Affairs of the East India Company: Minutes of evidence, 24 June 1830

Die Jovis, 24 Junii 1830.

[651]

The Lord President in the Chair.

Sir James Brabazon Urmston is called in, and examined as follows:

You were in the Company's Service in China?

I was.

What was your Situation?

I was there altogether above Twenty Years; I filled the several Stations in the Company's Factory, and was President of the Factory about Five Years in the latter Part of my Residence there.

Do you think the Company, purchasing their Teas generally by Contract, purchase them as advantageously as Individuals who purchase them in the open Market?

I think so, most certainly; they have the Chance of procuring better Teas.

Do you conceive that all the best Teas are furnished to those Merchants who contract with the Company?

Not all of them; a Portion of the Company's Teas are purchased in the Market.

What Proportion of the Teas is purchased in the Market?

It depends a good deal on the Circumstances of the Season; sometimes a Third, sometimes a Fourth, sometimes a Fifth, if the Contracts fall short, which has been the Case frequently. When they have not been able to obtain a sufficient Quantity of the Contract Teas, the Investment is made up by Purchases in the Market.

Have the Contractors usually failed in delivering the higher or the lower Qualities of Teas in the Quantity demanded by the Company?

During my Residence in China, particularly during my Chiefship, there was a great Defalcation in the Quantity of the Green Teas: that happened in Two or Three Seasons; we had also some Difficulty in obtaining the Quantity of Green Teas which the Contract required.

Have you gone into the open Market for the Purpose of purchasing those Green Teas when an insufficient Quantity was furnished to the Company by Contract?

When the Quantity of Green Tea was not to be had under the Contract, there was scarcely any of that Tea to be had in the Market. I alluded, in my former Reply, chiefly to the Purchases of Black Teas: it seldom occurred that when there was a Deficiency of Green Teas there were any of those Qualities to be had in the Market.

How do the Americans purchase their Teas?

There have been Instances where they have individually and privately contracted for the Teas, but I believe generally they purchase in the Market.

Do they not usually purchase a very large Quantity of Green Tea?

[652]

The Americans have generally run upon Green Teas; almost invariably. The Proportion of Black Teas imported into the United States of America has been, I understand, comparatively very small.

In those Years in which an insufficient Quantity of Green Teas has been furnished on Contract to the Company, and they have not gone into the Market to purchase any Quantity in consequence of the deficient Supply in the Market of that Quality of Tea, how have the Americans supplied themselves?

It has frequently happened, that in the Season when the Company could not obtain their Quantity of Teas, the Americans have also been deficient in their Quantity of Teas to a certain Extent; besides which the Americans have frequently taken that Description of Green Tea which The East India Company would not, as being unsuited for their Investment.

Buying Green Teas of an inferior Quality?

Yes.

Should you say that in general the Quality of the American Teas has been inferior to that of the Company?

I should say so most distinctly; there must of course be some Exceptions to this in a Trade carried on for a long Period of Years.

Have the Teas the Company have purchased in the Market been inferior to those they purchased on Contract?

Not always; sometimes they have been equally good, at other Times they have been rather inferior; they have sometimes been compelled to take rather an inferior Quality of Tea to make up their Investment; not from Choice, but from Necessity.

Who are the Persons who supply the Market at Canton with Tea?

Different Teamen (as they are denominated;) Teamen who come down the Country. They bring the Contract Teas for the Company, through the Hong Merchants, and also their private Consignments or Investments of Tea, to be disposed of to the Company and private Individuals. Some of the Hong Merchants supply the Americans frequently with such Teas.

Do those Teamen bring down Tea in small Quantities?

They sometimes do, but generally in what may be considered large Quantities, seldom less than Two or Three hundred Chests, which however is comparatively small, certainly.

Are they Proprietors of the Tea, or Agents for the Sale of it?

Sometimes they are Proprietors, and sometimes Brokers; but I think, generally speaking, the Men who bring the Teas down are Brokers or Agents who bring them from the Proprietors in the Tea Country.

Are they Persons of similar Character to those with whom the Hong Merchants contract for the Supply of The East India Company?

I believe they are of the same Character of Chinese, as far as my Information goes.

Are they not sometimes the same Individuals?

Sometimes it happened so in the course of a Period of Years.

If a Teaman had made a Contract he thought not advantageous with any one of the Hong Merchants, he would bring his Tea into the Market, would he not?

If the Contract is once entered into between the Hong Merchant and the Teaman, he is bound to produce it.

If he thought it was not advantageous to enter into the Contract proposed to him by the Hong Merchant, he would then bring his Tea into the open Market?

Most assuredly.

[653]

So that the only Circumstance which would determine him in contracting with the Hong Merchant, or bringing his Tea into the open Market, would be the Terms, whatever they might be, which might be offered to him by the Hong Merchant?

I should apprehend that they have the Chance of a better Sale to, and Payment from, the Hong Merchant than in the Market, and certainly so if the Teas were intended for the Company's Investment.

The Teaman, when he brings down his Tea, sells through the Agency of the Hong Merchant, does he not?

Very frequently he may sell to the Outside-man, because the Teamen do not come within the Monopoly of the Hong Merchant at Canton; they are, I believe, free Agents as far as the Disposal of their Tea is concerned.

Do the Company usually conduct their Business through the Agency of the richest and most solvent of the Hong Merchants, or through that of insolvent Merchants?

The Business of The East India Company at Canton has generally been divided among all the Hong Merchants. When the poorer or junior Merchants have not been able to procure their Teas, it has generally been done through the Agency of the senior Merchants.

Have they ever, by Preference, dealt through the Agency of the inferior and less solvent Merchants of the Hong?

That has rarely been the Case; it has I believe occasionally; I do not immediately, however, recollect: when they have had proper Security for the obtaining of the Teas from that Merchant; they have seldom done it unless that Person was secured by some of the more opulent Merchants.

Have they done it extensively?

No; the reverse.

They would rather avoid doing it?

Yes, assuredly, if there was any Risk, especially.

Do you apprehend that open Traders at Canton derive any Advantage from the Circumstance of the Company trading through the Agency of the insolvent Hong Merchants?

I should think it made very little Difference to them.

In what Way would it benefit them at all?

I do not think it would at all interfere with them.

Are Teas obtained more readily through the insolvent than through the richer Merchants?

I should say not; for the Teas would be required to be of the same Quality as if they were purchased through the richer Merchants.

