*The Viceroy.

having received from the merchants the strongest assurances that they would hold themselves responsible for its success, and having been requested by them not to address the government on the subject, the Committee yielded the point" to what they considered a better knowledge of the forms of the country."

9. The work, however, was stopt in the month of March, as already stated.

10. The Hong merchants having written to the Committee on the 2d September 1828, urging, at the instance of the Hoppo, that the Company's ships should unload, the Committee, in their reply on the 3d September, adverted to the delay in the alterations, and to the vexatious interference of government; adding, "We hereby request you to inform government, that after the landing-place is completed, we may then unload the ships."

66

11. On the following day the merchants stated that the delay was not on their part, and that the matter had been referred to the local authorities to examine.

12. On the 13th October the Committee addressed the Governor on other subjects, but at the same time alluded to the offensive state of the ground in the front of the Factory, adding, "An endeavour during this year was made to clear "the square of such nuisances, and afford a wholesome promenade, as foreigners are not allowed to go into the country; but at the suggestion of a petty custom"house officer (who was moved by malice because he shared not in the fees), every improvement was put a stop to, and the English Company have not at this "hour a landing-place fit to be used."

13. On the 17th of October, Howqua acquainted the Committee that he had had a long audience with the Viceroy on the subject of the Committee's Address; and stated, that "the Viceroy had given directions for the immediate recommence"ment of the operations in the square in the front of the Company's Factory; and "had expressed much displeasure at the delay which had been occasioned by the Nan-hey-yuen in carrying into effect the orders which he had previously given 66 upon the subject."

66

14. No record of this order appears on the proceedings of the Committee; but on their Consultations of the 18th October is the following statement:

"A pledge of this officer's* disposition to accommodate matters has been given "by a deputation of the Nan-hey-yuen to our Factory, to give directions for "the renewal of the works upon the landing-place, which will be resumed "forthwith."

15. There is a marked difference between the verbal statement of Howqua, in which he alluded to the operations in the square in front of the Factory, and the directions of the Nan-hey-yuen, given personally, which were confined to a renewal of the works upon the landing-place.

16. On the 22d October, two boats with cornelian beads having been seized at the landing-place in front of the Factory, you represented the necessity of the landingplace being secured by gates, and the space in front of the Factory surrounded by walls.

17. On the 21st November 1828, an edict was received through the merchants, which ordered them forthwith" to take the newly accumulated ground "in front of the Factory within the boundary, and build a landing-place "with the wood and stones; but it was not permitted to usurp, encroach and "build in other places, which would involve examination and inquiry." This was the first recorded sanction to the work, which was strictly confined to the building a landing-place with wood and stones.

18. On the 20th February 1829, the matter still remaining unfinished, the Committee addressed the Viceroy, preparatory to their departure from Canton for Macao, requesting his sanction for the completion of the work, and the surrounding it with a wall.

19. In consequence of this address, the Quang-choo-foo and Nan-hey-yuen were sent by the Viceroy to examine the place in person, and " to understand the case clearly.' The officers made a minute examination; and the Hoppo being called upon to state what effect the alterations would have with reference to the custom-house, reported, that" if they be allowed to build a wall around, it will "obstruct the view from the custom-house, and be an impediment to the Cons. 7 April 1829." attendants keeping a look-out from thence: it is inexpedient to allow this."

20. Upon which the Viceroy issued an edict, decidedly prohibiting the proposed alterations, excepting the repairing the landing-place with wood and stones, and forbidding the wall to be built. This was followed by another edict (arising out of a representation

a representation from the Committee), "prohibiting the Chinese from walking on
"the Company's landing-place, or making any noise there."

21. The discussions which had commenced in the month of June 1829, and
which led to the stoppage of the trade, only terminated on the 8th February 1830,
when the Factory repaired to Canton for the purpose of resuming the trade. The
President on that occasion was accompanied by Mrs. Baynes, on the alleged in-
vitation of Howqua. It appears to have been the first instance in which a lady
of the Factory had proceeded to Canton, and was in direct contravention of our
orders of the 3d April 1829.

22. The ground in front of the Factory remaining unfinished, the Committee
requested the merchants on the 27th February to bring the matter before the Cons. 27 Feb. 1830.
Viceroy, who issued an edict containing the following passage: "But ere one

66

year has elapsed, these foreigners all at once (because their request to have ware"houses was disallowed) now entreat to have a wall built and a gate set up, "and that the boards may be exchanged for stones. This really is perverse obstinacy."

