First,then,theysuppressedthestatementthattheRussiantreatyhadalreadybeenratified,andthattheEmperorofChinahadgiveninstructionstohismandarinstoreceiveandescorttheAmericanEmbassytothecapitalfortheexchangeoftheratifiedcopiesoftheAmericantreaty.Theseactsweresuppressedwithaviewtostiflethesuspicionthatwouldnaturallyarise,thattheEnglishandFrenchEnvoys,insteadoftheCourtofPeking,areresponsibleformeetingobstaclesinthetransactionoftheirbusinesswhichwerenotencounteredeitherbytheirRussianorAmericancolleagues.Theother,stillmoreimportant,factthatwasatfirstsuppressedbyTheTimes,andtheotherPalmerstonorgans,butisnowavowedontheirpart,isthattheChineseauthoritieshadgivennoticeoftheirwillingnesstoconducttheEnglishandFrenchEnvoystoPeking;thattheywereactuallyinwaitingtoreceivethematoneofthemouthsoftheriver,andofferedthemanescortiftheyonlyconsentedtoleavetheirvesselsandtroops.Now,asthetreatyofTien-tsincontainsnoclausegrantingtotheEnglishandFrenchtherightofsendingasquadronofmen-of-warupthePejho,itbecomesevidentthatthetreatywasviolated,notbytheChinese,butbytheEnglish,andthatonthepartofthelatterthereexistedtheforegoneconclusiontopickaquarreljustbeforetheperiodappointedfortheexchangeoftheratifications.
NobodywillfancythattheHon.Mr.BruceactedonhisownresponsibilityinthusbafflingtheostensibleendaimedatbythelastChinesewar,butthat,onthecontrary,heonlyexecutedsecretinstructionsreceivedfromLondon.Now,itistruethatMr.Brucewasdispatched,notbyPalmerston,butbyDerby;but,thenIhaveonlytoremindyouthatduringthefirstadministrationofSirRobertPeel,whenLordAberdeenkeptthesealsoftheForeignOffice,SirHenryBulwer,theEnglishAmbassadoratMadrid,pickedaquarrelwiththeSpanishCourt,resultinginhisexpulsionfromSpain,andthat,duringthedebatesintheHouseofLordsonthis\"untowardevent,\",itwasprovedthatBulwer,insteadofobeyingtheofficialinstructionsofAberdeen,hadacteduptothesecretinstructionsofPalmerston,whothensatontheOppositionbenches.
AmanoeuvrehasalsobeencarriedoutduringtheselastdaysinthePalmerstonianpress,whichleavesnodoubt,atleasttothoseacquaintedwiththesecrethistoryofEnglishdiplomacyduringthelastthirtyyears,astotherealauthorofthePeihocatastropheandtheimpendingthirdAngloChinesewar.TheTimesintimatesthatthegunsplantedonthefortsofTakuwhichcausedsuchhavocamongtheBritishsquadronwereofRussianorigin,andweredirectedbyRussianofficers.
AnotherPalmerstonianorganisstillmoreplainspoken.Iquote:
\"WenowperceivehowcloselythepolicyofRussiaisinterwovenwiththatofPeking;wedetectgreatmovementsontheAmur;wediscernlargeCossackarmiesmanoeuvringfarbeyondLakeBaikal,inthefrozendreamlandonthetwilightbordersoftheOldWorld;
wetracethecourseofinnumerablecaravans;weespyaspecialRussianenvoy\"(Gen.Mouravieff,theGovernorofEasternSiberia)
\"makinghisway,withsecretdesigns,fromtheremotenessofEasternSiberiatothesecludedChinesemetropolis;andwellmaypublicopinioninthiscountrybumatthethoughtthatforeigninfluenceshavehadashareinprocuringourdisgraceandtheslaughterofoursoldiersandsailors.\"
Now,thisisoneofLordPalmerston\'soldtricks.WhenRussiawantedtoconcludeatreatyofcommercewithChina,hedrovethelatterbytheopiumwarintothearmsofhernorthernneighbour.WhenRussiarequestedthecessionoftheAmur,hebroughtitaboutbythesecondChinesewar,andnowthatRussiawantstoconsolidateherinfluenceatPeking,heextemporizesthethirdChinesewar.InallhistransactionswiththeweakAsiaticStates,withChina,Persia,CentralAsia,Turkey,ithasalwaysbeenhisinvariableandconstantruletoostensiblyopposeRussia\'sdesignsbypickingaquarrel,notwithRussia,butwiththeAsiaticState,toestrangethelatterfromEnglandbypiraticalhostilities,andbythisroundaboutwaydriveittotheconcessionsithadbeenunwillingtoyieldtoRussia.YoumaybesurethatonthisoccasionthewholepastAsiaticpolicyofPalmerstonwillbeagainsifted,andIdraw,therefore,yourattentiontotheAfghanpapersorderedbytheHouseofCommonstobeprintedonthe8thJune,1859.