Where the Name of an insolvent Merchant is used for a Transaction in Tea, what Commission does he receive; does he receive the same as if he were a solvent Merchant?

It is done with that View; some Remuneration has generally been made to the Hong Merchant who thus assisted the insolvent one; whenever The East India Company deal in that Way with the insolvent Merchant, it is to give him some Assistance to endeavour to relieve him from his Difficulties.

So that it is exactly the same thing to them whether they purchase through him or through another; they pay exactly the same Commission?

Whenever that has been the Case it is so; but it is not a very usual Occurrence, as I remarked before.

They would not go out of their Way to give the Advantage of that Remuneration to an Insolvent in order to place him in a Situation of great Wealth and more Respectability?

[654]

I conceive, that if a Merchant had failed probably more from unfortunate Circumstances than Misconduct, the Company would endeavour by every Means in their Power, consistently with their own Interest, to assist that Hong Merchant, in order to restore him to his former Situation.

Do you apprehend that it is necessary that the Company's Trade at Canton should be conducted by an Establishment so numerous as that which is now there?

I conceive it would be quite impossible to conduct the Company's Trade with a less Establishment than now exists.

Are all the Persons on that Establishment constantly employed?

Entirely so, during the Season of Business, which is about Six or Eight Months; and a good deal at other Times.

What length of Time should you think required, in order to obtain such a Knowledge of China and the Trade as to be enabled to conduct the Business profitably and well?

I think that it would take some Years; the mere buying and selling of Teas might be acquired in Two or Three Years; but there are other equally important Occupations which require several Years Attention and Study to make them perfect.

Do you allude to the learning the Language?

I allude to the Knowledge of the Chinese Character, System and Habits, to enable us to negociate with them in the anxious Discussions in which the Company's Servants have been involved. I do not think any Person could do it successfully, unless after some Years of Experience and Study of the general System of the Chinese at Canton.

Do you apprehend that in that respect the Factory has Advantages over any private Agent residing at Canton?

Most decidedly, the greatest.

What particular Advantages, in your Opinion, are derived to the general Trade of other Merchants, from the Circumstance of The East India Company trading at Canton with their Monopoly?

I consider that The East India Company, by their Power and their Influence generally, have been able to gain Points with the Chinese which have proved frequently beneficial to the other Nations trading to China.

Had The East India Company conducted a Trade of the same Extent under the same Management at Canton, but without a Monopoly, do you think they would have been enabled to effect the same Objects?

Certainly not, in my Opinion.

In what Way do you apprehend that the Possession of that Monopoly has given them greater Influence than they would have otherwise possessed?

It is the great Combination of the Company's Influence, if I may use that Expression, which gives them a Controul over the Markets generally at Canton.

Does not that Influence depend upon the Extent of their Dealings conducted by the Select Committee, and not upon the Circumstance of their being assisted in their Profits by a Monopoly?

I should say that, strictly and fairly speaking, The East India Company's Trade is not that close Monopoly which has generally been represented. I allude to the very large Quantity of British Shipping, belonging to Individuals or private Houses of Agency, which annually proceeds from our Indian Dominions to China, generally called Country Ships, quite distinct from the Company's Ships from this Country. The Company's Trade in Teas to this Country is certainly a Monopoly.

Do you apprehend that, in their Dealings with the Hong Merchants, the Company derive a very great Advantage from their Power over the Country Ships; their Power of stopping the Trade?

I certainly conceive that they possess this Advantage, that having the Authority vested in them over the Country Ships which trade between India and China, they are enabled to take those Measures which would prevent any improper Conduct on the Part of the Country Ships, if they were so disposed.

[655]

If their Power over the Country Ships extended no further than to the Prevention of improper Conduct on the Part of the Crews of those Country Ships, do you apprehend that that Power would give them any particular Advantage, in dealing with the Hong Merchants, of preventing Exactions and Impositions?

Certainly; it gives them a great Advantage, I conceive.

What other Power have they over the Country Ships?

They have the Power, in fact, of general Official Controul over them, as having the British Flag flying; they are always placed by the Regulations of The East India Company, as soon as they arrive in the Port of Canton, distinctly under the Authority of The East India Company's Representatives in China.

Have they not the Power of stopping the Trade, and preventing their carrying on the Trade with the Hong Merchants?

Most unquestionably; it has been done occasionally, but only on important and imperative Occasions.

Is not that a most powerful Means in their Hands of preventing the Exactions of the Hong Merchants?

Most certainly it is.

Suppose the Company to lose their Monopoly, could that Power still be exercised by the Persons to whom the Management of their Trade might still be confided?

Yes, I think as regarded the Chinese it might be; because I think their Influence, from the Magnitude of their Trade, would continue, supposing their Trade existed to the same Extent, with the Exception of its not being a Monopoly.

This Power of stopping the Trade of the Country Ships does not arise out of the great Trade of The East India Company, but out of the Law and the Act of the Indian Government.?

Yes; it is an Agreement between the Government in India and the Owners or Agents of the Country Ships, that they shall be subservient to the Company's Orders and Regulations as soon as they arrive in China.

Supposing there were no East India Company trading to Canton, would it be possible for the Government in India to require to have this Bond executed in respect of the Country Ships, and to give some Person at Canton the Power of stopping the Trade?

I consider that State of Things would so completely alter the British Trade between India and China, that it is impossible for me to form an Opinion upon the Subject.

Will you explain more particularly the Points which you conceive The East India Company, by the peculiar Advantages of its Constitution, has been enabled to carry with the Chinese Government?

I think the Probity of their Dealings, the Magnitude of their Trade, the Confidence which the Chinese have for such a long Period of Years reposed in every Act of The East India Company there, have given them a very powerful Influence with the Chinese over the Trade; they have frequently, when Exactions have been attempted to be imposed on the Trade, averted them by the Firmness of their Servants in China and general Influence with the Chinese; and also in Cases of Homicide they have induced the Chinese to give up Points which would otherwise have been attended with the most vital Consequences.

Have the Ships of the United States, or the other Countries trading to Canton, been subject to Exactions of that Description which have remained unredressed?

[656]

All Foreign Ships have from Time to Time been subject to some Vexations; and whenever The East India Company have got theirs removed, the other Nations have frequently benefited by the same, when the Question bore on the Foreign Trade generally at the Port of Canton.