66

23. Upon the receipt of this communication, the Committee observed: "As every attempt to gain this point has failed by application to the government, we "must adopt other means to effect it. We therefore determined to remove the "inconvenience, by ordering a detachment of boats and seamen from our ships, by whom the cavity remaining will be filled from a heap of rubbish in the neighbourhood, and a fence erected to prevent intrusion."

66

66

24. An order was accordingly issued on the 2d March to the commanders of Cons.2 March 1830.
the ships, for carrying the plan into effect, and for their furnishing Captain
Haviside, who was to superintend it, with the assistance of a larger cutter or launch,
and a competent crew, containing a carpenter and carpenter's mate. The detach-
ment arrived in the night following, and from the exertions used by the officers and
men, the work was expected to be completed on the 5th, the ground levelled, and
a fence erected to make it secure.

25. On the 4th March the Hong merchants waited on the Committee, entreating
a suspension of the work, the Chinese government having refused to sanction it.
In reply to this request, they were informed that the Committee had not resorted to
the means used for the removal of the nuisance complained of until every endeavour
to attain that object by other measures had failed, and that the Committee felt
convinced the Viceroy could not be aware of the actual circumstances of the case,
which it was the duty of the Hong merchants to have stated properly to his
Excellency; that such a line of conduct would have superseded the necessity of
the Committee requiring the assistance of the seamen from the ships, and “that
"the culpability, if any could accrue from such an insignificant question, must rest
"with themselves;" the Committee adding, "that they could by no means agree
"to desist from the undertaking, which a few hours would then bring to a close."

26. On the 5th March the Quang-choo-foo visited the ground, and the Hong merchants informed the Committee that he had issued orders to hollow out the ground which had been levelled, and reduce it to its original state; upon which the Committee remarked, "This proposition is too ridiculous to be discussed, and was admitted by some of the merchants after the conference was broken up to be a mere matter of form, to support the consistency of the government; we conceive, therefore, that the matter may be considered terminated.”

66

27. On the 8th March an edict was issued by the Viceroy against parties of seamen coming to Canton, having reference, the Committee stated, to the party employed in the completion of the premises in front of the Factory.

28. On the 21st April the merchants addressed the Committee (then at Macao), representing that an order had been issued which obliged them to hollow out the ground again, and to cover the space over with boards as before; that 10 days had originally been allowed for effecting the order, but at their entreaty another 10 days had been granted. "Should we again procrastinate," (observed the merchants) "it would be difficult for us to bear the blame; and we imagine that you, gentle"men, could not endure to sit and look on at our being involved in difficulties." They had accordingly hired labourers to perform the work.

29. Upon which the Committee observed, "As we cannot accurately ascertain "the extent of the mischief, we shall refrain for the present from noticing this "offensive proceeding, which we can only attribute to an obstinate desire on the part of government to humiliate foreigners in the eyes of the people, and 66 circumscribe

454..

A 2

1

"circumscribe within the narrowest limits the little space allotted for our "recreation."

66

30. Our sentiments on the subject were made known to you in our despatch of the 13th April 1831, in the following terms: "We do not doubt from the observations on your proceedings that it was desirable that the space of ground in "question should be enclosed; but we greatly doubt the propriety of your doing "so in defiance of the repeated prohibitions of the Chinese authorities at Canton. "We hope those authorities will not again notice the affair; but should they do so, we positively forbid your retaining the enclosure by any other means than "those of negotiation. You are not to proceed to actual force, nor to use threats "or intimidation in your intercourse with the Chinese, in order to preserve "the continuance of the enclosure, should the Viceroy and other authorities "strenuously insist on its removal. This is not a question of sufficient importance "to incur the risk of exciting unfavourable feelings in the minds of the principal "authorities in the city, much less is it one for which the tranquil progress of our "affairs at Canton should be endangered by renewed discussions with the govern"ment of that place."

31. The Select Committee having closed their commercial transactions, returned on the 16th April 1830 to Macao.

32. Upon repairing to Canton on the 4th October following, for the purpose of commencing the business of the season 1830-31, Mrs. Baynes again accompanied the President. No invitation appears to have been given by the Hong merchants upon this occasion.

33. Shortly after that lady had arrived there, the Committee represent, that various "insulting and opprobrious" edicts were issued, several of them prohibiting Cons. 19 Oct. 1830. the residence of European females at Canton. The Committee remonstrated against them, and urged the unreasonableness of the objection to the residence of females, as several had resided in Canton the preceding season. The Committee represented that they were joined in their remonstrance by all the members of the British commercial community.

