Von Brandt to the Tsung-li Yamên, January 9, 1881

Mr. von Brandt to the Tsung-li Yamên.

I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your excellencies’ communication dated December 5, being an answer to a note from me on the subject of outward transit passes and other questions.

I regret sincerely that the state of my health has prevented me from discussing the question verbally with your excellencies, as my intention had been, and still prevents my going to the Yamên. In order, however, not to lose any more time, I have now the honor to lay before your excellencies in writing the reply to your note of December 5, which I have been authorized by my colleagues to make to it.

With regard to the first point, the list of duty-free goods, there can be no doubt in the opinion of my colleagues and myself that certain articles in the list being marked “foreign” and others not, under the first ones articles of foreign origin are understood, and under the other ones those of foreign or native origin. The articles of foreign origin would, of course, be imported and then pay no import duty, while those of native origin would be exported and pay no export duty. The mention of transit duty in connection with duty-free articles clearly refers only to goods of foreign origin, as in the body of the treaty no provision is made for the application of the transit-duty rule to native produce carried inland.

As the discussion now going on between the Yamên and the foreign representatives is, however, intended, in the first instance, to do away with such difficulties as have arisen from time to time, and as would, unless remedied, be likely to cause misunderstandings and ill-feeling between China and the treaty powers, my colleagues and myself propose to the Yamên to accept, in lieu of Trade Rule 2 as read until now, the version annexed herein, which, to my colleagues and to myself, seems to have the undoubted advantage of doing away with the ambiguity which your excellencies seem to find in the expressions used in the original rule.

As your excellencies will see from the annex, it is only for sixteen articles of native origin that my colleagues and myself claim freedom from export duty under the treaties, and as none of these articles is of much importance, we hope that the Yamên will see in this proposal, which we substitute for section II of the former proposal, the means of coming to an understanding with the foreign representatives.

With regard to the second point, the treatment on exportation of native produce bought in the port by a foreigner and exported by him, my colleagues and myself must insist on the necessity of giving to the treaty rule that on such produce nothing but the tariff export duty has to be paid, a full and explicit reassertion in the proposed agreement. If the treaty rule had been strictly observed by all the provincial authorities such reassertion would, of course, be unnecessary, but as, on the contrary, attempts have been frequently made by local authorities to force foreign exporters to pay transit duties on goods bought at the port, my colleagues and myself trust that your excellencies will understand the desirability and necessity of the rule contained in the treaty being announced in a form less likely to give rise to misunderstandings.

On the subject of goods manufactured from native produce, my colleagues and myself fail to see how, by such a process going on at the open ports, the goods so manufactured paying export duty on exportation any confusion can arise. It is generally believed to be a sound principle of political economy that industry and commerce will develop the more rapidly and become a greater source of revenue to the state the less they are interfered with and hampered by rules and regulations.

My colleagues and myself hope, therefore, that your excellencies will withdraw your opposition to section III, which, after all, contains nothing but a reassertion of the state of things as created by the treaties, while the introduction of the measures of supervision proposed by the Yamên would be an innovation, and, as such, as we firmly believe, fraught with serious dangers and difficulties.

Before closing this letter I beg to state that, though the last delay in the negotiations has been due to my inability of meeting your excellencies, my colleagues and myself would feel so much the more obliged to your excellencies for a speedy reply, as the necessity for stricter instructions being issued to the local authorities makes itself more strongly felt.

I avail myself, &c.,