You conceive no Exaction upon the Ships of the United States or the other Countries has been redressed, except through the Intervention of The East India Company first securing and obtaining a similar Redress?

Not at all Times; some minor Points have, I believe, been occasionally obtained by the Americans and others by their own Representations; but the very important ones, which The East India Company have certainly been the Means of obtaining by the firm Representations of their Servants, could not, I am persuaded, have been gained by the Americans or others at Canton. The East India Company have generally taken the lead if it was a Case in which their Trade as well as others has been concerned.

Do you mean that The East India Company has interfered professedly on the Behalf of other Countries, or merely that from having obtained Redress for themselves Redress has of course followed in the Case of others?

They have never applied for Redress for other Nations alone, but it has sometimes been considered a Measure of Equity and Justice on the Part of the Chinese, that what they gave to the Company they would equally give to the other Nations. The Company have never interfered for other Nations alone by any Chance that I am aware of.

Are you aware of any Instance in which a Grievance, not common to The East India Company and to the Traders of other Nations, has, in consequence of being deprived of the Advantage of The East India Company's Representations, remained unredressed?

I do not immediately recollect any Case in point, but I believe it has sometimes occurred; I cannot say that I remember any particular Case in the course of my long Residence there; I might perhaps quote one Instance where the friendly Feeling of the English was useful to other Foreigners. I allude to Two Russian Ships that visited Canton some Years since.

State the Circumstances of that Case.

Those Two Russian Vessels went to the Port of Canton after a Voyage of Discovery, for the Purpose of taking on board a Cargo of China Produce for Russia; but as the Russians had never been accustomed to trade in the Port of Canton, but to carry on their Trade between China and Russia over Land from the Frontier of China, the Canton Government in the first instance refused them Cargoes, but soon afterwards allowed the Ships to load, and made their Reference on the Subject to the Court of Pekin; before that Reply returned the Russian Ships had sailed by Permission of the Canton Government. Soon after their Departure an Edict arrived at Canton from the Court of Pekin, addressed to the Russian Ships, and that Edict was presented to the President of the Company's Factory, with a Request that he would forward the same to Russia, the Purport of which Edict was forbidding the Russians to trade to Canton. During the Stay of the Russian Ships at Canton, they received every Assistance and Attention they required from the British Authorities, without however the British Authorities in any way whatever interfering in the public Question between the Chinese Government and the Russians. I have little Doubt but this Attention and Assistance on the Part of the English towards the Russians had a good Effect in inducing the Canton Government to allow them to load Teas. I should observe that the Russians were The Emperor's Vessels, and not Private Ships.

This was, as far as you know, the only Instance in which Russian Ships came for the Purpose of trading to Canton?

The only Instance of the kind within my Knowledge.

Were the Factory at all surprised that the Canton Authorities gave them Permission, without waiting for the Opinion of Government?

The Canton Government was not, strictly speaking, justified in doing it, but they did it upon their own Responsibility, and as we heard nothing about it afterwards we supposed it was approved by the Court of Pekin.

[657]

Were the British Factory at all surprised at the Canton Authorities taking upon themselves to decide this Question?

We were somewhat surprised; but the Provincial Government at the same Time took upon themselves considerable Responsibility; the Canton Government, however, are possessed of extensive Powers whenever they think proper to exercise them.

Do they invariably attend to any Instructions they receive from the Pekin Government?

There are, no doubt, general Directions for their Guidance, but the Officers of the Canton Government frequently take upon themselves to act as they see proper; it is in consequence of this that we are so frequently subjected to those Exactions and Annoyances from the Provincial Government.

In what Way does the Influence of the British Factory at Canton operate on the Chinese Authorities in case of any Attempt to establish undue Exactions; does it go beyond the Power of stopping the Trade?

It is, as I have before observed, the general Influence of The East India Company, arising from the Importance and Magnitude of their Trade, which gives the Company that Weight.

Is not that to which the Company would be obliged to resort, if the Chinese Authorities did not yield to their Representation, the Stoppage of the Trade?

We have frequently ourselves stopped the Trade, as well as the Chinese: it was a Measure they only formerly resorted to, but of late Years we have frequently turned the Tables upon them, and stopped the Trade ourselves, by which Means we obtained the Point we required.

Supposing there was no such Body as the Company, and that the Exactions of the Chinese made it unprofitable to trade with them, would not that stop the Trade itself?

This would so completely alter the whole Face of the Intercourse between the English and the Chinese, it is impossible to give an Opinion upon it; the Removal of the Company's Influence would be so new a Feature, that I cannot judge of what might be the Consequences.

Do you think that it is any Advantage to the Trade of the Country Ships that their Trade should be liable to be stopped at the Discretion of the Supercargoes?

I think it is desirable; Individuals must frequently suffer for the Public Good in China as in other Places; Ships belonging to private Individuals, when their Trade is suspended, no doubt frequently suffer Loss, unfortunately for the Individuals, but it is for the general Good eventually.

Is not the Existence of such a Power a great Obstacle to Commerce?

No, I think not; it has never been exercised but in Cases of absolute Necessity, and where the Necessity has been most unequivocally and satisfactorily shewn.

If the Owners of Country Ships did not think there existed this Necessity, they would then have to suffer without a Cause?

I think, where an Authority like that of The East India Company exists in China, their Opinions should unquestionably prevail over those of the private Persons connected with the Country Ships; they are the Persons in Authority, and are so much the more responsible to the Chinese, consequently their Authority should be indisputable over Ships carrying the British Flag.

Do the Company abstain from purchasing that inferior Description of Tea which the Americans purchase, either for their own Consumption or for other Countries?

Yes, they do.

Is not such Tea cheaper than the lowest Description of Teas the Company sell here?

I believe it is; but every thing depends on the real Quality.

[658]

Do you suppose that which is used in England by the poorer Classes as Tea, and for which they pay the Company's Prices, is really that Plant?

Yes, certainly; that imported by The East India Company.

If, however, in point of fact, a great Adulteration of Tea takes place in this Country by a Mixture of other Leaves, would not such inferior Description of real Tea which the Americans purchase be superior in Quality to such adulterated Mixture?

That I am not prepared to answer; the Teas referred to in my former Answer I considered as those sold at the Company's Sales, and not Teas which might be adulterated in this Country afterwards.

Supposing the Adulteration to take place; if the poorer Classes are now ready to buy adulterated Tea at the Company's Prices of real Tea, would they not be equally ready to buy real Tea, though of a low Quality, if they could get it at a lower Price?