If

34. On the 20th October, Howqua, on whose invitation Mrs. Baynes proceeded to Canton in the preceding season, waited upon the Committee with the Viceroy's commands. "As to women coming to Canton, the old law forbids it; it never can be permitted. The chief is desired to send away the lady forthwith. "she cannot move immediately, the merchants are to ascertain in how many days "she will go. If the chief says he will not remove the foreign lady in two or "three days, if she still be here, soldiers will be sent to the Factory to seize and "drive her out. The chief is to tell the merchants what day she goes.""

35. It was upon the receipt of this communication the Committee resolved, in defiance of the laws and regulations of the country, to order up sailors and guns for the protection of the Factory.

36. Notwithstanding that communication, and also another edict of the Viceroy on the 27th October, in which it was declared "they ought not, in what has "been disallowed, to disobey and act irregularly," Mrs. Baynes was still suffered to remain at Canton.

37. Such was the state of affairs when you took your seat at the close of November as president and members of Select Committee, under our orders of the 26th May 1830. 38. On the 11th December, Howqua informed you that it was the desire of the Viceroy that all ladies then resident at Canton should immediately quit it. This was not assented to by you, though at the time you were aware the security merchant for a private ship consigned to Mr. Whiteman, was in confinement, on account of Mrs. Whiteman being at Canton.

39. On the 14th December, it appears that the Hong merchants waited upon you to entreat you to order the ladies from Canton. You nevertheless adhered to the determination adopted on the 11th, not to comply with such entreaty.

40. On the 28th the Viceroy issued another edict, which contained the following remarks: "But you, the Committee, are persons sent by your own country to control "the commercial affairs. You must, no doubt, be persons who clearly understand "what is reasonable and just, and maturely acquainted with the regulations. It is your duty to lead all the foreign merchants, to keep every one of them in his proper place, and not transgress the usages.

As to what is said in the petition, that husband and wife should not be separated, this refers to ordinary cases when living at home. If they go abroad, and become guests in a country, how can they be viewed according to the same " rule?

"rule? Besides, at Macao they may be sent to reside: where is the necessity of "overstepping the mark, and going to Canton?"

41. On the 29th December you received the translation of a document stated to have been sent from Pekin, and to have formed part of an imperial edict against the residence of European females at Canton..

42. It is recorded on your Consultations of the 1st January 1831, that a private communication had been made to your President that the residence of females was "a small matter," and you cited this as a proof of the duplicity of the Hong merchants, and as authorising your non-observance of the edicts regarding females; whilst at the same time it appears that the very source whence you derived this information, was actually one of the Hong merchants, upon whose assurance, it must, be remembered, the works in front of the Factory, which led to the conduct of the Foo Yuen, were entered upon by the Committee, and also that Mrs. Baynes originally visited Canton.

43. We observe likewise that on the same day you received this private communication from the Hong merchants, you recorded a memorial from the Viceroy, the Hoppo, and the Foo Yuen, to the Emperor, against the resort of females, and also, regarding the use of sedan chairs, and the bringing up of sailors and guns.

44. We have felt it necessary to enter thus minutely into the details of the proceedings in question, because they are materially connected with, and we have no doubt they tended to influence the subsequent conduct of the Chinese government in issuing the edicts and obnoxious regulations of which you now complain.

45. Having closed the business of the season, you departed from Canton in the month of February to Macao, where you received on the 14th of May last. a report of the proceedings adopted by the Foo Yuen at the Factory, on the 12th of that month. Messrs. Daniell and Smith were forthwith deputed to Canton for the purpose of ascertaining the real state of affairs. Those gentlemen reported the violent measures which had been adopted by the Foo Yuen towards your linguist, and also towards Howqua, who had been ordered to reduce the ground to the state in which it was three years preceding. They pointed out the indignity offered to the portrait of his late Majesty, and stated, that as the Hong merchants were afraid to fulfil their wishes by making known to the Viceroy the injurious effects of these. proceedings to the Company, and their request that he would desist, they addressed the Foo Yuen, protesting against the further demolition of the Company's property, and also of the quay, which they stated had been built openly, although the ground within the wall was not permitted to be completed.

46. The merchants having reluctantly agreed to take charge of the letter, Messrs. Daniell and Smith returned to Macao on the 19th May.

47. On the 20th you received from the Hong merchants the copy of the eight regulations which had been proposed by the Viceroy to the Emperor in Council on the 24th February. After transcribing the regulations, you observe: "We cannot "conceive any greater difficulties to be imposed upon an intercourse with this country than those which we have above enumerated, almost without a comment, "merely with explanation sufficient to place them in a clear point of view. Nor "do we hesitate to observe, that if they were to be acted upon to the letter (and "what security have we to the contrary?) foreign commerce could not be conducted "at Canton."

