To the Editor of the S11,—As one of the original m: hers of the Shanghai branch of tle Eh Assuciation, with some knowles: done by the local committee in the interest of British and, therefore, of the world's commerce in China, Lmay'be permittd to remark that if the snezested amendment of Mr. Ki. 8. Litle shon'd Shanghai branch of the will be in the position of reversing nullifying the labours of the past twelve years.
Experience, extending over a period of more than thirty years, teaches that tradal concessions or conventions must have the solid foundation of common advantage. This principle was enunciated and inculited by some of the ablest representatives of Great Britain in Chins and Japan, chief among whom I may cite the late Sir Harry Parkes, In common langiaye, mations as well as individuals, when negotiating commercial convention, must adopt the give and take principle which governs all hon-! ourable trade, wherever it is carrie on.
members of the Chins Association, and especis'ly the committee theres! know whether Cam r ght whan T say-tha in their advo commercial re-ferriis in China this prineip'e of reciprocity has never been ignored. The Associat'on's policy is best explained by a short sta:
from a letter autres-ed by the Shanghai Branch to the London Committee, dated July 10th, 1896:—When framing their letter of 10th April, 1895, the shai Committee were of opinion British interests could only be the adoption by Chins of m sures calculated to increase y of the empire as a whole. wyed, and continues to hai Comn inal reecmmentlations they have hitherto made still have e...... The} recognise that many of ths ble may, and many of them undourtelly ds ativet the revenues of the provin ments, thereby creat, opp> te their adoption. [tis answer to this objection option of the suggested although it may diminish eta will vf the Imperial Customs. he bad, but to refuse to recogni 11 be to display unbard: abe fatuity; while be admit its existe ce! ud if it is to conti succeed; which wus: ce, the Chambers la, and other commercial tions have so justly The Treaty of SI nghai, recently nego-fiated and awaiting tification, may not be the very best re cly for the admitted evils of which camp! sistently made for fully forty but it is the first practical attempt. towards the solution of a problem which has for so long defied the efforts of statesmen and men qualified by their com cial experience to reduce to common ground. It is, however, apparent to those who have followed this question for many years with ordinary attention that the British Government, in appointing a commissioner, and nominating a resident imer-chant of Shanghai to act in conjunction with him, have honestly endeavoured to bring about an understanding which may eventually have the desired result: if it fails, that is, if one of the high contracting Powers should not give effect to its obligations, the other contracting party may revert to its previous position without material inconvenience or injury No convention ever framed sticceeded immediately; the theories of negotiators are somictimes impossible in practice and, therefore, time is required to show if a convention is workable or in what direetion it requires revision.
I do not feel competent, nor have I any desire to criticise the merits of the new convention; all that I am anxious about is that the members of the Ci Association in Shanghai should rem what they hare previously advocated. Men of great experience have expressed their views regarding this treaty and their opinions deserro serious consideration but if the China Association in Shanghai should countenance the proposed amendment it will most emphatically contradict and stultify itself. i I am, ete,
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.