Seen ce a eat Paling ties Sea bp tht chs Bie Ni, Peiee It fs sometimes remarkable what man will'do to obtains Phe st an American university" fu ts Instance, the author has" complied vant mount of material with te ard to tari! fin yorloes counties for the purpose of showing that {Guinn has Boon "unjestiy: treated. Frankly the purpose of the book {nto allow that the. preseat tari!
detrimental to Chinn, but an one reads the book it would appeet not to be intended for propaganda but foe slate Spite of toe object The propaganda favour. able to China's cause is so cleverly overlaid with really valuable mater-fat'on the tari that one wonders felly an author with, Thould "have allowed. Rimecf the Inzury of be ineseerate and enki torlelt statement at that: China enjoyed tariff autonomy before! 1842, when the present system was, imposed on her by the British because of the Opium War.
As the statement stands it is true, just as true as it is to state that Germany was one of the principal Powers before the Versailles 'PO treaty but that owing to French opposition she is now reduced. It the sort of inadequate truth that is more misleading even than a falsehood. China enjoyed tariff autonomy before 1842, but she enjoyed very little foreign trade, From the time that foreign traders came to China by water until 1842) there was always trouble owing to the merciless exactions of the corrupt officials and the Ca-hong at: Canton. Other places were closed to trade that the Ca-hongs might better practice their monopoly. There was really no systematic tariff because the emperor regarded foreign trade as tribute. All. this, which might be found in any stand: ard work on the subject the author name is Ting or Liu) omits. He! begins with 1842, which is like] beginning the history of the Great War with the shot at Sarajevo. It} is a way of doing things but very a bad way. Furthermore, the constant reference to the Opium War is curious bad taste in one who! seeks a Ph. D. and is therefore ex-ceted to be scientifically accurate. The name is a misnomer. The war was not fought over the opium question but for the right to trade. It} is true that opium was the—most important article of trade but is) it mot also true that the reason opium was such a good commodity was that nothing else would bear' the exorbitant taxation imposed by the Canton officials? The author further suggests that the foreigner benefits from lower duties than foreign traders because of the transit pass. Again the statement is correct, but should not the author of a work on the tariff who makes Teference to the transit pass refer to likin in more than a passing mood? China suffers to-day from nothing as from likin. When one reads this monograph one would imagine that the foreigner is responsible for the failure of the Chinese government to abolish likin. No statement to this effect appears, But nothing re the expenditures the income. Could statement of the ares of the Chinese Govern-is there a budget? Are there any books? How, for instance, was the Gold Franc money expended? How much was paid and where did it go to? The author is really ingenious in making hhis generalization but he dare not {become particular lest he meet the snag of losing his propagandistic character whilst dealing ecientifcally with his subject. That the foreigner will benefit from an increased tariff is another of the arguments. The suggestion is that there will be better feeling, more trade, greater industries. Why should that be assumed? Trade and industry would be splendid China and even the present tariff which no one really defends would bring the Government a huge revenue were there stability and order in China. The crux of the trouble is not the tariff but China's inabillity to govern itself, the rapacity of the militarists, the unpatriotic, al-/most treasonable indolence of' the officials. If China can change that the tariff question will solve itself.
In spite of its lapses into pro. paganda which cannot, perhaps, be altogether avoided by' a Chinese, the book is worth reading because, it does provide a wealth of data and gives a clear-cut Chinese view point. It is unfortunate that the author is unwilling to use the usual method of writing his name in English so that when foreigners discuss his book, they might have some way of knowing what his name is. Mr. Ting or Mr. Liu has worked hard undoubtedly and were we one lof his examiners we should gladly give him his Ph. D. were he to Include a paragraph refering facts previous to 1842 and another paragraph devoted to likin.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.