Mr. Denby to Mr.
Blaine.
Legation of
the United States,
Peking, April 10, 1892.
(Received May 27.)
No. 1513.]Sir: In my dispatch No. 1501, of March 29 I had the
honor to send a copy of my communication to the foreign office relating to
the action of the lekin authorities at Canton adverse to the issuance of
transit passes.
I have now the honor to inclose a translation of the reply of the yamên to my
communication. This reply consists mostly of denials that any opposition has
been manifested to the issuance of transit passes. But the matter is too
evident to require any proof except to note that in 1891 there issued two
thousand transit passes, and in January, 1892, one hundred and twenty-six.
The proclamations complained of appeared January 26, and in February the
number of transit passes fell to six, all of which were for cotton yarn.
These figures are reported to me by Mr. Seymour. There can be no doubt that
the hostile action of the lekin authorities caused this practical extinction
of transit passes. The foreign office has been requested to wire its
directions to the viceroy, and further correspondence will ensue.
I have, etc.,
[Inclosure with No. 1513.]
The tsung-li yamên to Mr.
Denby.
Your Excellency: The prince and ministers had
the honor to receive, on March 26, a communication from the United
States minister in regard to the posting of proclamations by the lekin
authorities at Canton, setting forth that unprincipled and crafter
[crafty] Chinese merchants had assumed the names of foreign merchants
and falsely used transit passes for the purpose of smuggling and evading
the payment of lekin, and offering a reward for their arrest. The United
States minister furthermore states that complaints have reached him from
Canton that lekin was levied on imports sent into the interior under
transit passes as well as an extra lo-ti-shui after such imports had
reached their destination; that in consequence of the action of the
lekin officials the trade under transit passes had entirely ceased, and
thus harm had been done to the general import trade. Reference is made
to section 3 of the Chefoo convention, under which Chinese and
foreigners alike are entitled to use transit passes, and it is therefore
difficult to understand how Chinese could fraudulently use transit
passes; that the levy of lekin on imports under passes on their way into
the interior is forbidden by treaty, and the duty leviable on goods
covered by transit passes on arrival at their destination can not, under
treaty, be greater than on goods not covered bypasses. The lekin office
has acted in violation of treaty stipulations, and the minister of the
United States must hold the Chinese Government responsible for any
losses American merchants may suffer through such illegal action.
The yamên at the time telegraphed to the governor-general at Canton to
investigate the matter, and a cablegram in reply has been received from
that officer as follows: “Chinese merchants as well as foreign merchants
are alike permitted to take out transit passes without the payment of
lekin on the goods they cover. The rule of action hitherto taken in Yuet
[sic] provinces has been in accordance with,
treaty stipulations. No prohibitions have been enacted against Chinese
merchants taking out transit passes and no extra lekin has been levied
on the goods these documents cover. But foreign merchants should apply
for passes in their own names and also the Chinese merchants in their
names. They should not borrow or use the names of others. Recently
Chinese merchants have applied for transit passes and many have
[Page 103]
assumed the names of foreign
merchants, the evils resulting from this being very great. Foreign
merchants of regular bona fide standing are men naturally of
respectability, and in applying for transit passes they, as a matter of
course, observe and respect the treaties. But among Chinese merchants
there are those who are avaricious and greedy for a little gain, and who
secretly carry goods and smuggle, and they, therefore, assume the names
of foreign merchants, as they wish by such a plan to avoid suspicion.
Such crafty merchants by their acts not only prove detrimental to the
collection of lekin in the interior, but they injure and destroy the
reputation of foreign merchants. Again, the importation recently of
foreign goods has not fallen off. A reference to the custom returns is
evidence of this fact. Since the native authorities at Canton have never
prohibited the application for transit passes, they have never detained
merchandise or refused even once to grant transit passes. The statement
in regard to paying indemnities for losses is decidedly one that the
viceroy can not understand.”
The yamên would observe that the Cant on authorities have never
prohibited Chinese from obtaining passes. Their action has been in
accordance with treaty stipulations. The expression “assuming” in the
proclamations issued by the lekin office meant that Chinese had assumed
foreign merchants’ names for the purpose of smuggling by the art of
deception, and the prohibition of such practices is certainly in
accordance with the stipulations of section 3 of the Chefoo convention.
Further, the action taken is also in accordance with the terms of
Article X of the rules appended to the tariff, which reads that it is at
the option of the Chinese Government to adopt what means appear to it
best suited to protect its revenue. But the wording of the proclamations
was not perfectly clear in its meaning, and, therefore, on reading them
it has led to doubt. From the reply of the viceroy no chin has been
levied on goods covered by transit passes. The yamên will, as a matter
of course, address the viceroy at Canton to again issue strenuous
instructions to observe (?) the treaties.
