Mar. 22. in yesterday's correspondence ye were attacked by a Chinese correspondent, Mr. C. Y. W. eng, for our recent exposure of he capricious and unreasonable sharges levied by the Shanghai Surtax Revenue Office. Mr, Meng described our article entirely wrong and absolutely rréundless." Tu quo que is a poor argument, but we fear it nust frankly be said that these epithets apply to Mr. Meng's fetter and not to our article which was based on information: very carefully collected from various merchants, who know exactly what they have had to pay—though never, it may be added, what they would have to pay from one day to. another. And there was the great cause of complaint. To say, as Mr. Meng does, that no luxury tax has been levied on parcels at the post office but only a Parcel Post Tax, is a mere quibble. Besides, there is the definite case we mentioned of the musk, which had to pay export duty, surtax and luxury tax, To say that the Surtax Bureau has been "trying to make its schedule as scientific possible" and therefore rates have necessarily been changed, is, in the light of actual tacts, laughable, The further assertion that merchants have always had ample warning of such changes is simply untrue, The question of tobacco we carefully did not touch, knowing that it belongs to a separate category. Just as a speculation, it looks to us a if somebody in the Surtax Bureau had put up Mr. Meng to write in its defence. It is curious that since our exposure anew official has been put in charge of the Bureau, with the Special duty of rectifying the irregularities we described, We dwell on this matter. partly, because we cannot allow our vanigity to be impugned, prin 5 Because this question of okpriciousness of taxation its hitherto unscientific nature goes to the root of tariff autonomy, On March 5, Peking announced the appointment of a Committee to make preparations for the adoption of tariff autonomy next year, which it assumes to have been granted outright at the Customs Conference of 1921, On March 14 Nanking issued regulations gov: cerning its own Tariff Committee croated for the purpose of hastening and realizing tariff autonomy." No date, however, is mentioned for this event. The Peking mandate says practically no more. than what we have epitomized above, and in ticular never mentions likin. But the Nanking regulations go into considerable detail, couple the abolition of likin with increase of tariff and reorganization of national loans and provide for the engagement of foreign tariff experts to advise on technical matters. In the north, the opinion appears to he held that Peking is intentionally "trailing its coat" before the Powers. far only the Japanese Mi has responded. In one "interview he is reported to have dwelt upon the abolition of likin as a sine qua non of tariff autonomy, adding that China "must give guarantees as to the appropriation of increased revenue;" and in a subsequent statement to the press he says:—
"Unless the increased revenue be properly employed for the interests of China and her nation, the increase in the revenue would be entirely meaningless...
"At any rate, we desire that China shall only institute Customs autonomy by such means as to promote the interests of both China and the foreign Powers, and with this end in view, I intend to adhere to the principle' of the Agreement reached at the Tariff Conference."
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.