It is impossible for me to judge of the Tastes of the inferior Orders of People in this Country as regards Tea.

Are there not Instructions from the Company never to purchase that inferior sort of Tea?

Distinctly; we never purchase that sort of Tea which is alluded to in the Question; I mean Tea of bad Quality.

Do the Chinese make any Distinction between Foreign Nations trading to Canton in point of Duty?

None whatever; the nominal Imperial Duties are the same; the Duties levied on the Articles of Import and Export are the same in respect of all Nations.

In case of any Difficulty arising in the American Trade, how is the Representation of the Americans conveyed to the Authorities in Canton?

The Americans have a Consul there; he is, generally speaking, a complete Cypher; I mean in his public and official Capacity; the Representations have generally been from the Individuals, and they have been managed by the Hong Merchants.

You stated that the Influence of The East India Company arose entirely from the Extent of their Dealings?

In a great measure, and the strict Confidence the Chinese place in the Company upon all Occasions?

What Reason have you to suppose that Influence would not be equally powerful, whether that Influence was managed by a Consul appointed by The King's Government, or by the Factory appointed by The East India Company?

I think that the Case would so completely change the whole System of British Commerce in China, that I feel a Difficulty in answering the Question; I do not think it possible that an Individual in the Capacity of a Consul could do this.

Why could not the Interests of the British be managed by a Consul, or some Person under the Authority of The King's Government?

He might manage the mere Interests by Representations to Government, but he could not manage the Commercial Transactions.

Would not those Representations be of equal Weight with the Representations made by the Servants of the Company?

I should say not, most decidedly.

Will you state your Reasons, supposing that that Person, whoever he was, was invested with equal Authority with that possessed now by the Company's Factory, with respect to the British Factory in the Port of Canton, The East India Company's Trade existing, but without a Monopoly?

[659]

I should consider upon that Occasion that in all Embarrassments and all Discussions with the Chinese Government they would still look to the Trade and not to the Consul; the Chinese cannot enter into the particular Question of the exclusive Political Charter granted to the Company; they look to the Company's Servants and the Trade generally; and I feel perfectly satisfied they would treat the Consul almost as a Cypher, and always refer to the Company's Servants and Trade, and not to the Consul.

As they do with respect to the Consul of the American Government?

Precisely in the same way; I do not think a Consul would have the slightest Weight or Influence with the Chinese.

Supposing the Trade carried on by the Company at Canton were diminished by the Removal of the present Monopoly, do you apprehend that the Influence of their Servants would remain as powerful as it is now?

I think to a very great Extent it would; as long as they were known to have a Trade there, though not a chartered Trade, their Influence would prevail to a very considerable Extent; nor could the Chinese easily be brought to forget the Importance of the Company and their Influence, though their Trade might be somewhat diminished.

Though they saw that in point of fact the Company no longer exercised any Authority over the British Ships trading there?

Yes; I think they would appeal to The East India Company there, because of the Trade being a tangible Object; they would stop the Company's Trade, as they do now; they would not discuss the Matter with the Consul; they would stop the Trade, beginning with The East India Company's, no doubt.

Do you not think they would have the same Disposition to act with The King's Representative as they have with the Representative of the Company?

I do not think a Consul would have the slightest Weight or Influence with them.

That they would not pay the same Respect to The King's Officer as they do to the Company's Servants?

They might pay him mere personal Respect, as being appointed from the Crown of this Country.

Did they not, in the Case of Admiral Drury, object to treating with him, because he was not The King's Representative?

I was not in China during the Time of Admiral Drury being there; I was in England.

Do you conceive that the Americans suffer any Inconvenience or Injury in their Commercial Concerns from not having an Establishment similar to that of The East India Company?

I do; I think they are liable to a great many Commercial Inconveniences at Canton from their Want of Unanimity amongst themselves, and Want of Unity like a public Body.

What Proportion of the American Trade is managed at Canton by Agents?

I am not able to answer that; the American Trade has been conducted by private Individuals there, and I am totally ignorant of their Arrangements in this respect.

How many Commercial Agents are there at Canton?

I do not know; I do not exactly recollect. When I left China, Three Years ago, there must have been resident there Ten or a Dozen American private Agents, and Eight or Ten British private Agents. Very many other British Agents however are passing the whole Year in Ships to and from India; or they may stop the whole Year round; the Company have never in the slightest degree impeded them. I refer to Agents who came round to manage their Concerns from our various Ports in India, &c.

Can you state what Proportion of the Country Trade, and the Trade of Americans and other Merchants, is conducted by Supercargoes, and what Proportion by Agents?

[660]

I cannot answer that, not being aware of private Arrangements connected with the Country Ships. Sometimes the private Ships are consigned to resident Agents in Canton; at other Times an Agent comes with them, transacts the Business, and returns in the Ship. But there is no Rule at all; it is according to the private Arrangements of the Parties concerned.

Do you think that the Power of stopping the Commercial Intercourse with the Chinese would be as safely entrusted to the Consul, who would himself have an Interest in the Trade, as it is with the Factors of The East India Company, who, if they stop for others, must likewise stop their own, and so impose upon themselves a material Inconvenience?

I do not think the Consul would be of the slightest Use to the Trade as long (as I have observed before) as there is a great combined Commercial Body trading there.

Must he have Influence if he had the Power of stopping the Trade?

I should imagine his Influence would be but trifling.

Do you apprehend that the Influence possessed by The East India Company, and the Extent of their dealing, with the Confidence their Probity has inspired in the Chinese, enable them to obtain their Teas at a lower Cost than the Americans?

With regard to the Price I cannot say; but they are unquestionably enabled to obtain better Teas; they have the Command of the Tea Market, and the Choice of the Market over that of other Nations at Canton.

Therefore, in trading at Canton, they have a decided Advantage over other Nations?

I think they have decidedly so.

Are you of Opinion that The East India Company, without the Monopoly, would still, as a chartered Company, conduct their Trade at Canton to Advantage?

Most assuredly they would, as a combined Commercial Body, provided the Trade was conducted on the same Principles and in the same Manner as it is at the present Moment. I am viewing this Question as one between the Chinese and The East India Company, not as between The East India Company and the private Individuals in this Country.

Has the Export of British Manufactures to Canton been upon the whole profitable?

