No. 209.
Mr. Denby
to Mr. Bayard.
Legation of
the United States,
Pelting, May 26, 1888.
(Received July 21.)
No. 646.]
Sir: I have the honor to inclose, for your
information, a newspaper copy of a letter presented by the Hong Kong chamber
of commerce to the Hong-Kong Government; also one addressed to the committee
of the chamber of commerce by the leading Chinese merchants of the colony,
both having relation to the recent action of the Australian authorities in
refusing to allow Chinese passengers to land at Australian ports.
It appears that 270 Chinese laborers who took passage per steamer Afgan at Hong-Kong on the 27th of March last were
refused permission to land at Melbourne. Other steamers from Hong-Kong to
Australia, whose departures were subsequent to the Afgan, it is feared will meet the same fate.
The China press is full of bitter attacks against the Australian colonies and
views the stoppage of emigration as not only arbitrary but high-handed with
a vengeance, as no notice, it is alleged, was given by the Australian
authorities of the intended exclusion of Chinese laborers; and that very
heavy losses will revert to the owners and charterers of vessels which have
been specially constructed for the trade.
On the other hand, I understand that the Australian Government justify the
action taken under the Chinese emigration statute of 1865 and Chinese act of
1881.
The following is a copy of a telegram, dated Melbourne, the 8th of May,
addressed by the governor of Victoria to the governor of Hong-Kong, as
published in the Hong-Kong papers:
Referring to your telegram, 4th May, my Government are acting under
Chinese immigrant statute, 1865, and Chinese act, 1881. Chinese
immigrants, by Afgan to Victoria,
naturalization papers presented by Chinese immigrants claiming to be
naturalized British subjects have nearly in all cases been found to
have been issued to other than the ostensible holders, attempting
consequently fraudulent evasion of poll-tax, the consequence being
Government strictly enforcing acts, under order in council passed
under public health acts, rendered vessels from Hong-Kong,
Singapore, etc., liable to detention by health officer.
Whatever may be said pro and con in the matter of the action taken in the Afgan case, there is one thing almost certain, and
that is, there has been a strong anti-Chinese feeling prevailing in
Australia for a considerable time, and it may reasonably be conjectured that
the adoption of measures for the restriction of Chinese immigration would be
favorably received by a large class of colonists, principally the
workingmen.
As an index of the public sentiment on this question, I need only refer to
the account of a public meeting held at Sydney on the 27th March last, which
forms an inclosure, No. 2.
As further evidence that the colonists are anxious to reduce to as small a
degree as possible the influx of Chinese laborers, the following telegram,
taken from an Australian paper, shows. I give it in full:
Sydney, April 10.
The New South Wales Government has dispatched a reply to the
secretary of state for the colonies re the
Chinese protest, couched in very clear and forcible language. It
commences by asking the British Government why, if America prohibits
Chinese immigration, the colonies should not do so for the same
reason. As in America, the working classes of Australia are directly
opposed to them; there can be no sympathy or peace between ‘the
races, neither any interchange of ideas, of religion, or
citizenship,
[Page 305]
intermarriage, or social communication. It asserts that the
Australians are determined to preserve the British type of races,
and that if protection can not be afforded as sought Australia must
act from the force of public opinion. The reading of the above
dispatch in the Sydney house of assembly elicited great cheers,
which were renewed when Sir H. Parks replied that if, unfortunately,
the reply of the imperial authorities was unfavorable it would then
unquestionably be the Government’s duty, without loss of a single
day, to take steps to protect the colony, once and forever, from the
influx of Chinese.
It is reported that some of the leading Chinese in Australia have requested
that the matter be brought under the notice of the viceroy at Canton, and he
be urged to take diplomatic action, but I have not, as yet, been able to
ascertain that any such action has been taken by that officer.
I have, etc.,
[Inclosure 1 in No. 646.]
the hong-kong chamber of commerce and chinese
exclusion in australia.
The following letter has been addressed by the chamber of commerce to the
Government:
Hong-Kong General Chamber of
Commerce,
Hong-Kong, May 7, 1888.
