Mr, Ricutap, on rising to call attention to the relations of this country with China, said the question was one the importance of which would be admitted on both aides of the House. It was desirable that the relations between the two countries should be friendly and pacific, but unhappily they had not been so at any time within the last forty or fifty years, and the question naturally arose as to thie side on which the fault of these unfriendly relations lay. Thorough-going and unscrupulous patriotism in the English mind would ascribe all the fault to the arrogance of the Chinese, who were regarded as a semi-barbarous race, but the voice of historical trath would not ratify this judgment, Honest Englishmen who brought "unprejudiced minds and unsophisticated conscieuices to an examination of the facts, could scarcely look back upon the relations that had auvsisted between England and China with other feelings than those of mortification and shame. The conduct of the English policy in China had been directed mainly by English Residents engaged in com-
nities for first making, and then merce and there persons had lost no opportu-sions for offence. As an instance and illustre tion of the persistent misrepresentations which were constantly made for the purpose of bringing about war and leading to annexation, the Bout member referred to the murder of Mr, Margary, which was at once declared to be the act of the Burmese Government at the igation of the Chinese, Dr. Anderson had ince shown those assertions to be un-
published in the interests of the Eng founded, and, yet the Chinese, newspapers merchants called loudly for war with China, which would revive the flagging influence of England, and with Burwab, with a view to the annexation of its coast line. Lord Elgin spoke of the tone of Europeans in China connected with commerce as being "for war on a great scale." We had virtually abandoned the control of our Chinese policy into the hand of those merchants; but ho hoped the British Parliament and" people would become alive to their responsibility and to the necessity of taking that policy into their own hands, to be directed according to their own principles. He differed widely from the hon, member for Wiek, who said last year, in the course of the debate on the opium trafiio, Tudia cannot be governed according to English ideas." The same thing had been said long ago as to the West Indies, but the West Indies were governed according to English ideas, and the consequence was that slavery and the slave trade were doomed—a fate which be hoped awaited the opium traffic. The standing charge against the Chinese was that there was no trusting th and that they violated a treaty as soon as was made, But how did we observe the treat made with them? By article 12 of the Supplementary Treaty of Nanking it was ordered that the system of smuggling which had theretofore prevailed should cease,{and our Consuls were to watch over the observance of this Article by British subjects. But no sooner was the treaty made than British merchants endeavoured toevaie it by contending that opium was not specified by name, and must, therefore, be regarded as among the non-enumerated articles, Sir H. Pottinger, however, who negotiated the treaty, and who ought to have known what was intended, issued a proclamation against the interpretation sought to be put upon it, and said that any merchant who smuggled opium would do so at his own risk and would receive no support from Elor Ma~ jesty's Consuls. For a space of fourteen ars, from the Ireaty of Nanking to the in, the British Government had violated the treaty by countenancing in various ways the introduction of opium. [t was eaid that the Chinese Government had likewise connived at the smuggling of opium. But what could they do otherwise? Sir R. Alcock, in a memorandum written in 1857, said that every privilege extorted from the Chinese by our treaties had been abused by certain traders. Another right had been
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.