For some Years past, I believe, quite the reverse. I refer to the Company's principally.

Is it less profitable now than it used to be?

Less than some few Years back, certainly.

Are you aware that the Price of British Manufactures, especially Cottons and Woollens, has considerably diminished in the last few Years?

Yes, it has; but the Price has been diminished also in China.

Are you aware that the Reduction of Price in China has not been in proportion to the Reduction of Price here?

No, it has not.

Notwithstanding that, has the Export of Woollens become more unprofitable than it used to be?

It has.

To what do you attribute that?

I attribute it to that which perhaps is not generally very well understood in this Country; the Resources the Chinese possess in their own Manufactures of Silks and Cottons, which answer their Purposes at all Seasons of the Year and for every Class of Life. And I should add also, that I think, as far as my Information enables me to judge, that China, generally speaking, is in a much more impoverished State as a Nation than it was even Twenty Years ago. I go on such general Information only as I collected in China. I think these are some Causes, added to the Markets being overstocked with British Manufactures, why such Commodities have not gone off so well in China of late Years.

[661]

If British Manufactures are Forty-five or Fifty per Cent. cheaper than they were Twenty Years ago in England, and there has been a great Reduction in Freight and Charges, how do you account for the Export of British Manufactures being less profitable than it used to be?

I can only account for it from this, that the Chinese do not require our Manufactures as they did formerly.

The Measure of their Demand is the Price they are willing to give, and we know that they now give a Price smaller than that they gave before, but not diminished in proportion to the Diminution of the Price of the British Manufactures in England?

I should say that arose from the Chinese not requiring our Manufactures so much as they formerly did; I do not think that the Price has any thing to do with it as the Want of Demand.

Have the Prices of their own home-made Commodities diminished?

No, I fancy not; I believe they are about the same Prices, so far as my Information enables me to judge, as they formerly were.

Does it come within your Knowledge that the Chinese manufacture a larger Quantity of Goods than they used to do?

Of Cotton Goods of their own, I have understood they do.

Have there been any Duties taken off their own Manufactures, to your Knowledge?

I cannot speak to that Point.

Do you know of any Instance in which the American Consul has had recourse to the Influence of the Factory with the Chinese to remove Obstructions in the Way of Americans carrying on their Trade?

I am not aware of any.

Are you aware of any particular Instance in which the American Consul has himself made Representations to the Chinese Authorities?

There have been frequent Cases where, I understand, the American Consul has made Representations to the Chinese Government, and has sometimes obtained Redress, and sometimes he has not.

It appears by the Paper No. 11. Page 21. of the Papers before the Committee, that the Price of Superfine Spanish striped Cloth exported in the Season 1813-14 was £26 7s. 11d.; the Sale Price of that at Canton in 1814-15, £28 12s. It appears that the Price of the same Cloth in 1828-29 was £11 0s. 2d.; the expected Sale Price in Canton in 1829-30, £17. Can you explain why the Export of that Cloth should be less profitable now than it was in the Year 1813-14?

I rather suspect, as far as my Recollection leads me, that that was an experimental Consignment at the Time it was made, but which proved unacceptable to the Chinese, and consequently the Price became reduced. I think it was an experimental Consignment, but found not to answer.

It appears that the Price of Long Ells in the Season 1813-14 was £2 7s. 2d., and the Sale Price at Canton in 1814-15 £2 10s. The Price of Long Ells in 1828-29 was £1 13s. 11d., and the expected Sale Price at Canton £2 2s. 8d. Does it not appear from that Statement that the Export of Long Ells must be much more profitable now than it was in the Year 1813-14?

I can only answer that Question in the same Way I have done others on the same Subject, that I am persuaded there is much less Demand for our Woollens in the present Day at China than there was formerly.

Has any Quantity of Long Ells remained on the Hands of the Factory?

Formerly, some Years ago, when the Company exported a very large Quantity, there was frequently a great Quantity remaining in the Hands of the Company; but of late Years the Exportation of Long Ells has been so reduced they have generally been sold off on their Arrival in China.

To what do you attribute the Diminution of Demand for Woollens in China?

I really conceive that it is because the Chinese do not consume our Articles as they did in former Years, and that the Markets have been overstocked.

[662]

How do you account for that?

It is very difficult, except that they do not actually require them; they have found their own Manufactures answer their Purpose as well, with a less Cost to themselves.

Are Woollen Manufactories carried on in China?

No; but they have the Cotton and Silk, which answer their Purpose.

Do not the higher Ranks wear Woollens?

No; if they wear any of our Manufactures, it is Camlets.

It appears from the Statements read to you from these Returns, that in the Year 1813-14 the Long Ells exported from this Country produced a Rise in China beyond the Price paid for them in England of 2s. 10d., and that the Long Ells exported in 1828-29 were expected to produce a Price in China beyond that paid in this Country of 8s. 9d.; can you state how, under those Circumstances, the Export of Long Ells can be less profitable now than it was in 1813-14?

No; I am not aware of the Circumstances.

Has there been any Import of Goods in competition with ours into the Port of Canton of late?

The Americans have imported them.

In what respect are their Articles preferred to ours?

I do not think their Articles have been preferred to ours by the Chinese, but from such an additional Quantity being thrown into the Market, the Market has become overstocked.

In the same Articles do the Americans undersell us?

Yes; but there is one thing I might probably be allowed to state: the Americans were in the habit at one Period, in China, of introducing a Quantity of Camlets, for which they did not pay the regular Duties, but either smuggled them or passed them off as another Article, whilst The East India Company were paying Seventeen and Eighteen Dollars apiece for Articles of the same Description, paying their regular Duties publicly; this Transaction of course gave the Americans every Advantage in the Disposal of this Article.

That would be only a temporary Case; where the Duties are equally and fairly paid by the Americans and The East India Company, is the Price of the American Camlets or the Company's Camlets lowest?

They are the same Price; I believe they are the same Article; they were sent from Liverpool, as I have understood, and had very much the Appearance of the Company's Bales, they were so ingeniously packed up and marked.

When the Americans state that they have realized a Profit on the Export of British Manufactures to China, do you apprehend that may be attributed to their having smuggled in those Articles, and avoided the Payment of Duties?

I think it is to a considerable Extent; I doubt very much the Americans having obtained the Advantages which have been stated in the Public Papers; an American of some Respectability assured me, before I left China, that so far from the Woollen and Camlet Trade being a profitable one, they were in fact a losing Concern.