TheythrowmorelightonPalmerston\'ssinisterpolicy,andthediplomatichistoryofthelastthirtyyears,thananydocumentseverbeforeprinted.Thecaseis,inafewwords,this:
In1838PalmerstoncommencedawaragainstDostMohammed,therulerofCabul,awarthatledtothedestructionofanEnglisharmy,andwascommencedonthepleaofDostMohammedhavingenteredintoasecretallianceagainstEnglandwithPersiaandRussia.Inproofofthisassertion,Palmerstonlaid,in1839,beforeParliament,aBlueBook,chieflyconsistingofthecorrespondenceofSirA.Burnes,theBritishenvoyatCabul,withtheGovernmentatCalcutta.BurneshadbeenassassinatedduringaninsurrectionatCabulagainsttheEnglishinvaders,but,distrustfuloftheBritishForeignMinister,hadsentcopiesofsomeofhisofficialletterstohisbrother,Dr.Burnes,atLondon.Ontheappearance,in1839,ofthe\"Afghanpapers,\"preparedbyPalmerston,Dr.Burnesaccusedhimofhaving\"garbledandforgedthedispatchesofthelateSirA.Burnes,\"and,incorroborationofhisstatement,hadsomeofthegenuinedespatchesprinted.Butitwasonlylastsummerthatthemurdercameout.UndertheDerbyMinistry,onthemotionofMr.Hadfield,theHouseofCommonsorderedalltheAfghanpaperstobepublishedinfull,andthisorderhasbeenexecutedinsuchaformastoconstituteademonstration,tothemeanestcapacity,ofthetruthofthechargeofgarblingandforgery,intheinterestofRussia.Onthetitle-pageoftheBlueBookappearsthefollowing:
\"Note——Thecorrespondence,onlypartiallygiveninformerReturns,isheregivenentire,theomittedpassagesbeingmarkedbybrackets,[].\"
Thenameoftheofficial,whichappearsasaguarantyforthefidelityofthereturn,is\"J.W.Kaye,SecretaryinPoliticalandSecretDepartments,\"Mr.KayebeingtheuprighthistorianoftheWarinAfghanistan.Now,toillustratetherealrelationsofPalmerstonwithRussia,againstwhichhepretendedtohavesetuptheAfghanwar,oneinstancemaysufficeforthepresent.TheRussianagent,Vickovitch,whocametoCabulin1837,wasthebearerofaletterfromtheCzartoDostMohammed,SirAlexanderBurnesobtainedacopyoftheletter,andsentittoLordAuckland,theGovernor-GeneralofIndia.Inhisowndespatches,andvariousdocumentsinclosedbyhim,thiscircumstanceisreferredtooverandoveragain.ButthecopyoftheCzar\'sletterwasexpungedaltogetherfromthepaperspresentedbyPalmerstonin1839,andineverydespatchinwhichitisreferredto,suchalterationsweremadeaswerenecessarytosuppressthecircumstanceoftheconnectionofthe\"EmperorofRussia\"withthemissiontoCabul.ThisforgerywascommittedinordertosuppresstheevidenceoftheAutocrat\'sconnectionwithVickovitch,whom,onhisreturntoSt.Petersburg,itsuitedNicholastoformerlydisavow.Forinstance,atpage82oftheBlueBookwillbefoundthetranslationofalettertoDostMohammed,whichreadsnowasfollows,thebracketsshowingthewordsoriginallysuppressedbyPalmerston:
\"Anambassadoronthepartof[the]Russia[anEmperor]came[fromMoscow]toTehran,andhasbeenappointedtowaitontheSirdarsatCandahar,andthencetoproceedtothepresenceoftheAmeerHeisthebearerof[confidentialmessagesfromtheEmperorandofthe]lettersfromtheRussianambassadoratTehran.
TheRussianambassadorrecommendsthismantobeamosttrustyindividual,andtopossessfullauthoritytomakeanynegotiations,[onthepartoftheEmperorandhimself],etc.,etc.\"
These,andsimilarforgeriescommittedbyPalmerstoninordertoprotectthehonouroftheCzar,arenottheonlycuriosityexhibitedbythe\"Afghanpapers.\"TheinvasionofAfghanistanwasjustifiedbyPalmerstononthegroundthatSirAlexanderBurneshadadviseditasapropermeansforbafflingRussianintriguesinCentralAsia.NowSirA.Burnesdidquitethecontrary,andconsequentlyallhisappealsonbehalfofDostMohammedwerealtogethersuppressedinPalmerston\'seditionofthe\"BlueBook;\"thecorrespondencebeingbydintofgarblingandforgery,turnedquitetothereverseofitsoriginalmeaning.SuchisthemannowabouttoenteronathirdChinesewar,ontheostensiblepleaothwartingRussia\'sdesignsinthatquarter.
ANOTHERCIVILIZATIONWARNewYorkDailyTribuneOctober1859
byKARLMARX
THATTHEREistobeanothercivilizationwaragainsttheCelestialsseemsamatternowprettygenerallysettledwiththeEnglishpress.
Still,sincethemeetingoftheCabinetCounciIonSaturdaylast,aremarkablechangehascomeoverthoseverypapersthatwereforemostinthehowlforblood.Atfirst,theLondonTimes,inanapparenttranceofpatrioticfury,thunderedatthedoubletreacherycommitted——bycowardlyMongolswholuredonthebonhommeoftheBritishAdmiralbystudiouslyfalsifyingappearancesandscreeningtheirartillery——bytheCourtofPeking,which,withdeeperMachiavelianism,hadsetthoseMongologrestotheirdamnablepracticaljokes.Curioustosay,althoughtossedonaseaofpassion,TheTimeshad,initsreprints,contrivedtocarefullyexpungefromtheoriginalreportsallpointsfavourabletothedoomedChinaman.Toconfoundthingsmaybetheworkofpassion,buttogarblethemseemsrathertheoperationofacoolhead.Howeverthatbe,onSept.16,justonedaybeforethemeetingoftheMinisters,TheTimesveeredround,and,withoutmuchado,cutoneheadoffitsJanus-headedimpeachment.\"WeJear,\"itsaid,\"thatwecannotaccusetheMongolswhoresistedourattackonthefortsofthePeihooftreachery\";butthen,tomakeupforthatawkwardconcession,itclungthemoredesperatelytothedeliberateandperfidiousviolationofa\"solemntreaty\"by\"theCourtofPeking.\"Threedayslater,aftertheCabinetCouncilhadbeenheld,TheTimes,onfurtherconsideration,evenfound\"noroomfirdoubtthatifMr.BruceandM.deBourboulonhadsolicitedtheMandarinstoconductthemtoPeking,theywouldhavebeenpermittedtoeffecttheratification\"ofthetreaty.What,then,remainsthereofthetreacheryoftheCourtofPeking?Notashadoweven,butinitsplacethereremaintwodoubtsonthemindofTheTimes.\"Itis,\"itsays,\"perhapsdoubtfulwhether,asamilitarymeasure,itwaswisetotrywithiuchasquadron,ourwaytoPeking.Itisstillmoredoubtfulwhether,asadiplomaticmeasure,itwasdesirabletouseforceatall.\"Suchisthelameconclusionofalltheindignationblusterindulgedinbythe\"leadingorgan,\"but,withalogicofitsown,itdropsthereasonsforwarwithoutdroppingthewaritself.Anothersemi-Governmentalpaper,TheEconomist,whichhaddistinguisheditselfbyitsferventapologyfortheCantonbombardment,seemstotakeamoreeconomicalandlessrhetoricalviewofthingsnowthatMr.J.WilsonhasgothisappointmentofChancelloroftheExchequerforIndiaTheEconomistbringstwoarticlesonthesubject,theonepolitical,theothereconomical;thefirstonewindingupwiththefollowingsentences:
\"Now,allthesethingsconsidered,itisobviousthatthearticleofthetreatywhichgaveourAmbassadorarightofvisitingorresidingatPeking,wasoneliterallyforcedupontheChineseGovernment;andifitwerethoughtabsolutelyessentialtoourintereststhatitshouldbeobserved,wethinktherewasmuchroomforthedisplayofconsiderationandpatienceinexactingitsfulfilment.NodoubtitmaybesaidthatwithsuchaGovernmentastheChinese,delayandpatienceareinterpretedasasignoffatalweakness,andisthereforethemostunsoundpolicywecouldpursue.Buthowjarareweentitled,onthisplea,tovarytheprinciplesonwhichweshouldassuredlyacttowardanycivilizednationinourtreatmentoftheseOrientalGovernments?Whenwehavewrungoutanunwelcomeconcessionfromtheirfears,itmaybeperhapsthemostconsistentpolicytowringout,alsofromtheirfears,theimmediateexecutionofthebargaininthewaymostconvenienttoourselves.Butifwefailinsodoing——if,inthemeantime,theChineseovercometheirfears,andinsist,withasuitabledisplayofforce,onourconsultingthemastothemodetobetakenforgivingourtreatyeffect——canwejustlyaccusethemoftreachery?Aretheynotratherpractisinguponusourownmethodsofpersuasion?TheChineseGovernmentmay——anditisverylikelythatitisso——haveintendedtoentrapusintothismurderoussnare,andneverhavepurposedtoexecutethetreatyatall.Ifthisshouldprovetobeso,wemustandoughttoexactreparation.ButitmayalsoprovethattheintentiontodefendthemouthofthePeihoagainsttherecurrenceofsuchaviolententryaswasmadegoodbyLordElgininthepreviousyear,wasnotaccompaniedbyanydesiretobreakfaithonthegeneralarticlesofthetreaty.Asthehostileinitiativecameentirelyfromourside,anditwas,ofcourse,atanymomentcompetenttoourcommanderstoretirefromthemurderousfire,openedonlyforthedefenceoftheforts,wecannotcertainlyproveanyintentionofbreakingfaithonthepartofChina.And,tillproofofadeliberateintentiontobreakthetreatyreachesus——wethinkwehavesomereasontosuspendourjudgment,andponderwhetherwemaynothavebeenapplyingtoourtreatmentofbarbarians,acodeofprinciplesnotverywidelydifferentfromthatwhichtheyhavepractisedtowardsourselves.\"
Inasecondarticleonthesamesubject,TheEconomistdwellsontheimportance,directandindirect,oftheEnglishtradetoChina.Intheyear1858,theBritishexportstoChinahadrisento?,876,000,whilethevalueoftheBritishimportsfromChinahadaveragedupwardofcg,000,000foreachofthelastthreeyears,sothattheaggregatedirecttradeofEnglandwithChinamaybeputdownataboutci2,000,000.Butbesidethesedirecttransactionstherearethreeotherimportanttradeswithwhich,lessormore,Englandisintimatelyconnectedinthecircleofexchanges,thetradebetweenIndiaandChina,thetradebetweenChinaandAustralia,andthetradebetweenChinaandtheUnitedStates.\"Australia,\"saysTheEconomist,\"takesfromChinalargequantitiesofteaannually,andhasnothingtogiveinexchangewhichfindsamarketinChina.AmericaalsotakeslargequantitiesofteaandsomesilkofavaluefarexceedingthatoftheirdirectexportstoChina.\"BoththesebalancesinfavourofChinahavetobemadegoodbyEngland,whoispaidforthisequalizationofexchangesbythegoldofAustraliaandthecottonoftheUnitedStates.
England,therefore,independentlyofthebalanceduebyherselftoChina,hasalsotopaytothatcountrylargesumsinrespecttogoldimportedfromAustraliaandcottonfromAmerica.NowthisbalanceduetoChinabyEngland,Australia,andtheUnitedStatesdfromChinatoIndia,asasetbyChinatoIndia,onaccountofarked,enpassant,thattheimportsneveryetreachedtheamountofl,000,000sterlingwhiletheexportstoChinafromIndiarealizethesumofnearly?0,000,000.
TheinferenceTheEconomistdrawsfromtheseeconomicalobservationsis,thatanyseriousinterruptionoftheBritishtradewithChinawould\"beacalamityofgreatermagnitudethanthemerefiguresofourownexportsandimportsmightatfirstsightsuggest,\"andthattheembarrassmentconsequentuponsuchadisturbancewouldnotbefeltinthedirectBritishteaandsilktradeonly,butmustalso\"affect\"theBritishtransactionswithAustraliaandtheUnitedStates.TheEconomistis,ofcourse,awareofthefactthatduringthelastChinesewar,thetradewasnotsomuchinterferedwithbythewarashadbeenapprehended;andthat,attheportofShanghai,itwasevennotaffectedatall.
Butthen,TheEconomistcallsattentionto\"twonovelfeaturesinthepresentdispute\"whichmightessentiallymodifytheeffectsofanewChinesewarupontrade——thesetwonovelfeaturesbeingthe\"imperial\"
not\"localcharacterofthepresentconflict,andthe\"signalsuccesswhich,forthefirsttime,theChinesehaveeffectedagainstEuropeanforces.HowverydifferentsoundsthislanguagefromthewarcryTheEconomistsolustilyshoutedatthetimeoftheLorchaaffair.
TheMinisterialCouncil,asIanticipatedinmylastletter,witnessedMr.MilnerGibson\'sprotestagainstthewar,andhismenaceofsecedingfromtheCabinet,shouldPalmerstonactuptotheforegoneconclusionsbetrayedinthecolumnsoftheFrenchMoniteur.ForthemomentPalmerstonpreventedanyruptureoftheCabinet,andtheLiberalCoalition,bythestatementthattheforceindispensablefortheprotectionofBritishtradeshouldbegatheredintheChinesewaters,whilebeforethearrivalofmoreexplicitreportsonthepartoftheBritishEnvoy,noresolutionshouldbetakenastothewarquestion.