48. You then adverted to the favourable period at which the occurrence took place; stated that you did not see the necessity of advancing any positive propositions in your correspondence with the government, but determined to acquaint them, that if they proceeded to acts destructive of the commerce, nor offered 66 any redress for those already committed, you should be compelled at an early date "to suspend it." You dispatched Mr. Lindsay to Canton for the purpose of delivering up the keys of the Factory to the Hong merchants for them to convey to the Foo Yuen, stating that you would not retain them while the factories were not secure from intrusion, and your premises from destruction. You resolved to give intimation to the British merchants at Canton of your intentions, and to publish a notice, in order to prevent any misapprehension; and you further resolved to address the Bengal government, suggesting a letter from the Governor-General to the Viceroy, dispatching it to China in a vessel of war, and entrusting it to the commander for presentation; and that some ships of war should be sent to support the measure, and that the admiral should visit China, in contemplation of contingencies like the present.

49. In accordance with these views, you addressed the Governor, Foo Yuen and Hoppo on the 19th May, noticing the whole of the circumstances, and stating, that as you had no means at that time of protecting the property you abandoned it, and transmitted the keys of the Factory to the Foo Yuen. You likewise published a notice on the 20th May, recapitulating the events, and, as the Representatives of the British Nation in China, gave public intimation, that should the evil complained of remain unremoved, all commercial intercourse between the two countries would be suspended on the 1st August. This was followed by a notice in Chinese, under date the 29th of May, to be delivered to the Hong merchants or linguist, or through any other channel by which it might reach the observation of the Foo Yuen; and by your Consultations of the 2d June, it appears to have been "placed in conspicuous places in Canton."

50. On the 26th May you addressed a letter to the Bombay government, requesting that one of the Company's cruisers might be dispatched to you with as little delay as possible; and on the same day you wrote to the Supreme Government, in accordance with the intentions you recorded on the 20th.

51. In this latter document, you pointed out the aggressions of the Foo Yuen, and likewise the different circumstances connected with that event; but you appear to have kept wholly out of view the facts to which we have adverted at such length regarding the unauthorized works carried on by the late Committee on the ground immediately in front of the Factory, as well as the act of bringing up the sailors and guns, facts which ought to have been stated to the Bengal government, as most essential in enabling them to form a correct judgment on the measures brought to their notice. It also appears that you sent a copy of your letter to the Bengal government to Admiral Sir Edward Owen.

52. Having thus noticed the aggression on the Factory, the new regulations, the intended stoppage of the trade, and your letter to the Supreme Government of India, we shall proceed to offer such observations upon these points, and upon your conduct in connection with them, as the circumstances appear to us to call for.

53. The aggression of the Foo Yuen was characteristic of his nation, and had the works which he destroyed been originally carried on under the sanction of the local authorities at Canton, his conduct would have afforded a strong ground for remonstrance; but when it is clearly shown that the works were begun without authority, that when part only was sanctioned, the whole was carried forward, and the edicts and proclamations pointedly prohibiting the measures were treated with contempt, it cannot be matter of astonishment that the local government of a city, in the vicinity of which you reside solely for the purposes of trade (not under any defined treaty, but by sufferance only), and which government has the means of retaliation in its own hands, should, after the repeated instances in which its authority was set at defiance, and very probably instigated by the imperial edict (which arrived at Canton on the day of the outrage) confirming the new regulations, have acted in the peremptory manner adopted by the Foo Yuen on the occasion.

54. The regulations, though termed new, do not materially differ in substance from those which have been enacted at former periods. We do not perceive any strong objections exist to the provisions contained in the 1st, 2d and 8th Regulations. The departure of the Factory from Canton after the close of commercial dealings is all that is insisted upon under the 1st Regulation, and has in fact been invariably observed by you. The object of the 2d is to prevent the Chinese borrowing money from foreign merchants, a most wholesome provision, and one which, if it be strictly observed, will eradicate an evil which has been the cause of serious embarrassment from an early period of our intercourse with Canton.

55. The 8th Regulation appears to provide sufficiently for the presentation of addresses and appeals, both through the Hong merchants and directly at the city gates.

56. The re-enacting of the 5th and 6th, prohibiting the resort of females and sailors to Canton, and also the bringing up of guns and muskets, has clearly been occasioned by the proceedings which we have already noticed.

57. The provisions of the 3d and 4th, if enforced, would undoubtedly interfere most materially with the essential comforts of your Factory, and with the facilities hitherto possessed by you for carrying on your commercial affairs.

58. We observe that in the year 1814, when the propositions were submitted by Sir George T. Staunton for confirmation by the Chinese government, a proceeding to which you have referred, the 5th was as follows: viz.

"For