In what Year was that?

In the Year 1825 or 1826.

Do the Americans generally do their Business at Canton through the Hong Merchants, or in what Form?

A great deal through the Outside Merchants.

When a Ship drops her Anchor, is not Security entered into by some one for the good Conduct of her Crew during her Stay on the Coast?

Immediately; and she cannot commence her Commercial Operations 'till some Hong Merchant secures her.

[663]

Is there any greater Difficulty experienced by the Americans, whose Trade is free, in finding such Security, than is experienced by The East India Company's Ships?

Most certainly; the Americans have frequently had Difficulty in obtaining a Security Merchant for their Ships.

To what do you attribute that Difficulty?

The natural Aversion which every Chinese has to become responsible for the Act of any Ship, but above all a private one.

Why should that operate to a greater Extent with the Americans than with our Ships?

Because we have entered into an Agreement; there is an Understanding between the Company's Representatives and the Hong Merchants, that the Company's Ships shall be secured by the Hong Merchants in rotation as they stand upon the List.

How is that applied to the Country Ships?

The Country Ships are secured generally by an Arrangement between the Agents or the Parties belonging to the Country Ship and any particular Hong Merchant through whom they may sell their Investment; that is a private Arrangement entirely.

Do Country Ships find greater Difficulty in getting Security than the Company's Ships?

Sometimes they have a Difficulty, but not very frequently.

Is there any Difficulty at all when a Ship is consigned to a private Agent?

Not so much if he is an established Agent of Respectability in Canton, of which there are now several.

The Question refers to Country British Ships; is there a greater Difficulty experienced by a British Country Ship in gaining Security than by an American Free Trader?

I should say distinctly that the Difficulties are less with the Country Ships, from the Circumstance of their being British Country Ships; for they know that those Ships are under the Authority of the Company's Representatives.

Do the Dutch carry on any considerable Trade in Canton?

When I left China there were Four or Five Ships from Holland of about Four or Five hundred Tons each, I believe.

Do they trade under any chartered Company, or are they running Ships?

Originally they traded entirely under a chartered Company, (the Dutch East India Company;) during the War that Trade was annihilated, and the Americans became the Carriers of that Trade; at the Conclusion of the War the Dutch appeared again; there were some private Ships, others were sent out by an Establishment, a Body called in Holland, I believe, the Dutch East India Company, or the Dutch Company; but I have heard so little about it that I am not prepared to answer the Question distinctly, as regards this new Dutch Company; but formerly they traded as a public chartered Body for many Years.

Supposing the Trade of The East India Company with China became at liberty, do you conceive there would be greater Difficulties attending the Private Trade in finding Security for the good Behaviour of the Crews of the Shipping than is now experienced under the present Management of their Trade?

I should say so distinctly; private individual Ships, or private Traders, would have very considerable Difficulty in obtaining Security of Merchants for themselves in China.

What is the Export generally of the Dutch Ships to China?

Dutch Camlets has been their principal Article of Export.

Is their Trade an increasing Trade, or diminishing?

I have not heard for the last Three or Four Years much about the Dutch China Trade.

[664]

Are those Camlets of a Quality superior to those imported by The East India Company?

The Chinese at one Time preferred the Dutch Camlets; but latterly our Manufactures have been so much improved that I believe the Chinese give the Preference to our own; at all Events they hold them in equal Estimation with the Dutch Camlets.

What has been the Import Cargo into China by any other Ships?

The Spaniards have very rarely visited China of late. The Portuguese Trade is confined strictly to the little Colony of Macao, which they have in China. Their Trade almost entirely consists of Opium, between Bengal and Macao.

Have there been any French Ships?

Yes; they brought principally Wines, and Articles of that Description; and returned with an assorted Cargo of Teas, and Silks, and Chinaware; a general assorted Cargo, in fact.

Did you hear whether the Import of Wines was profitable?

The Wines were profitable to a small Extent; they were not bought by the Chinese, but by Europeans resident in China. They brought Money principally for the Purchase of their Homeward Cargo.

Has there been any Danish or Swedish Ship?

A Swedish Ship has not been there for many Years; a Danish Ship arrived, I think, the Year I quitted China.

Do you think Wine would be a profitable Article in the China Market?

No; quite the reverse. The Wine by the French. Ship was bought up by the Europeans, being a superior Article, for their own drinking; the Chinese do not drink it.

Do you apprehend, if there was a much greater Demand for Tea, that Tea could be furnished by the Merchants of equal Quality?

In the course of Years; but I think for the first few Years there would be a considerable Difficulty in their getting a sufficient Quantity. The Demand must become gradual, and regular, and established; then possibly they might increase the Growth of their Teas; but it is by no means certain.

During the last Fifteen or Twenty Years there has been, has there not, an increased Demand to the Extent of Five or Ten Millions of Pounds, on the Part of Foreign Merchants trading to China, altogether?

There has been an Increase, but that has chiefly arisen on the Part of Great Britain.

Has that great Increase produced a Deterioration of Quality, or an Increase of Price?

As far as the Company's Investment goes, I do not think that it has made any Difference in the Quality of their Teas.

Has it in the Price?

No, I think not.

Then in the course of Ten or Fifteen Years an additional Quantity of Five or Ten Millions of Pounds of Tea having been exported from China, has that been, so far as you know, without any Deterioration of Quality of that increased Quantity of Teas which has been furnished to The East India Company, or any Increase of Price?

Yes, without any Deterioration in Quality; but I consider that it has arisen solely from the extreme Care, Vigilance, Exertions, and Attention of The East India Company's Servants in China, that the additional Quantity of Teas, so stated to have been imported, was not of a deteriorated Quality.

Will you turn to the Account Number 11, in Page 21, to which you have been before referred; what Description of Cloth is that stated to be superfine Spanish striped Cloth?

It was, I believe, sent out to China the Year after I quitted Canton; I do not remember to have seen it, but I understood it was an experimental Concern; I know the Circumstance o. its having gone out.

Were not you in Canton in 1813-14?

[665]

I was, but it did not come under my Eye; I have no Recollection of having seen it.

It appears that the Quantity of that particular Article of Cloth has increased between 1813-14 and 1828-29 nearly double; is the Demand for that Description of Cloth increasing in China?

Certainly not; I should say decreasing.