Thustheburningquestionwasputoff.Palmerston\'srealintentionhowevertransiresthrouthecolumnsofhismob-organTheDailyTelegraph,whichinoneofitsrecentnumberssays:
\"ShouldanyeventleadtoavoteunfavourabletotheGovernmentinthecourseofnextyear,anappealwillcertainlybemadetotheconstituenciesTheHouseofCommonswilltesttheresultoftheiractivitybyaverdictontheChinesequestion,seeingthattotheprofessionalmalignants;headedbyMr.DisraelimustbeaddedtheCosmopolitanswhodeclarethattheMongolswerethoroughlyintheright.\"
ThefixinwhichtheToriesarehemmedup,byhavingallowedthemselvestobecomeinveigledintotheresponsibleeditorshipofeventsplannedbyPalmerstonandenactedbytwoofhisagents,LordElginandMr.
Bruce,(LordElgin\'sbrother)Ishall,perhaps,findanotheroccasionforremarkingupon.
THENEWCHINESEWARNewYorkDailyTribuneOctober18,1859
byKARLMARX
INAformerletterIassertedthatthePeihoconflicthadnotsprungfromaccident,but,onthecontrary,beenbeforehandpreparedbyLordElgin,actinguponPalmerston\'ssecretinstructions,andfasteninguponLordMalmesbury,theToryForeignMinister,theprojectofthenobleViscount,thenseatedattheheadof&oppositionbenches.Now,first,theideaofthe\"accidents\"inChinaarisingfrom\"instructions\"drawnupbythepresentBritishPremierissofarfrombeingnewthat,duringthedebatesontheLorchawar,itwassuggestedtotheHouseofCommonsbysowellinformedapenonageasMr.Disraeli,and,curioustosay,confirmedbynolessanauthoritythanLordPalmerstonhimself.OnFebruary3,1857,Mr.DisraeliwarnedtheHouseofCommonsinthefollowingterms:
\"IcannotresisttheconvictionthatwhathastakenplaceinChinahasnotbeeninconsequenceoftheallegedpretext,butis,infact,inconsequenceofinstructionsreceivedfromhome,someconsiderabletimeago.Ifthatbethecase,IthinkthetimehasarrivedwhenthisHousewouldnotbedoingitsdutyunlessitearnestlyconsideredwhetherithasanymeansofcontrollingasystem,whichifpursued,willbeone,inmymind,fataltotheinterestsofthiscountry.\"
AndLordPalmerstonmostcoollyreplied:
\"Therighthon.gentlemansaysthecourseofeventsappearedtobetheresultofsomesystempredeterminedbytheGovernmentathome.
Undoubtedly,itwas.\"
Inthepresentinstance,acursoryglanceattheBlueBook,entitled:
\"CorrespondencerelativetotheEarlofElgin\'sspecialmissionstoChinaandJapan,1857-59,willshowhowtheeventthatoccurredatthePeihoonthe25thJunewasalreadyrecordedbyLordElginonthe2ndofMarch.Page484ofthesaidcorrespondence,wefindthefollowingtwodispatches.
THEEARLOFELGINTOREAR-ADMIRALSIRMICHAELSEYMOUR.
Furious,March2,1859.
\"SIR:WithreferencetomydispatchtoyourExcellencyofthe17thult.,IwouldbegleavetostatethatIentertainsomehopethatthedecisioncometobyherMajesty5SGovernmentonthesubjectofthepermanentresidenceofaBritishAmbassadoratPekin,whichIcommunicatedtoyourExcellencyinaconversationyesterday,mayinducetheChineseGovernmenttoreceive,inabecomingmanner,therepresentativeofherMajesty,whenheproceedstoPekinfortheexchangeoftheratificationsofthetreatyofTien-tsin.Atthesametime,itisnodoubtpossiblethatthishopemaynotberealized,and,atanyrate,IapprehendthatherMajesty\'sGovernmentwilldesirethattheAmbassador,whenheproceedstoTien-tsin,beaccompaniedbyanimposingforce.Underthesecircumstances,IwouldventuretosubmitforyourExcellency\'sconsideration,whetheritwouldnotbeexpedienttoconcentrateatShanghaiattheearliestconvenientperiod,asufficientfleetofgunboatsforthisservice,asMr.Bruce\'sarrivalinChinacannotbelongdelayed.Ihave,etc.ELGINandKINCARDINE.\"
THEEARLOFMALMESBURYTOTHEEARLOFELGIN.
FOREIGNOFFICE,May2,1859.
\"MyLORD:IhavereceivedyourExcellency\'sdispatchofthe7thofMarch,1859,andIhavetoinformyouthatherMajesty\'sGovernmentapproveofthenote,ofwhichacopyisthereininclosed,andinwhichyourExcellencyannouncedtotheImperialCommissionersthatherMajesty\'sGovernmentwouldnotinsistupontheresidenceofherMajesty\'sMinisterbeingpermanentlyfixedatPekin.
\"HerMajesty\'sGovernmentalsoapproveofyourhavingsuggestedtoRear-AdmiralSeymourthatafleetofgunboatsshouldbecollectedatShanghaiinordertoaccompanyMr.BruceupthePeiho.
\"Iam,etc.MALMESBURY
LordElgin,then,knowsbeforehandthattheBritishGoverment\"willdesire\"thathisbrother,Mr.Bruce,beaccompaniedby\"animposingforce\"of\"gunboats\"upthePciho,andheordersAdmiralSeymourtomakeready\"forthisservice.\"TheEarlofMalmesbury,inhisdispatchdatedMay2,approvedofthesuggestionintimatedbyLordElgintotheAdmiral.ThewholecorrespondenceexhibitsLordElginasthemaster,andLordMalmesburyastheman.WhiletheformerconstantlytakestheinitiativeandactsupontheinstructionsoriginallyreceivedfromPalmerston,withoutevenwaitingfornewinstructionsfromDowningStreet,LordMalmesburycontentshimselfwithindulging\"thedesires\"
whichhisimperioussubalternanticipateshimtofeel.HenodsassentwhenElginstatesthatthetreatybeingnotyetratified,theyhadnottherighttoascendanyChineseriver;henodsassent,whenElginthinkstheyoughttoshowmuchforbearancetowardstheChineseinregardtotheexecutionofthearticleofthetreatyrelatingtotheembassytoPekin;and,nothingdaunted,henodsassentwhenindirectcontradictiontohisownformerstatements,ElginclaimstherighttoenforcethepassageofthePcihobyan\"imposingfleetofgunboats.\"HenodsassentinthesamewaythatDogberrynoddedassenttothesuggestionsofthesexton.
