The 47th article of the Treaty of Tientain states "British Merchant Vessels are not entitled to resort to other than the Ports of Trade declared open by this Treaty. They are not unlawfully to enter other Ports in China or to carry on clandestine trade along the coasts thereof. Any vessel violating this provision, shall, with her cargo, be subject to confiscation by the Chinese Government." 7 Now Shui-kau is an inland district on an inland stream and not a Port of Trade to which foreign vessels may go; and the foreign steam launches in conveying passengers and goods to and from that place contravene the Treaty..........Lf the Treaty is again broken, the penalty provided will enforced and the launches and goods upon them confiscated to the Chinese Govern-
Ihereby declare the above extracts to be true translations from the above-mentioned despatches.
(Signed) Faep. S. A. Bourne, Acting Interpreter.
Due notice of the trial was given to the Taotai, and he was invited to be present at the hearing and to produce evidence of his charge. The request was, however, not complied with, and the hearing of the case proceeded without him.
Defendant G. Harman handed in a statement of his defence, of which the following is the substance Ist.—Art. 47 of the Treaty of Tientsin refers to merchant vessels resorting to other than Treaty Ports; my steam Iaunches are not merchant vessels, and they nover'left this port.
2ud.—When the Treaty of Tientsin was tified, steam launches were unknown to the parties thereto and thus this class of boats is not included in Art: 47.
Srd.—Foroign-owned launches have been running to Shui-kau for nearly four years past. I have towed official and family house-boats from the upper bridge to Shui-kau and have brought down and taken up to Shui-lau and other places on the river official despatches and lotters and seen them properly delivered, which has been much appreciated, 4th,—The authorities were aware of my steam Iaunches running to Shui-kau for months past, and if they wished me to stop, I received no duo notice. H.B.M.'s Consul, on the morning of the 16th December, asked me to stop my boats running up to Shui-kau, and I promised to do so on the return of my launches, which were then up river, to the Sottlement. They wore never permitted to return, and 801 had not the opportunity of carrying out the wishes expressed by H.B.M.'s Consul.
ly launches only have been seized, others that were on the same line are untouched.
6th.—The passenger-boat Taiwan, the property of Messrs. Kaw Hong Take & Ca. is now running to Sharp Peak. Is not Sharp Peak outside the limits of the port? No notice has been taken of this. The same boat was, moreover, permitted to leave Foochow for a non-treaty port, (Fuching) which is further out than Sharp Peak, a port situated on the sea coast.
7th.—I beg also to state that my launches have never carried cargo of any kind, and launches of this class were built
fied by the builder of the launches now for passengers only, and this oan be certi seized.
8th.—I also beg to slate that Iam the sole owner of one steam launch and charterer of the other. The steam Iaunch" now in custody of the Chinese authorities are treaty foreign property and the crews are employed by foreigners.
A certificate from the Superintendent of the Foochow Dockyard was also put in to prove the allegations in clauses 7 and 8 of the defendant's statement.
by H.B.M.'s Consul, ©. A. Sinclair, Esq.:—-Appended is " copy of the decision given
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.