Sim,—The frightful massacre of mis-slovenes in North ina, their recall from the Western Provinces, and the disturbances and threatened riots in the South attributed to their presence, prove how completely China is. overrun by these Roman Catholic and Protestant zealots, while the representations of our merchants, and Chambers of Commerce claiming freet access to inland ports and places show that, practically, the British trader is as rigorously confined to the Treaty port areas as he was in the old factory days at Canton half a century ago. Our interests in China are alleged to be strictly commercial, yet the Treaty restricts merchants to residence at the open ports only, whereas missionaries are allowed to roam about the Empire at will, and to erect habitat tions and chapels wherever they can, when ther desired by the people or not. In fact, it is regarded as a triumph to sojourn in districts most Hostile to the presence of foreigners. It is, therefore, interesting to inquire wherein lies the distinction, from a Treaty point of view, between the missionary and the merchant, and why the latter should be denied the rights or privileges accorded to these self-constituted emissaries of the Churel.
The British Treaty prohibits residence inland to all subjects alike, but the mis sionary has taken advantage of the fa-youred nation clause to creep in under an article of the French Treaty, and is allowed to settle in the interior, lease, buy, or build premises in which to dwell' and sell his particular merchandise, books—a dutiable commodity—whereas' the merchant seeking similar facilities to enable him to dispose of or find a market for equally dutiable Manchester goods is denied the privilege. Does not this procedure appear grossly inconsistent, and would not a reversal of the existing condition of that is, restrict the unwelcome mi to port areas, and allow the British merchant to travel (as the Russians do) and reside inland—conduce fo less_ill-feeling towards foreigners than now obtains At all events, it would accord with our policy of expanding trade and of non-interference with the rites and prejudices of the people, besides initiating fiscal reforms necessitated by the Treaty tariff regulations under which our trade is conducted.
To illustrate more clearly the inconsistency of, so to speak, granting charters to missionaries to trade inland in books, yet withholding from merchants identical privileges, let us cite a case in connection with the recent concession allowing foreign craft to navigate the inner waters and to trade at non-Treaty riverine marts and places. Under the new inland navigation rules, a British merchant may dispatch a registered steamer from an open port. say Chinkiang on the Yangtze, with a cargo of merchandise, including a ton of Chinese tracts and Bibles, to the city of Yangchou on the Grand Canal. Here wne will find 'a nest of missionaries largely engaged in selling religious and educational works. If British or American, their residence, assuming it to be a native edifice, will be recognised by a sign-board bearing the Chinese equivalent of "Hall of Glad Lidings," and there the books will be deposit-e for sale or distribution. Now, it would greatly facilitate the business of the British owner of the steamer to have a residence or warehouse at Yangchou, as the missionaries have, in which to repack produce, or store imports and exports; but, according to the interpretation of the Treaty, for a merchant or a banker to claim' what is granted to missionaries would be an infraction of our Treaty of Commerce, Peace, and Friendship. fact, it has been ruled that a British firm may not display the Chinese name of the hong over the door of his native partner's house to indicate that it was the agency of a foreign merchant. Yet the missionary may display or build anything calculated to incense the people of China. Can inconsistency be carried to greater length?
When the Tientsin Treaty was framed, obstacles to alien residence inland no doubt really existed on fiscal grounds, mainly in connection with the opium traffic, but better regulations for controlling inland trade have been introduced, which modify or do away with the old oh: lections; and the easiest or only way of maintaining an "open door" and extending our commerce is to accord to traders, when desired, the same right of residence land now granted or usurped by missionaries, The presence in the interior of the foreign merchant or his recognised native agent under the protection of our flag, as claimed by the preacher, is needed to ensure strict observance and adherence to tariff provisions. Chinese importers are supposed to enjoy the same tariff advantages as foreigners, but it is too wellkuown, that natives have no means of enforcing their rights when contested by ro-venue officials, or of resisting surcharges which hamper and throttle our trade. According to tariff regulations, one payment frees British imports from all further inland and transit dues; but to show how impossible it is for a Chinese purchaser of our manufactures to benefit by the Treaty stipulations unsupported by the foreign er, we have only to point to the Canton officials, who for four decades persistently ignored our right to forward goods inland under the tariff rules. At Inst, owing largely to the determined action of one man—a British merchant, who resisted the mandarin demands from his houseboat (N.B.—Had he resided on shore, like the missionaries, it would, in his case, have been regarded as a breach of Treaty), anchored at Wuchow up the West River (Canton}—the barrier officials were thoroughly worsted, with the result that imports valued at about £1,000,000 a year now enter the Kuangtung and Kuangsi provinces free from surtaxes, whereas prior to the above incident they were closed to Treaty-taxed goods. Had British merchants been allowed the same protection and freedom of right of residence inland as enjoyed by missionaries, the Southern provinces would never have remained closed for 40 years to British transit trade.
Tt must be admitted that there seems little disposition on the part of British or other foreign firms in China to reside inland. The tendency is to centralize trade at the large ports, and not to embark or risk capital at the smaller marts. During the past 25 years 17 additional ports have been opened to trade, and Consulates established at most of them, yet, excluding steamer agents, scarcely a foreign merchant has found inducement to engage in business at any of them. However, now that inland steam navigation is permitted, it seems only consistent and in the interest
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.