ThesorryfigurecutbytheEarlofMalmesburyandthehumilityofhisattitude,areeasilyunderstoodifonecallstomindthecryraisedontheadventoftheToryCabinetbytheLondonTimesandotherinfluentialpapers,astothegreaperilthreateningthebrilliantsuccesswhichLordElgin,undertheinstructionsofPalmerston,wasabouttosecureinChina,butwhichtheToryAdministration,ifforpiqueonly,andinordertojustifytheirvoteofcensureonPalmerston\'sCantonbombardment,werelikelytobaffle.Malmesburyallowedhimselftobeintimidatedbythatcry.Hehad,moreover,beforehiseyesandinhisheartthefateofLordEllenborough,whohaddaredopenlytocounteracttheIndiapolicyofthenobleViscount,andinrewardforhispatrioticcourage,wassacrificedbyhisowncolleaguesoftheDerbyCabinet.Consequently,MalmesburyresignedthewholeinitiativeintothehandsofElgin,andthusenabledthelattertoexecutePalmerston\'splanontheresponsibilityofhisofficialantagonists,theTories.ItisthissamecircumstancewhichforthepresenthasputtheToriesinaverydismalalternativeastothecoursetobetakeninregardtothePeihoaffair.EithertheymustsoundthewartrumpetwithPalmerston,andthuskeephiminoffice,ortheymustturntheirbacksonMalmesbury,uponwhomtheyheapedsuchsickeningflatteries-,duringthelateItalianwar.
ThealternativeisthemoretryingsincetheimpendingthirdChinawarisanythingbutpopularwiththeBritisbmercantileclasses.In1857
theybestrodetheBritishlion,becausetheyexpectedgreatcommercialprofitsfromaforcibleopeningoftheChinesemarket.Atthismoment,theyfeel,onthecontrary,ratherangryatseeingthefruitsofthetreatyobtained,allatoncesnappedawayfromtheirhold.TheyknowthataffairslookmenacingenoughinEuropeandIndia,withoutthefurthercomplicationofaChinesewaronagrandscale.Theyhavenotforgottenthat,in1857,theimportsofteafellbyupwardof24
millionsofpounds,thatbeingthearticlealmostexclusivelyexportedfromCanton,whichwasthentheexclusivetheatreofwar,andtheyapprehendthatthisinterruptionoftradebywarmaynowbeextendedtoShanghaiandtheothertradingportsoftheCelestialEmpire.AfterafirstChinesewarundertakenbytheEnglishintheinterestofopiumsmuggling,andasecondwarcarriedonforthedefenceofthelorchaofapirate,nothingwaswantedforaclimaxbutawarextemporizedforthepurposeofpesteringChinawiththenuisanceofpermanentEmbassiesatitscapital.
TRADEWITHCHINANewYorkDailyTribuneDecember3,1859
byKARLMARX
ATAtimewhenverywildviewsobtainedastotheimpulseAmericanandBritishcommerceweresuretoreceivefromthethrowingopen,asitwascalled,oftheCelestialEmpire,weundertooktoshow,byasomewhatelaboratereviewofChineseforeigncommercesincethecommencementofthiscentury,thatthosehigh-flownanticipationshadnosolidgroundtostandupon.Quiteapartfromtheopiumtrade,whichweprovedtogrowinaninverseratiotothesaleof\'Westernmanufactures,wefoundthemainobstacletoanysuddenexpansionoftheimporttradetoChinaintheeconomicalstructureofChinesesociety,dependinguponthecombinationofminuteagriculturewithdomesticindustry.Wemaynow,incorroborationofourformerstatements,refertotheBlueBookentitled,CorrespondenceRelativetoLordElgin\'sSpecialMissionstoChinaandJapan.
WherevertherealdemandforcommoditiesimportedintoAsiaticcountriesdoesnotanswerthesupposeddemandwhichinmostinstancesiscalculatedonsuchsuperficialdataastheextentofthenewmarket,themagnitudeofitspopulation,andtheventforeignwaresusedtofindatsomeoutstandingseaports——commercialmen,intheireagernessatsecuringalargerareaofexchange,aretoopronetoaccountfortheirdisappointmentbythecircumstancethatartificialarrangements,inventedbybarbarianGovernments,standintheirway,andmay,consequently,beclearedawaybymainforce.Thisverydelusionhas,inourepoch,convertedtheBritishmerchant,forinstance,intotherecklesssupporterofeveryMinisterwho,bypiraticalaggressions,promisestoextortatreatyofcommercefromthebarbarian.ThustheartificialobstaclesforeigncommercewassupposedtoencounteronthepartoftheChineseauthorities,formed,infact,thegreatpretextwhich,intheeyesofthemercantileworld,justifiedeveryoutragecommittedontheCelestialEmpire.ThevaluableinformationcontainedinLordElgin\'sBlueBookwill,witheveryunprejudicedmind,gofartodispelsuchdangerousdelusions.
TheBlueBookcontainsareport,datedin1852,ofMr.Mitchell,aBritishagentatCanton,toSirGeorgeBonham,fromwhichwequotethefollowingpassage:
\"OurCommercialTreatywiththiscountry(China)hasnow(1852)
beennearlytenyearsinfullwork,everypresumedimpedimenthasbeenremoved,onethousandmilesofnewcoasthavebeenopeneduptous,andfournewmartsestablishedattheverythresholdsoftheproducingdistricts,andatthebestpossiblepointsupontheseaboard.Andyet,whatistheresultasfarasthepromisedincreaseintheconsumptionofourmanufacturesisconcerned?