Sir: By desire of the committee of the chamber
of commerce, I have the honor to bring to the immediate notice of his
excellency the governor the following resolution, which was passed
unanimously at a special meeting of the committee held today to consider
the question of the refusal of the Australian colonies to admit Chinese
subjects into their ports:
“Resolved, That in the opinion of the committee
the action of the Australian Governments prohibiting the landing of
Chinese in the Australian ports, intelligence of which has been received
by telegraph, is a subject demanding the very grave consideration of Her
Majesty’s Government—
- “(1) Because it is not consonant with British methods of
government, of justice, that tradal regulations should be
instantly suspended without ample notice, to permit of those
interested conforming therewith, for the action of these
Australian colonies threatens to involve those engaged in the
trades affected by the new regulations with very serious loss,
for which apparently no compensation is offered. Merchants
depending upon the good faith of the Australian Governments,
having complied with regulations in force when their engagements
were made, are, at a moment’s notice, without warning of any
kind, subjected to limitations with which they are powerless to
comply.
- “(2) That the refusal to permit the landing of Chinese in the
Australian colonies is fraught with most serious consequences to
British interests in China.
“Perhaps at this juncture no prominent notice may be taken by the Chinese
Government of the restrictions imposed upon the rights of its subjects,
conceded under treaties with Great Britain; still the committee can not
but deplore the dangerous precedent that has been set, and which will
doubtless very seriously affect the promotion of England’s friendly
intercourse with China in the near future.”
I am also requested to forward to you, for the information of his
excellency, copy of a letter dated to-day and addressed to the committee
by the leading Chinese merchants of this colony, bearing upon the
question. The names of the signatories are in the possession of the
chamber and can be furnished to the Government if required.
I have, etc.,
P. Ryrie,
Chairman.
Hon. F. Stewart, LL. D.,
Colonial Secretary.
Hong-Kong, May 7, 1888.
Gentlemen: We have received a telegram from
Australia informing us that the Australian authorities refused
permission to Chinese passengers to land under any circumstances, and
that the passengers by several steamers recently arrived there from
Hong-Kong were turned back unceremoniously and without any previous
warning. We are quite at a loss to understand this most unjustifiable
action of the Australian
[Page 306]
Government, especially after having had long commercial intercourse with
our port and other ports of China. We can not but view the present
action of the Australian Government as a direct infringement of all
international law and usages, and a violation of treaty rights between
civilized nations.
The passengers who are subject to this exclusive policy embarked from the
colony without the slightest previous knowledge or notice, and their
being turned back in this arbitrary manner will, in our opinion, injure
the trade of this colony and entail much hardship and loss both to the
passengers themselves and local ship-owners and mercantile firms.
We, therefore, having met together, in long deliberation, resolve to
approach you and request your kind assistance in getting a satisfactory
settlement of this difficulty and to obtain right and justice from the
Australian Government, and, if necessary, to move his excellency the
governor of Hong-Kong to communicate by cable with the Government in
question with a view to having the restriction removed.
We are, etc.,
(Here follow signatures.)
The Committee of the Hong-Kong General
Chamber of Commerce.
[Inclosure 2 in No. 646.]
Account of public meeting held at Sydney, Australia,
March 27, 1888.
A large and enthusiastic meeting was held to-night, under the auspices of
the Anti-Chinese League, in the Sidney town-hall, to protest against the
influx of Chinese into Australia and the present legislation regarding
Chinese. The mayor presided, and amongst the speakers of the legislative
assembly, Messrs. Dibbs, Fletcher, Melville, and Schey, M. P’s, and Mr.
Talbot, president of the league. These following resolutions were
carried without a Single dissentient:
- (1)
- That the almost unrestricted influx of Chinese into Australia
will, if continued, threaten our social and political welfare,
and that the time has arrived for the imposition of substantial
and effective restrictions on their further introduction.
- (2)
- That this meeting of citizens desires to express its strong
objection to any action on the part of the Government of China
in giving assistance or encouragement to Chinese immigration
into Australasia, and calls upon the home government to maintain
the right of the Australian colonies to frame such laws as they
may consider necessary to insure in this continent a
preponderance of the British race.
A deputation was appointed to present the resolutions to the
governor.
