Ministers of the Tsung-li Yamên to Sir Thomas Wade, August 1, 1881

Ministers of the Tsung-li Yamên to Sir Thomas Wade.

The ministers are in receipt of a note from the British minister, in which he observes that the negotiation of the changes desired in the matter of inland taxation has been committed to him, and that he was given to understand on the 28th of March last that the ministers were prepared to agree to 10 per cent, ad valorem as the amount that should include both tariff duty and lekin. The adoption of any change so important would, however, depend upon the assent of all foreign governments having treaties with China, and it would be essential that the Tsung-li Yamên should state explicitly to what extent the Chinese Government is prepared to go in the emancipation of the import trade. The change would be tried as an experiment for a stated term of years.

The British minister added that there were other provisions claimed for the protection of trade in the collective note of November, 1879, and that the support of the proposition to increase the import duties is not to be counted upon until satisfaction on these points be secured. Referring to the opium question, the British minister remarked that opium is in the tariff of almost every treaty power, and it is perfectly open to any power to decline the adoption of arrangements affecting opium taxation that may be sanctioned by Great Britain. The ministers would observe, omitting from present consideration the question of opium, which still remains to be discussed, that foreign goods which have paid import duty at a treaty port are conveyed into the interior under transit certificate, which frees them from all other levies after payment of the transit duty. On the other hand, goods unprovided with transit certificates are liable to duty and lekin at such stations as they may pass. So much is clearly stated in the treaty regulations.

Sir R. Alcock’s supplementary convention of 1869 provided that certain commodities of foreign origin, confined to three categories, should circulate freely in treaty port provinces on payment simultaneously of import duty and transit due, but in the case of non-treaty port provinces the commodities having arrived at their place of destination would thenceforth be liable to inland charges in the same manner as native produce.

This arrangement, however, never came into force in consequence of the regretable refusal of the British Government to ratify the convention. The proposition of the British minister, who is now engaged with the conduct of this question, to obviate inconvenient charges by a single payment once for all, is in fact what Sir R. Alcock intended by the simultaneous payment of import duty and transit due, and the ministers of the Yamên proposed at the outset to adopt Sir R. Alcock’s project in its integrity. The British minister not agreeing to this, the Yamên were inclined to make some concession, and first proposed a general import duty of 20 per cent, ad valorem, and subsequently of 11½ per cent. to cover all levies en route to the place of destination, no matter where. The British minister still held out, until at last the Yamên, in a spirit of accommodation, went so far as to offer a still further reduction to a rate of 10 per cent.

Under the conditions at present existing the import duty of 5 per cent., with the transit duty of 2½ per cent., amounts to a total levy of 7½ per cent. ad valorem on foreign imports. The arrangement proposed would increase the aggregate by no more than the amount of the transit duty, and it would be very unsafe to assume that this addition will compensate the Chinese Government for dues which at present are levied in transitu, or after the goods have passed the place of destination. If, however, on the representation of the several ministers the present proposal should obtain the sanction of the treaty powers, regulations for its enforcement as an experiment during a provisional term would of course be negotiated forthwith by the representatives and the Yamên. The institution of such provisional experiment would, for the moment, be premature, in view of the British minister’s remark that “there are other provisions claimed for the protection of trade in the collective note of November, 1879, and the support of the proposition is not to be counted on until (reasonable satisfaction on) these points be secured.” Nevertheless, now that the general principle (of the proposed change) has been determined, there is no harm in deferring for a time the discussion of its application in detail.