Why,plainlythis:ThatattheendoftenyearsthetablesoftheBoardofTradeshowusthatSirHenryPottingerfoundalargertradeinexistencewhenhesignedtheSupplementaryTreatyin1843
thanhisTreatyitselfshowsusattheendof1850!——thatistosay,asfarasourhomemanufacturesareconcerned,whichisthesolequestionwearenowconsidering.\"
Mr.MitchelladmitsthatthetradebetweenIndiaandChina,consistingalmostexclusivelyinanexchangeofsilverforopium,hasbeengreatlydevelopedsincethetreat),of1842,but,eveninregardtothistrade,headds:
\"Itdevelopeditselfinasfastaratio,from1834to1844,asithasdonefromthelatterdatetothepresent,whichlatterperiodmaybetakenasitsworkingunderthesupposedprotectionoftheTreaty;while,ontheotherhand,wehavethegreatfactstaringusintheface,intheTablesoftheBoardofTrade,thattheexportofourmanufacturingstuffstoChinawaslessbynearlythree-quartersofamillionsterlingatthecloseof1850thanitwasatthecloseof1844.\"
ThatthetreatyOf1842hadnoinfluenceatallinfosteringtheBritishexporttradetoChinawillbeseenfromthefollowingtabularstatement:
DECLAREDVALUEINPOUNDSSTERLING
18491850185118521853
CottonGoods1,001,2831,020,9151,598,8291,905,3211,408,439
WoollenGoods370,878404,797373,399434,616203,875
Otherarticles164,948148,433189,040163,662137,289
Total1,537,1091,574,1452,161,2682,503,5991,749,597
1854185518561857
CottonGoods640,820883,9851,544,2351,731,909
WoollenGoods156,959134,070268,642286,852
Otherarticles202,937259,889403,246431,221
Total1,000,7161,277,9442,216,1232,449,982
Now,comparingthesefigureswiththeChinesedemandforBritishmanufacturesin1843,statedbyMr.Mitchelltohaveamountedto?,750,000,itwillbeseenthatinfiveoutofthelastnineyearstheBritishexportsfellfarbelowthelevelof1843,andin1854wereonly10-17ofwhattheyhadbeenin1843.Mr.Mitchell,inthefirstinstance,explainsthisstartlingfactbysomereasonswhichappeartoogeneraltoproveanythinginparticular.Hesays:
\"ThehabitsoftheChinesearesothrifty,andsohereditary,thattheywearjustwhattheirfathersworebeforethem;thatistosay,justenoughandnomoreofanything,nomatterhowcheapitmaybeofferedthem.NoworkingChinamancanaffordtoputonanewcoatwhichshallnotlasthimatleastthreeyearsandstandthewearandtearoftheroughestdrudgeryduringthatperiod.
Now,agarmentofthatdescriptionmustcontainatleastthreetimestheweightofrawcottonwhichweputintotheheaviestgoodsweimporttoChina;thatistosay,itmustbethreetimesasheavyastheheaviestdrillsanddomesticswecanaffordtosendouthere.\"
Absenceofwants,andpredilectionforhereditarymodelsof,dress,areobstacleswhichcivilizedcommercehastoencounterinallnewmarkets.
Astothethicknessandstrengthofdrills,mightBritishandAmericanmanufacturersnotadapttheirwarestothepeculiarrequirementsoftheChinese?Buthere,wecometotherealpointatissue.In1844,Mr.
MitchellsentsomesamplesofthenativeclothofeveryqualitytoEngland,withthepricesspecified.HiscorrespondentsassuredhimthattheycouldnotproduceitinManchester,andmuchiessshipittoChina,attheratesquoted.Whencethisinabilityinthemostadvancedfactorysystemoftheworldtoundersellclothwovenbyhandinthemostprimitivelooms?Thecombinationwehavealreadypointedto,ofminuteagriculturewithdomesticindustry,solvestheriddle.WequoteagainfromMr.Mitchell:
\"Whentheharvestisgathered,allhandsinthefarmhouse,youngandoldtogether,turntocarding,spinning,andweavingthiscotton;andoutofthishome-spunstuffaheavyanddurablematerial,adaptedtotheroughhandlingithastogothroughfortwoorthreeyears,theyclothethemselves,andthesurplustheycarrytothenearesttown,wheretheshopkeeperbuysitfortheuseofthepopulationofthetowns,andtheboatpeopleontherivers.Withthishomespunstuff,nineoutofeverytenhumanbeingsinthiscountryareclothed,themanufacturevaryinginqualityfromthecoarsestdungareetothefinestnanking,allproducedinthefarm-houses,andcostingtheproducerliterallynothingbeyondthevalueoftherawmaterial,orratherofthesugarwhichheexchangedforit,theproduceofhisownhusbandry.
Ourmanufacturershaveonlytocontemplateforamomenttheadmirableeconomyofthissystem,and,sotospeak,itsexquisitedovetailingwiththeotherpursuitsofthefarmer,tobesatisfied,ataglance,thattheyhavenochancewhateverinthecompetition,asfarasthecoarserfabricsareconcerned.Itis,perhaps,characteristicofChinaalone,ofallcountriesintheworld,thattheloomistobefoundineverywell-conditionedhomestead.Thepeopleofallothercountriescontentthemselveswithcardingandspinning,andatthatpointstopshort,sendingtheyarntotheprofessionalweavertobemadeintocloth.ItwasreservedforthethriftyChinamantocarrythethingouttoperfection.Henotonlycardsandspinshiscotton,butheweavesithimself,withthehelpofhiswivesanddaughters,andfarmservants,andhardlyeverconfineshimselftoproducingforthemerewantsofhisfamily,butmakesitanessentialpartofhisseason\'soperationstoproduceacertainquantityofclothforthesupplyofneighbouringtownsandrivers.
\"TheFui-kienfarmeristhusnotmerelyafarmer,butanagriculturistandamanufacturerinone.Heproducesthisclothliterallyfornothing,beyondthecostoftherawmaterial:lieproducesit,asshown,underhisownroof-tree,bythehandsofhiswomenandfarmservants;itcostsneitherextralabournorextratime.Hekeepshisdomesticsspinningandweavingwhilehiscropsaregrowing,andaftertheyareharvested,duringrainyweather,whenout-of-doorlabourcannotbepursued.Inshort,ateveryavailableintervalthroughouttheyearround,doesthismodelofdomesticindustrypursuehiscalling,andengagehimselfuponsomethinguseful.\"
AsacomplementofMr.Mitchell\'sstatementmaybeconsideredthefollowingdescriptionLordElgingivesoftheruralpopulationhemetwithduringhisvoyageuptheYang-tse-kiang:
\"WhatIhaveseenleadsmetothinkthattheruralpopulationofChinais,generallyspeaking,well-doingandcontented.Iworkedveryhard,thoughwithonlyindifferentsuccess,toobtainfromthemaccurateinformationrespectingtheextentoftheirholdings,thenatureoftheirtenure,thetaxationwhichtheyhavetopay,andotherkindredmatters.Iarrivedattheconclusionthat,forthemostpart,theyholdtheirlands,whichareofverylimitedextent,infullpropertyfromtheCrown,subjecttocertainannualchargesofnoveryexorbitantamount,andthattheseadvantages,improvedbyassiduousindustry,supplyabundantlytheirsimplewants,whetherinrespectoffoodorclothing.\"
Itisthissamecombinationofhusbandrywithmanufacturingindustry,which,foralongtime,withstood,andstillchecks,theexportofBritishwarestoEastIndia;buttherethatcombinationwasbaseduponapeculiarconstitutionofthelandedpropertywhichtheBritish,intheirpositionasthesupremelandlordsofthecountry,haditintheirpowertoundermine,andthusforciblyconvertpartoftheHinduself-sustainingcommunitiesintomerefarms,producingopium,cotton,indigo,hemp,andotherrawmaterials,inexchange,forBritishstuffi.
