Aug. 20.
Tue Eastern News Agency communicated a telegram a few days ago to the effect that China's request for further revision of her tariff had been referred Home by the foreign Ministerd and not all of them had yet received an answer: at the same time, it was added, several of the Powers were disposed to consent to revision in principle. This message is obviously incorrect in one point. There can be no question of the Powers being disposed to consent in principle, inasmuch as they definitely undertook to consider a further revision two years later when they ratified the revised tariff in 1919, which brought the Customs dues up to an effective five per cent. This undertaking was given on the ground of the alteration of values which, the Chinese Government argued, was likely to be brought about by the war, the then revision having been based upon the average values from 1912 to 1916. But there is a distinction between considering the revision of a tariff and accepting it when considered, which it should not be beyond the ingenuity of diplomacy to draw; and there is a further distinction which it needs no diplomat to perceive, namely, that it is in no sense China which asks for revision of the tariff but only Peking. And everybody to_ the more money to play.with uncontrolled.
The tariff at present in force is the result of discussions that lasted throughout the whole of 1918. The first six months of that year were spent upon the actual details of the tariff; the second six months in persuading Japan to withdraw the objections raised by her delegates to every provision which they fancied might cause any inconvenience to their country's trade. Eventually on January 2 of 1919 it was announced that the revised tariff had been submitted to the Powers for ratification, and in due course it came into force.
The value of the revision to Peking is, we believe, in the neighbourhood of Tls. 3,000,000 annually. Certainly that is no very great sum, from the standpoint of State revenues, but it is enough, when taken in conjunction with other pickings that have come in Peking's way during recent years, to make one wonder what has become of it. For example, there have been increases in Customs revenue independently of increased tariff Boxer Indemnity money, cancelled altogether as regards some Powers and suspended from payment for five years by others; the profit derivable from high exchange; and latterly and still continuing, several million dollars filched from the starving people of north China, for whose supposed benefit the Diplomatic Body had been weak enough to assent to the imposition of what were humorously called famine surtaxes. Against all this unexpected wealth all the Practical evidence we see of government is series of lootings by unpaid soldiers and not a penny forthcoming in compensation; @ series of strikes by unpaid professors and teachers; and Peking borrowing a few thousands here and a few thousands there from week to week to enable it just to carry on. It is an edifying spectacle.
In face of such a record, no undertaking. thoughtlesdly given anyltwo years ago should be held to compel the Powers to pour more money into Peking's bottomless pit without the most serious reflexion. Furthermore, this is a case in which the foreign and Chinese business communities have a right to ask for the fullest possible publicity. There is reason to believe that certain.merchants in Shanghai have "been asked for their opinion by, their Minister, but in such wise that they are more or less bound to confidence. But all merchants have a right to know what the nature of that inquiry was and, incidentally, whether it was addressed in time enough to make any practical difference to the Diplomatic Body's disposition. We cannot forget that that Body took it upon itself to consent to the famine surtax without any inquiry of the mercantile community's opinion: and in this connexion we may quote a report, not ill founded, that it has been suggested that' the present question of tariff revision might be disposed of, without the bother of long discussion, by clapping on a surtax of another one-and-a-quarter per cent. In all conscience, if there is to be any more talk of surtaxes, it must be in the direction of cutting them off, not of adding to them. The case as regards tariff revision in a nutshell is this. If there were the faintest chance of the extra revenue going to the benefit of the Chinese people, well and good. But there is not. Whatever money Peking can get, it will squander. The foreign and Chinese communities are thus exposed to paying more for imported goods for the sole personal benefit of 2 minority masquerading as a Government, who have already misappropriated millions to the great inconvenience of the nation. Why in the name of all that is monstrous should: they?
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.