Then how do you account for the Fact of a greater Quantity having been sent to China in 1828-29 than in 1813-14?

From the Anxiety of The East India Company to forward the Exportation of British Manufactures as much as in their Power was possible.

Do you attribute any Part of the Decrease of Price to the Market being overstocked in China?

Almost entirely to the Market being overstocked, as I before remarked.

Have you any Reason to think that the Supply of Tea of a superior Quality sent from the Tea Country to the Market of Canton, is below the Demand that there is for that Species of Tea?

Most distinctly. The East India Company have frequently had considerable Difficulty in getting the better kind of Teas.

You think that there is a Species of Tea, the Supply of which is so limited, that after The East India Company have been furnished with the Quantity they required, the Americans, if desirous of procuring it, would be unable?

They would be perfectly unable to obtain it.

Do you know, or have you heard, of any Instance in which the Americans, being able to procure a superior sort of Tea, have chosen an inferior Description, as finding it more profitable?

No, I am not; I am not aware of the Circumstance.

If however it should be the Fact that, having an Opportunity of making such a Choice, they have chosen the inferior Description, how would you account for that Fact?

It must be from their own Commercial Arrangements, which I cannot be aware of.

Is not the sort of Tea to which your late Answer had reference, principally Black Tea?

Souchong and Green Teas, and the better sort of Congo.

Has not the Demand for Green Tea in the English Market considerably diminished of late Years?

I am not aware of the State of the English Market.

You were in China in the Years 1818-19 and 1819-20?

I was.

It appears in the Account No. 32. that in the Year 1818-19 the Company exported from China 21,085,860 lbs. of Tea, and in the following Year 28,476,231 lbs.; are you aware whether any Difficulty was experienced in obtaining that increased Supply of more than Seven Millions of Pounds of Tea required in One Year, and whether the Price rose in proportion to that increased Demand?

The Company's Servants, if I recollect rightly, had considerable Difficulty in obtaining that additional Supply at that Period; with regard to the Prices, I have no immediate Recollection of them.

It appears that in the Year 1825-26 the Company exported 27,821,121 lbs., and in the Year 1826-27, 40,182,241 lbs. of Tea; are you aware whether any Difficulty was experienced in obtaining that increased Supply of more than Twelve Millions of Pounds of Tea in One Year?

They had, if I recollect, very great Difficulty in obtaining that additional Supply.

[666]

Are you aware whether the Price was increased in proportion to that increased Demand?

I am not.

Does considerable Adulteration of Tea take place between the Time of its leaving the Place of its Growth and Canton?

No, I believe not; and most certainly not in the Company's Teas.

Nor any Mixture?

No, I believe not; certainly not in the Company's.

Are you able, from your Acquaintance with China, to assign any Reason why the Supply of a superior Description of Teas is unequal to the Demand?

I can only account for it from the Deficit in the Growth; that there is not sufficient of it; the Chinese perhaps have not sufficiently attended to an extended Cultivation of it.

Has there been any additional Tax imposed by the Chinese Government affecting the Growth of Tea?

Not to my Knowledge.

How long does it take in the Culture of the Plant, to bring it to that State to produce the Teas?

I have understood from intelligent Chinese, that it takes about Three Years, generally speaking; but I believe it dpends a good deal on Soil and Locality, and other Circumstances.

When the Demand for Tea has been so greatly increased, has the Company been obliged to purchase Teas of a very inferior Quality?

They have sometimes been compelled, when they could not obtain Teas of a better Sort, to make up the additional Quantity with Teas of a lower Quality than that termed the Contract Quality of Teas; but they have always been exceedingly cautious and particular in the Quality of their Teas.

Can you state whether, in that Year in which the Demand of the Company increased to an Extent of more than Twelve Millions of Pounds, the whole of that additional Quantity consisted of inferior Tea?

I have no immediate Recollection of the Quality which comprised that additional Quantity. I should think Part of it must have been of superior Quality, but I have no distinct Recollection at this Moment.

Do you know whether any Part of that increased Supply was brought from the remoter Parts of the Country?

No, certainly not; it was all brought from the usual Tea Country.

Is the Tea which is furnished to the Russian Commerce, furnished from the same Parts of the Chinese Empire with the Tea that comes down to Canton?

That is a Point we have never been able distinctly to ascertain; but, from all my Information, I am led to believe that the Teas sent over Land to Russia are partly obtained from the Tea Countries from which we get our Supplies, and partly from another Province from which we do not get our Supplies.

Can you state whether, upon the whole, the Cultivation of Tea is on the Increase or stationary in the Provinces?

I cannot.

Have you been able to ascertain what Increase of Price is necessary to cover the Cost of the Conveyance of a Pound of Tea from the most distant Province to where it is conveyed to Canton?

No; I am not able to answer that Question.

Have you ever heard the original Price of Tea in any of the Provinces in which it is produced?

No, I have not; it passes through so many Hands, and there are so many Expences attending it, that it is difficult to arrive at that Fact, limited as we are in China in our Means and Channels of Information.

Do you know whether the Tea purchased for private Consumption in China is purchased at a cheaper Rate than that which you pay for it?

I am not exactly aware of that.

[667]

How many Years does the Tea Plant continue to thrive?

I have heard it variously stated; some say Ten or Fifteen Years; it is merely a Matter of Opinion with me, from my general Information on the Subject.

Can you at all account for that extraordinary Increase of Twelve Millions of Pounds, which appears to have taken place in the Export of Tea from 1825-26 to 1826-27?

I can only account for it from a greater Demand for it in this Country; I am not aware of the particular Circumstances attending it.

The Witness is directed to withdraw.

Walter Stevenson Davidson Esquire is called in, and examined as follows:

In what Situation were you in Canton?

I was in the Situation of a private Merchant and general Agent.

Were you in the Service of The East India Company?

No; quite unconnected with the Company.

How long were you there?

Eleven or Twelve Years.

When did you go there?

I visited China first in the Year 1807, and settled there in 1811.

How long did you remain there?

'Till 1822.

Whence did you go to China?

From England, by the Way of India.

Did you go with a Licence from The East India Company?

None whatever. I resided as a Portuguese Subject, having obtained from The King of Portugal Naturalization, and all the Privileges and Immunities of a Portuguese Subject, while residing at Macao.

Did you go out in a Portuguese Ship?

No; I went out in an English Ship.

Having first made yourself a Portuguese?