InChinatheEnglishhavenotyetwieldedthispower,noraretheylikelyevertodoso.
ENGLISHPOLITICSNewYorkDailyTribuneFebruary14,1860
byKARLMARX
THEMOSTinterestingtopicstoucheduponintheParliarnentaryaddressdebateswerethethirdChinesewar,thecommercialtreatywithFrance,andtheItaliancomplication.TheChinesequestion,itoughttobeunder-stood,involvesnotonlyaninternationalquestion,butalsoaconstitutionalquestionofvitalimport.ThesecondChinesewar,undertakenonthearbitrarybehestofLordPalmerston,havingledfirsttoavoteofcensureagainsthisCabinet,andthentoaforcibledissolutionoftheHouseofCommons——thenewHouse,althoughelectedunderhisownauspices,wasnevercalledupontocashierthesentencepassedbyitspredecessor.TothisverynromentLordPalmerston\'ssecondChinesewarstandscondemnedbyaParliamentaryverdict.Butthisisnotall.
Onthe16thofSeptember,1859,theaccountoftherepulseonthePeihowasreceivedinEngland.InsteadofsummoningParliament,LordPalmerstonaddressedhimselftoLouisBonaparte,andconversedwiththeautocratonanewAngloFrenchexpeditionagainstChina.Duringthreemonths,asLordGreysays,theBritishportsandarsenals\"haveresoundedwiththedinofpreparation,\"andmeasuresweretakenfordispatchingartillery,stores,andgun-boatstoChina,andforsendinglargeforcesofnotlessthanio,000men,inadditiontothenavalforces.Thecountryhavingthusbeenfairlyembarkedinanewwar,ontheonehandbyatreatywithFrance,ontheotherbyavastexpenditureincurredwithoutanypreviouscommunicationtoParliament,thelatter,onitsmeeting,iscoollyasked\"tothankHerMajestyforhavinginformedthemofwhathadhappenedandofthepreparationsthatwerebeingmadeforanexpeditiontoChina.\"InwhatdifferentstylecouldLouisNapoleonhimselfhaveaddressedhisowncorpslegislatif,ortheEmperorAlexanderhissenate?
InthedebateontheAddressintheHouseofCommonsin1857,Mr.
Gladstone,thepresentChancelloroftheExchequer,withreferencetothePersianwar,hadindignantlyexclaimed:
\"Iwillsay,withoutfearofcontradiction,thatthepracticeofcommencingwarswithoutassociatingParliamentwiththefirstmeasuresisutterlyatvariancewiththeestablishedpracticeofthecountry,dangeroustotheConstitution,andabsolutelyrequiringtheinterventionofthisHouse,inordertorendertherepetitionofsodangerousaProceedingutterlyimpossible.\"
LordPalmerstonhasnotonlyrepeatedtheproceeding,\"sodangeroustotheConstitution\";hehasnotonlyrepeateditthistimewiththeconcurrenceofthesanctimoniousMr.Gladstone,butasiftotrythestrengthofministerialirresponsibility,wieldingtherightsofParliamentagainsttheCrown,theprerogativesoftheCrownagainstParliament,andtheprivilegesofbothagainstthepeople——hehadtheboldnesstorepeatthedangerousproceedingwithinthesamesphereofaction.HisoneChinesewarbeingcensuredbytheParliament,heundertakesanotherChinesewarinspiteofParliament.Still,inbothHouses,onlyonemanmusteredcourageenoughtomakeastandagainstthisministerialusurpation;and,curioustosay,thatonemanbelongingnottothepopular,buttothearistocraticbranchoftheLegislature.ThemanisLordGrey.HeproposedanamendmenttotheAddressinanswertotheQueen\'sSpeechtothepurportthattheexpeditionoughtnottohavebeenentereduponbeforethesenseofbothHousesofParliamentwastaken.
ThemannerinwhichLordGrey\'samendmentwasmet,bothbythespokesmanoftheministerialpartyandleader,HerMajesty\'sopposition,ishighlycharacteristicofthepoliticalcrisiswhichtherepresentativeinstitutionsofEnglandarerapidlyapproaching.LordGreyconcededthat,inaformalsense,theCrownenjoyedtheprerogativeofenteringuponwars,butsinceministerswereinterdictedfromspendingonesinglefarthingonanyenterprisewithouttherevioussanctionofParliament,itwastheconstitutionallawandpracticethattheresponsiblerepresentativesoftheCrownshouldneverenteruponwarlikeexpeditionsbeforenoticehavingbeengiventoParliament,andthelatterbeencalledtomakeprovisionfordefrayingtheexpenditurewhichmightbethusincurred.Thus,ifthecouncilofthenationthoughtfit,itmightcheck,inthebeginning,anyunjustorimpoliticwarcontemplatedbyministers.HisLordshipthenquotedsomeexamplesinordertoshowhowstrictlytheseruleswereformerlyadheredto.In1790,whensomeBritishvesselswereseizedbytheSpaniardsonthenorth-westcoastofAmerica,PittbroughtdowntobothHousesamessagefromtheCrowncallingforavoteofcredittomeettheprobableexpenses.Again,inDecember1826,whenthedaughterofDonPedroappliedtoEnglandforassistanceagainstFerdinandVII.ofSpain,whointendedaninvasionofPortugaltothebenefitofDonMiguel,CanningbroughtdownasimilarmessagenotifyingtoParliamentthenatureofthecaseandtheamountofexpenditurelikelytobeincurred.InconclusionLordGrey.broadlyintimatedthattheMinistryhaddaredtoraisetaxesuponthecountrywithouttheconcurrenceofParliament,sincethelargeexpenditurealreadvincurredmusthavebeendefrayedonewayoranother,andcouldnothavebeendefrayedwithoutencroachinguponmoney-grantsprovidedforentirelydifferentdemands.
