Nov. 7.
The present trend of the Tariff] Conference and especially the) lighthearted allusions to abolition of likin—as if that could be accomplished overnight and all) ready for free trade in the morning—revives memories of an important article which Sir Francis Algen, _'Inspector-General of Customs, contri buted to the "Nineteenth Century, in August, 1924, Although written more than @ year ago it has in no e Tost. its applicability to those questions of which the delegates at the Tariff Conference are disposing with the celerity and light heartedness of the Queen of sentencing her guests to execution. And in contrast with the heady, unthinking sentimentality of that remarkable assem-Dlage, it introduces the cold common sense of hard fact as refreshing as shower bath after a night of jazzing, Not the least important part of the article is that it invites us to look at the question of" internal taxation from the provincial standpoint, the conventional view is that the provinces are wholly sinners at the expense of Peking and no doubt that is true to a large irom Sir Francis Aglen's article is that there is a good deal of "pot and kettle" in the question.
The essence of the article is) summed up in a single short paragraph. If by the abolition of likin is mean ithe withdrawal by administrative act of the Chinese Government of the right of provincial authorities to tax goods in transit and in situ," likin assuredly cannot be abolished. If it means protection of foreign imports from the vexatious delays and illegal imposts so familiar, then abolition can be obtained, "provided that the mistake initiated by the framers} of the 1868 Treaties and pers ed in for six decades be now corrected." The italics are Sir Francis's to emphasize the crux of the whole matter. For the full explanation of his meaning the reader must be referred to the article itself. But very briefly it is this. The 5 of transit passes, to protec ¢ign goods passing into the interior and native goods on the way to the coast for export, meant that revenue essentially, provincial in character was now, Ueing collected for the Central Government. A conflict was inaugurated "between the provineial exchequer and a potential rival in the shape of a national treasury." And "this initial mistake has been confirmed and persisted in for sixty years." The revolution tended to agar: ing policy" attempted to do. with the salt, wine and tobacco and stamp revenues what was being done with the Customs. "The provinces were left to fill the vacuum caused by the withdrawal of these revenues as best they could." Everyon3 knows what they have dom simple. Instead of limiting the] protection of transit passes to certain classes of goods, he would extend it to all alike, no matter whence they come or whither they are going; and tha collection of these dues should remain with the Maritime Customs, but the entire proceeds should be allocated to provincial exchequer under some arrangement for pro rata distribution. Sir Francis Says that the financial sacrifice made by Peking would not be great: "transit dues collected by the Maritime Customs do not exceed $4,500,000 annually." One assumes, therefore, that he anticipates aa enormous increase from extension of passes to all goods and from the stimulus to trade resulting from single taxation: otherwise there can never be enough to satisfy the provinces.
What seems to us the weakest) part of the scheme is that Sir Francis believes the provinces would sooner have their revenue collected for them in this way than maintain the "costly and somewhat inefficient administration" that they do now. This appears to us doubtful. What! is going to become of the members of that administration? There is, for instance, a likin station beyond Jessfield, which must be the support of hundreds of employees. In the aggregate hangers-on of the various} Snternal taxation offices of each province must be almost enough to start another revolution, when their present occupation is gone. But at any rate Sir Francis Aglen suggests a concrete scheme. That which the Tariff} Conference appears to contemplate is, of course, far easier, ramely, abolition of likin by) mandate, And undoubtedly likin, ag_such in name, would go at once, But what would take its place only the ingenuity of a provincial tax-collector could say.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.