The Sun.
London, England, 1845-11-06 00:00:00

' THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY MORNING, NOVEMBER 6, 1845.

• existence at Singapore.' It is difficult, we conceive, to find two
places whose situation is more aisimilar in every respect.
Singapore is a place wherd rent Of land istiemartablY mode.`
rate; it is the emporium of an important and valuable trade, with a
large and Comparatively wealthy population. Hong-Kong. on the
other hand,, is already taxed in ground.rents alone higher than any
colony in the world; it has no trade at all, and is the •mere place
of residence of Government and its officers, with a few British
Merchants, and a very scanty and poor Chinese population.

•' When Hong-Kong is as able to bear taxation as Singapore, it
may, in our humble judgment, be still a question, whether the
heavy,grounikrents ought not to exempt the inhabitants from
furthir payments; but whatever may eventually be considered ex-
pedient, we would wish to impress upon the Government our belief
that oppressive burdens laid on an infant trade, and on a new
colony, situated as Hong_Kong now is, must inevitably be not only
unjust to the early settlers, but ultimately fatal to the settlement
itself.

" We are bound, as merchants, to speak with diffidence on
points of law where we find our views at variance with those of
the colonial law officers : but we must still adhere to our opinion,
and re-assert our conviction, that Ordinance No. 2 is alike uncon-
stitutional and illegal.

" We quite concur with his Excellency in the wisdom of his
having refused to levy a small tonnage duty in Hong. Kong. for as
most of the business transacted in this harbour consists in-the mere
transhipment of goods Pram one vessel to another, we are satisfied
that any attempt to enforce such a charge would merely have had
the effect of driving the ships to one, of the adjacent anchorages
without the limits of the port.
" We also fully concur in the sound policy which has exempted
wine, beer. and spirits from duty, inasmuch as any revenue which
could have been derived from the limited consumption in so small
a community could not have been expected to pay the expense of
collection.

" That the civil, naval, and military servants of Government are
subject to the payment of 8 per cent. as an Income-tax in Hong-
Kong, from which the merchants are exempt, we submit does not
apply to this as a colonial question, for they are equally liable to
that tax at other places, and even on the high seas.
. .

" It remains for us to notice the remarks of his Excellency iLI
Council on what Is termed the trade of Hong. Kong.
" The reported increase in tonnage we cannot consider any-
proof of extended trade, for it shows nothing more than the number
of ships that have anchored in Hong-Kong Bay on their way to
other ports.

" All, or nearly all, the cotton ships from India have stopped a
few hours at Hong-Kong before proceeding to Canton, but not a
single bale of their cargoes has been landed or sold here; and the
same remark may generally apply to the ships from England, but it
would be as erroneous to infer from the number of inward vessels,
that there is an increase of trade, or indeed that there is any trade
at all, as to suppose, because all the English tea.laden ships from
Canton call here for their dispatches, that Hong-Kong is the centre
of the tea trade.

" With regard to the report of Mr. Gutzlaff, that ' 120,000
pieces of cotton goods have been taken away by 13 junks this
year,' we are not prepared to deny that this officer may have
access to sources of information of which we are deprived; but
we submit that setae daft' may be entertained of the authenticity
of mercantile statements, which appear to have eluded the ob.
nervation of the whole mercantile community. We are quite
satisfied Mr. Outzlaff must have been convinced that such a trade
really existed, but as we cannot find that his Information has been
derived from any of the British merchants, we are apprehensive
that he has relied on. the reports of the Chinese junk people—a
class by no means remarkable for strict adherence to correctness in
questions of statistical detail. _

" Supposing, however, the reports to be correct, it by no means
follows that such deliveries of cotton cloths can be deemed part
of the trade of Hong-Kong, for nothing is of more common occur-
rence than for the junk-owners to purchase goods in Canton,
deliverable outside the port, at Macao, Hong-Kong, or elsewhere;
and if this place did not exist, the business would be carried on •t
any other convenient anchorage.
" Giving, however, the fullest measure of credit, both to Mr.
Gutalatr's informants, and the inference that his Excellency in
Council appears to deduce from the report, we venture to remark,
that if, after four years' occupation of the colony, the only trade
which can be found to exist, after apparently the most diligent in-
quiry, is an export of 120,000 pieces of cloths, in a place pos-
sessing all the advantages of a free port, so pointedly enumerated
in your letter now under reply, there is yet scarcely sufficient
business transacted, or likely soon to be transacted, in the colony,
as to justify heavy taxation.

" Tbe following tabular statement, taken from official returns,
will show the position of the question more accurately, assuming
(what as abdie stated, we do not think it would be correct to
admit) that the 19.0,000 pieces of cotton cloths belong to the
trade of this place. _

d lIIPORT-TRADE

" Canton, for the year 1844—tonnage, 83,679 tons; value,
3,883,8281.
" Shanghai, for the haltyear ending June 30, 1845—tonnage,
6,578 tons; value, 442,7571.
" Hong-Kong, half-year ending June 30, 1844—tonnage,
62,264.
YRAR's TIMM

" 120,000 pieces of cloth, say at 10s., 60,0001.
" In oonclusion, while expressing our sense of the courtesy of
his Excellency in Council, in furnishing us with the remarks in
question on our memorial, we cannot but again lament that the
existing Government appears resolved to disregard the deliberate
opinions of the whole mercantile community, and sacrifice to a
fallacious appearance of present prosperity the just claims of the
colonists and the real interests of the settlement. —We have the
honour to b?, Sir, your most obedient servants,
_

" A. MATHESON,
" GEORGE T. BRAINE,
Commlttii.
GILI3ERT SMITH,
C7RAFORD KEER,
" Victorl2, Aug. 9.9, 1845."