NowwhichsortofrcplvdidLordGreyelicitonthepartofthecabinet?TheDukeofNewcastle,whohadbeenforemostinprotestingagainstthelawfulnessofPalmerston\'ssecondChinesewar,answered,inthefirstinstance,that\"theverywholesomepractice\"hadarisenoflateyearsof\"nevermovinganamendmenttotheAddressunlesssomeatpartyobject\"wastobeattained.Consequently,LordGreybeingnotpromptedbyfactiousmotives,AnpretendingnottoaspiretoputMinistersoutinordertoputhimselfinwhatforthelifeoftheDukeofNewcastle,couldhemeanbyinfringinguponthat\"verywholesomepracticeoflateyears?\"Washecrotchetyenoughtofancythattheyweretobreaklancesexceptforgreatpartyobjects?Inthesecondinstance,wasitnotnotoriousthattheconstitutionalpractice,soanxiouslyadheredtobyPittandCanning,hadbeenoverandoveragaindepartedfrombyLordPalmerston?HadthatnobleViscountnotcarriedonawarofhisowninPortugalin1831,inGreecein1850,and,astheDukeofNewcastlemighthaveadded,inPersia,inAfghanistanandinmanyothercountries?Why,ifParliamenthadallowedLordPalmerstontousurptohimselftherightofwarandpeaceandtaxationduringthecourseofthirtyyears,why,then,shouldtheyallatoncetrytobreakfromtheirlongserviletradition?ConstitutionallawmightbeonthesideofLordGrey,butprescriptionwasundoubtedlyonthesideofLordPalmerston.WhycallthenobleViscounttoaccountatthistimeoftheday,sinceneverbeforehadhebeenpunishedforsimilar\"wholesome\"
innovations?Infact,theDukeofNewcastleseemedratherindulgentinnotaccusingLordGreyofrebellionforhisattemptatbreakingthroughLordPalmerston\'sprescriptiveprivilegeofdoingwithhisown——theforcesandthemoneyofEngland——asheliked.
EquallyoriginalwasthemannerinwhichtheDukeofNewcastleendeavouredtoprovethelegalityofthePeihoexpedition.ThereexistsanAnglo-Chinesetreatyof1843bydintofwhichEnglandenjoysalltherightsconcededbytheCelestialstothemostfavourednations.
NowRussia,inherrecenttreatywithChina,hasstipulatedfortherightofsailingupthePeiho.Consequently,underthetreatyof1843,theEnglishhadarighttosuchpassage.This,theDukeofNewcastlesaid,hemightinsistupon\"withoutanygreatspecialpleading.\"Mighthe,indeed!OntheonesidethereistheuglycircumstancethattheRussiantreatywasonlyratified,and,consequentlydatesitsactualexistenceonlyfromanepochposteriortothePeihocatastrophe.This,ofcourse,isbutaslighthusteronproteron.Ontheotherhand,itisgenerallyknownthatastateofwarsuspendsallexistingtreaties.IftheEnglishwereatwarwiththeChineseatthetimeofthePeihoexpedition,they,ofcourse,couldappealneithertothetreatyOf1843,nortoanyothertreatywhatever.Iftheywerenotatwar,Palmerston\'sCabinethastakenuponitselftocommenceanewwarwithoutthesarictionofParliament.
Toescapethelatterpowerofthedilemma,poorNewcastleassertsthatsincetheCantonbombardment,forthelasttwoyears,\"EnglandhadneverbeenatpeacewithChina.\"ConsequentlytheMinistryhadpushedonhostilities,notrecommencedthem,andconsequentlyhemight,withoutspecialpleading,appealtothetreatieseffectiveonlyduringatimeofpeace.Andtoheightenthebeautyofthisqueersortofdialectics,LordPalmerston,thechiefoftheCabinet,assertsatthesametime,intheHouseofCommons,thatEnglandallthistimeover\"hadneverbeenatwarwithChina.\"Theywerenotsonow.Therewere,ofcourse,Cantonbombardments,Peihocatastrophes,andAnglo-Frenchexpeditions,buttherewasnowar,sincewarhadneverbeendeclared,andsince,tothismoment,theEmperorofChinahadallowedtransactionsatShanghaitoproceedintheirusualcourse.Theveryfactofhishavingbroken,inregardtotheChinese,throughallthelegitimateinternationalformsofwar,PalmerstonpleadsasareasonfordispensingalsowiththeconstitutionalformsinregardtotheBritishParliament,whilehisspokesmanintheHouseofLords,EarlGranville,\"withregardtoChina,\"disdainfullydeclares\"theconsultationofParliamentbyGovernment\"tobe\"apurelytechnicalpoint.\"TheconsultationofParliamentbyGovernmentapurelytechnicalpoint!
Whatdifference,then,doesstillremainbetweenaBritishParliamentandaFrenchCorpsLigislatif?InFrance,itis,atleast,thepresumedheirofanationalherowhodarestoplacehimselfintheplaceofthenation,andwhoatthesametimeopenlyconfrontsallthedangersofsuchusurpation.But,inEngland,itissomesubalternspokesman,someworn-outplace-hunter,someanonymousnonentityofaso-calledCabinet,that,relyingonthedonkeypoweroftheParliamentarymindandthebewilderingevaporationsofananonymouspress,withoutmakinganynoise,withoutincurringanydanger,quietlycreeptheirwaytoirresponsiblepower.TakeontheonehandthecommotionsraisedbyaSulla;takeontheotherthefraudulentbusiness-likemanceuvresofthemanagerofajointstockbank,thesecretaryofabenevolentsociety,ortheclerkofavestry,andyouwillunderstandthedifferencebetweenimperialistusurpationinFranceandministerialusurpationinEngland!
LordDerby,fullyawareoftheequalinterestbothfactionshaveinsecuringministerialimpotenceandirresponsibility.could,ofcourse,\"notconcurwiththenobleEarl(Grey)inthestrongviewswhichhetakesofthelachesofGovernment.\"HecouldnotquiteconcurinLordGrey\'scomplaintthattheGovernmentoughttohavecalledParliamenttogether,tohaveconsultedthemontheChinesequestion,\"buthe\"certainlywouldnotsupporthimbyhisvoteshouldhepresstheamendmenttoadivision.\"
Consequently,theamendmentwasnotpressedtoadivision,andthewholedebate,inbothHouses,ontheChinesewarevaporatedingrotesquecomplimentsshoweredbybothfactionsontheheadofAdmiralHopeforhavingsogloriouslyburiedtheEnglishforcesinthemud.
