Mr. Little—Will they be free?
Mr. Dudgeon—They will get the draw-Yack. This is all nonsense.
Mr. Little repeated that the Treaty named raw cotton only. He had consulted a lawyer, as it was a point which would have to be referred to the law officers of the Crown, and he was informed as already stated that the mention of raw cotton in terms excluded all other pro-! duets. If not, why not put clearly in the Treaty that every kind of raw material would be entitled to the drawback? Was the same principle and procedure to be applied to all other products of foreign type as to these soos Mr. Dndgeon—Nonsense.
Mr. Little asked if this was nonsense, why was it not clearly stated, so that the difficulty could not arise. The question would arise the moment the Treaty was made; there was a difference of opinion the room now.
Mr. Dudzeon—Decidedly.
Mr. Little continued to argue that the, officers must decide whether or not China could tax everything except raw cotton, That was a grave disadvantage.
There was a third disadvantage beyond the restrictions to trade caused by more taxation than existed at the present. time. He had listened most carefully to the replies to his argument hour the num-! ber of custom houses. He had stated, at present, there were more than 25, but that was only the list from one book. From tivo other books which he had obtained, he had now a list of over 300 stations, which had obtained power in collecting these taxes. Mr. Dudgeon had said there were only 18 or 25 altogether, but would he state in what they consist?
They wore said to consist of all native custom houses now existing whether in the open ports, on the seaboard, on rivers, inland waterways, land routes or Jand frontiers, but as enumerated in the three books named in the Treaty the list extended to more than 300 stations. Moreover the books he had investigated were 50 years old and the probable number to-day was nearer a thousand. Thus there were places in the book which gave three stations but which now had 12, and others which gave four or five and' now had 15 or 20 stations. In Shanghai district alone there were now over stations, though only one was given in the book, and there were over 700 Chinese employed in these custom houses apart from the one mentioned. He (Mr. Little) had returned recently from a journey of 2,000 miles in China, and during that time he had won to many custom houses. He found that in many cases they were called equally custom houses or barriers. There was the same examination, the same tolls and duties as at. the likin stations. In certain places there were no likin stations and in others no custom hous-s. The only difference was that in one case the money went first to the provincial trea-jury and afterwards anything left went to Peking, while the customs went first to the Imperial treasury and the remains to the provincial officials. The first point then was that everything was the same over again. There was nothing in the Treaty which would not allow the Chinese to retain all the stations such as these, and there were over 3,000 of them in China. China had too many of them for her own good, and it would be better for her to have 300 important stations than 1,000 small ones. But they would remain together with the system which Sir James Mackay said has been done away with. They would be subject to the same squeezes until the whole system was reformed and Chinese officials, from top to bottom, were paid decent salaries. In some places the officials were not paid one cent in salary, but got what they could squeeze. Anyone would squeeze under those circumstance. Further than this, as Mr. Kingsmill had pointed out to him (the speaker), the Treaty allowed the customs houses to be planted where the Chinese liked. Evidently " slimness" did not die with the Boers These custom houses could be changed when the Chinese liked and they might cover all the main waterways.
Opium stations were also allowed, and five or six of them would not cover the boundaries of the various provinces. salt. reporting stations were to be ¢stablished what would be the difference? The man in charge would want his squeeze just the same. Tt was useless to say' there would be no delay or stoppage. People might say that salt was carried in a certain sort of boat, but the would not carry his on this speci of boat, and apparently he would get through. For the Treaty said that no Boat was to be stopped to be examined. Yet it was stipulated that all salt boats were to pay at the first customs house to which they came. That was most incon-tent; first there was to be no examination, and then there was to be a careful examination of all boats. For was it to be supposed that, all boatmen being honest, they would pull up of their own accord. at the first custom house? The idea was ridiculous and absurd.
