedingly clear and distinct, so that
your Excellency, I conclude, will early have understood all
the explanations I have therein given you. To resume, how-
ever; in the management of the affairs of our two nations, far
from having recourse, just as individual nations may prompt,
to forcible measures, wo should seek to carry with us
public opinion, by adhering to the rules of heaven (or
nature). Your Excellency should again examine the state-
ments in my previous communications.
I avail myself of this opportunity to wish your Excellency
prosperity.

- Hiett-fiing, 6th year, 10th moon, 16th day (7th November,
1856.) Translated by
(Signed) H. S. PARKES.

Encounter, at Canton, November 6, 1856.
Sir,—Since my communication of the 3d inst. my opera-
tions have beeen limited, Ist, to showing the authorities
that it is in our power to throw shot and shell to reach the
most distant of the city forts and government buildings ; and
this morning, in consequence of a most menacing number of
war junks having collected under the protection of the French
Folly Fort, it appearing absolutely necessary, for the security
of our position, that they should be dispersed or destroyed,
the Barracouta and Coromandel, steam vessels, with our

armed boats, successfully accomplished this service, though I
regret to state not without the loss of 1 man killed and
wounded.

Considerable resistance was offered, and the fire from the
junks and forts, in the early part of the operation, was
stoutly maintained. The security of our position here will
now be the main object of our exertions.—l have, &c.,
(Signed) M. SEYMOUR.
His Excellency Sir John Bowring, LL.D., her
Majesty's Plenipotentiary, Hong Kong.

List of Officers engaged in the destruction of war junks and
the French Folly Fort, on the 6th November, 1856.
Calcutta.—Launch, Mr. E.H. Stuart, acting mate; barge,
Lieutenant F. J. Campbell, Mr. Eden, midshipman; pinnace,
Lieutenant Beamish, Mr. Kennedy, midshipman.
Sybille.—Launch, Lieutenant A. H. Alston, Mr. W. H. De
Burgh, midshipman; barge, Lieutenant E. F. Dent, Mr. H.
T. Price, midshipman ; pinnace, Mr. T. K. Hudson, acting
mate; Ist cutter, Mr. A. T. Brooke, midshipman.
Encounter. —Pinnace, Lieutenant Gibson ; Ist cutter, Mr.
F. R. Hardinge, acting mate; 2d cutter, Mr. Alex. Tupman,
midshipman; 2d gig, Mr. W. G. P. O'Callaghan, cadet.
Sampson.-Ist cutter, Lieutenant Wm. Clark ; 2d cutter,
Mr. Charles H. Murphy, midshipman.
Winchester.—Cutter, Mr. Wm. Bell, midshipman. A
party of Royal Marines light infantry ou board the steam-
tender Coromandel, muter the command of Captain Boyle,
R.M.L. 1., her Majesty's ship Calcutta.
(Signed) CHARLES J. B. ELLIOT, Commodore.

List of Casualties amongst the Naval Forces employed at the
destruction of war junks and the French Folly Fort, on
the 6th November, 1856.
KILLED.
William Prowse, ordinary seamen, Calcutta.
WOUNDED.
William Reid, Royal Marine, dangerously, Barracouta.
John Barns, Royal Marine, severely, Barracouta.
John Dempster, quartermaster, slightly, Barracouta.
Charles Hipsey, stoker, slightly, Barracouta.
(Signed) CHAS. A. ANDERSON,
Staff Surgeon, Calcutta, in Medical Charge
of the Force disembarked,

Government-house, Hong Kona, Nov. 8, 1856.
Sir,—l have received your Excellency's despatch of the
6th inst., informing me that shot and shell had been thrown
into the most distant of the city forts and Government build-
ings, and announcing the destruction of a large number of
Chinese war jun Ks, and the capture of the French Folly Fort.
I have to express to your Excellency my great and admir-
ing sense of the consummate skill and prudence with which
the military operations have been directed, and to all con-
cerned my thorough appreciation of the promptitude, zeal,
and bravery which have given them such successful results.
Whatever may have been the importance of the question
which necessitated the first appeal to hostilities, it has now
assumed a character seriously involving all our present and
future relations with China ; and I am of opinion that every-
thing possible should be done to give effect to treaties which
have been pertinaciously and recklessly ♦iolated—a small and
turbulent fraction of the population of China cannot be
allowe,l to supersede the engagements of their Emperor to
the sovereign of Great Britain.

I submit-to your Excellency that the next step to take
,hould be a notice to the Imperial Commissioner that unless,
within a period to be fixed by you, your reiterated demands
are complied with, the Bogue Forts will be destroyed.
I think it should also be stated that the object of our en-
tering the city is to carry forward a work of peace and amity;
to put a stop to the miseries, whose infliction has been ren-
dered imperative by the resistance to lawful requirements,
mild to prevent their recurrence on any future occasion.—l
have, &c.,

British Consulate, Canton„ Nov. 9, 1856.
Sir,—l have to acknowledge your Excellency's letter of the
7th inst. in which you dislaim the adoption of forcible mea-
sures, and appeal to higher principles as the proper guide of
our actions.
I deeply regret that your Excellency should not at an
earlier date have kept these principles in view, for it is owing
to the utter disregard of them on your Excellency's part, as
evinced by your violation of treaty engagements, your die-
courtesy and inattention to my demands, that the present
unwilling resort to force has been rendered unavoidable.
Neither is it creditable to your Excellency that, in the em-
ployment of force on your part, you should have recourse to
measures so opposed to civilised practices, as that of offering
a reward for the indiscriminate murder of Englishmen. I
enclose you a copy of one of those proclamations, the original
of which, under your Excellency's seal, is in possession of
her Majesty's consul.
I take this opportunity to repeat the demands already so
clearly presented to your Excellency in my letters of the 30th
of October, and Ist of November, and to again staN that
your Excellency's compliance therewith is the only solution
of the present difficulty that I can accept. The fulfilment of
the particular treaty engagements, which is the sole object
of those demands, is now proved to be indispensable for the
preservation of 'peace and amity, and the prevention in fu-
ture of disastrous misunderstandings like the present. I
therefore once again warn your Excellency that active ope-
rations will be recommeuced, unless I receive within 24 hours
your assent to all I have required. The experience of the last
fortnight should have convinced your Excellency of the futi-
lity of seeking to invite the people to support you in your
unjust and personal policy, and, I therefore, trust you will
well consider the danger of the crisis you persist in urging
on.—Accept,