But the most important question of all was the consumption tax. This he maintained was worse, by for, than anything that could be produced on the subject of likin, Mr. Dudgeon had stated that the Treaty solemnly engaged that foreign goods should not be taxed. In the lence of guarantees these solemn en-sagements might be counted out. Mr. Duigeon had said that the tax was not to be collected in transit, yet most distinctly a clause of the Treaty provided that it might be levied at the first Custom house it came to. Then they were told it nas only to be levied at the destination, but supposing it came to a destination at Shanghai, how collect it? There were a hundred means of ingress to or egress from Shanghai, and how was the tx to be taken as the goods Only two ways were possible. One was to estab ish offices at the entrances, hut in that case there would have to be established five times more than the number of likin stations in the whole country. There was one other way, and that eas to employ the Chinese system of taxation on sales. How was the turnover of a man in business to be decided? Suppose a merch"nt handled 10,000 piculs of flour; of that he might put down 9,000 piculs as for foreign consumption and 1,009 as for native consumption. Perhaps even he might not put down so much as 1.000 piculs as f-r the native consumption. What would the Chinese mandarin do under those circumstances? He would say that the only thing was to tax the whole of the business and then the foreign-consumed goods would have no protection whatever. They would have already paid their 12} pet cent surcharge, yet they would he taxed equally with native goods in addition. It was stid there were ways foreigners could be protected, but the thing wacimpo-sible. the consumption tax came right home the Chinaman, When jassing " likin stion, the boat would sail away with the wind and that was the end of it. But in his store he was completely at the merey of the tas collector, and of all the harpies that surrounded the mandarin's yamen, There were methods of applying pressure of which foreigners knew absolutely nothing, and the Chines were left. perfect! ty helpless. The late Viceroy Liu Kun-yi was reported to have said We will have the additional import taxes and likin as well." The new Treaty not only increased the surcharge but invented a fresh tax on bouts carrying both Eh and foreign goods, Was not ign produe!s indirectly Tt was said certainly that this carrying ta was to he small and reasonable," but there was awide difference in the' inter-
a Chinaman and an Englishman.
ion 11 would be put on those words That the Trea'y was fall of dangers Dudgeon had admitted. It was ful of pi sand worded in such a way that i ili smerehunts could not protect thole ods. With likin stations alons there Was some chance, as merchants knew when their hosts were stopped and delayed, but with the new system th-re woul be no chance wh A farther pi semi ion tax exult he levied over and over again, Goods would be taken to a hong and' the consumption tax levied, When they were split into smaller po tions and resold they would be option tas assam and again when they were divided in" yet smaller lots.
Members had been told in the that morning that hi it. Lil motion was unfair ati there must be agreed with that principle; there could he no transaction if it were all on one side, But there absolute 2 should be done without be made a treaty in which
taking thi A person who had defended this argument claimed that this oaty was of the give and take kind, but another would say that British. merchants were required by it to give largely and to nothing in return. 'The objections to it were very powerful and gray and he urged every member in the meeting to place on record mo-t un tly the fact that they did not want the 'Treaty. Some said that other Powers would possibly put is out. Ho (Or. Lift') knew that the oaty in its present form was not acceptable te other countries. But was this a position for a Britisher to take up? Was there no British pluck left? Were they to bombly cringe st the heels of other Power: They were surely a self respecting independent people, strong enough to say We won't have th's Treaty, but if there is to be a Treaty at all, we will see it is one which will protect British commerce and privileges in this country" (loud applause).
Mr. J. O. P. Bland, who referred to the very eloquent address they hud heard from Mr. Little. said that there was no doubt that anyone who had listened to the debate that had taken place felt that while this Treaty, as explained ly Mr. Dulgeon, did embody the best expressions of opinion as formulated by the best exponents of that opinion in the past, still ther" remained something, as must inevitably be the csxe, open to that. constructive or destructive criticism which Mr. Little so ably wielded. Therefore, with the permission of the meeting, he would bring forward an amendment which might perhaps save the face. that precious face, of the meeting, to which Mr. Little had alluded, and yet show that they were not destructive entirely, and that they had come regard for the past work of the Association, and
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.