I could not make myself a Portuguese Subject in England, but merely possessed that Privilege in China. I indemnified the Captain of the English Ship on which I embarked against the Penalty to The East India Company, provided he should be obliged to pay it.

It was on your Arrival at Macao you obtained Naturalization?

No; I obtained the Credentials of Naturalization in London, before going out.

Is that a Thing to be purchased?

No; it did not cost me One Shilling; it was obtained for me by the English Ambassador then at the Court of Brazils.

Did you act as Merchant for yourself, or as Agent for others?

In both Capacities.

Did you act extensively as an Agent?

Very extensively.

In the Conduct of your Business, did you derive Advantages from the Existence of The East India Company, as a great Trading Company at Canton?

Certainly; I should have been exceedingly sorry to settle in Canton but for the Power of the Company, in some Measure at least, to protect British Commerce, and, consequently, that Commerce which I conducted.

[668]

State the particular Manner which you conceive you derived this Advantage from The East India Company's Influence in China?

I derived Advantages, in common with all other Foreigners, I may say, from the Circumstance of a powerful Body like The East India Company possessing important Influence, in consequence of their great Character and extensive Trade.

In what Manner was that Influence exerted so as to benefit you?

It was never actively exerted so as to benefit me, and it would have been quite in vain for me to have asked them to do so; but it was exerted, I conceive, in favour of all British Trade, and as almost all the Trade I managed was British, although I could only reside in the Capacity of a Foreigner, I derived Advantages in common with all others who managed Commerce of the same Description.

What was the particular Nature of the Advantages you derived, and in what Manner did you derive them?

I am at a Loss to detail in what Manner I derived them, although highly sensible of their Existence.

Do you consider that the Influence of the Company was in any way a Counterpoise to the Influence of the Hong?

Most decidedly so; a most invaluable one; indeed I consider that had it not been for the Existence of the Company in China, the British Trade could not have been carried on.

State your Reasons for entertaining that Opinion?

Because the Exactions, the Oppression and Injustice of the Chinese Government are so great, that I conceive no Individual would be fool-hardy enough to hazard sending his Property on Shore in that Country, but from the Knowledge that a Body like The East India Company is there to countenance it.

Will you state any specific Exaction which the Chinese Government attempted to carry into effect, and which the Company successfully resisted?

In the Year 1814 the Chinese Government attempted to make the Hong Monopoly more close than it had ever been before; and had not The East India Company's Authorities resisted upon that Occasion, it is impossible to say the Lengths to which the Chinese would have gone in taxing both the Imports and Exports at their own capricious Pleasure, and, consequently, in diminishing the Profits and increasing the Hazard of enterprising Individuals.

Do you consider that a Diminution of the Number of Hong Merchants acts as a Tax on Imports and Exports?

It enhances the Power of the remaining Merchants so much that it is most likely to produce that Effect; indeed, I might say, the certain Result.

Are not the Hong Merchants, in fact, Agents for the Sale of the Tea furnished by the Tea Merchants in the Interior?

Avowedly they are the Principals; but they may be, and no doubt are, on many Occasions, merely the Agents of a Tea Transaction.

Is it consistent with your own Knowledge, whether they are actually to any great Extent Dealers in Tea as their own Property, or Agents for the Sale of Teas belonging to others?

I should think in a great many Instances merely Agents, because in my Time the Hong was principally composed of Men in bankrupt Circumstances, who possessed in reality no Property whatever.

In as far as the Hong Merchants acted as Agents for the Sale of the Property of others, must it not have been their Interest to extend the Trade?

Certainly.

Would not any Exactions imposed by them have had the Effect of diminishing instead of extending the Trade?

Certainly; and that is One of the Absurdities which is practised every Day in China, as well as in this Country, and in all Countries, indeed.

[669]

Have any Exactions within your Knowledge been recently enforced by the Chinese Government?

It is now between Eight and Nine Years since I quitted the Spot, and of course, from that Period, I have only Information by the Report of others.

Have the goodness to speak to any Fact within your own immediate Knowledge during the Time you were in China?

If I am to speak to Grievances, there are many: They attempted to take away our Servants; at one Time they resisted the valuable Right of communicating in the Chinese Language, which The East India Company gained, after a great Battle; they attempted, I think, to prevent the Passage of Letters and Persons from Macao to Canton; they exacted Fees on trifling Articles of Baggage at Canton, and so forth.

What was the Amount of those Fees?

Trifling.

Did they, during all the Time you were in China, attempt to impose any new Duty on the Import or Export of any Article of Merchandize?

During my whole Experience in China, which was very extensive, I never had occasion to know any thing whatever respecting the Details of Duty, either on the Inward Cargo or the Outward.

Being an Agent at Canton, how did you manage to avoid the obtaining that Knowledge?

The Chinese Merchant manages all that, and the European need not necessarily know any thing of it. The Prices given for the Commodity are such as enable the Chinese Merchant to pay the Duties on the Inward Cargo; and the Prices demanded, or charged on the Outward Cargo, also embrace the Duty, for which the Chinese Lander and Shipper is alone responsible.

Were not you called upon to pay Duties on the Ship?

Always.

Were those increased?

No, I think not; at least I do not recollect any Increase of that Nature.

Were not those Alterations which the Chinese appear to have been desirous of introducing rather of a vexatious than of an onerous Character?

Decidedly; but the Knowledge which the Parties who reside in China acquire of the Chinese Government quickly teaches them, that if they do not resist Encroachments in the Commencement, Resistance soon proves to be too late, and they would become intolerable.

In what Manner did the Factory of the Company proceed to resist those Innovations?

In the Year 1814 the Chief of the Factory stopped all British Trade.

That was on the Attempt to diminish the Number of Servants, was it not?

Yes; that may have formed Part of our many Grievances.

In what Manner did they resist those Innovations you have referred to?

The only Stoppages of consequence that I witnessed were those of 1814, and One in 1821, which took place upon the Occasion of Loss of Lives, in the Affair of the Topaz Frigate.

Were those Innovations, as to the Conveyance of Letters, and with regard to Servants, and so on, resisted successfully, or submitted to?

They were resisted firmly, vigorously and successfully by Mr. Elphinstone, the then Chief, and the Committee, and as I conceive, most judiciously so.

In what Manner were they resisted?

By a Stoppage of the Trade 'till the Chinese gave way.

As regarded the Servants, or the Landing of Luggage, and the Letters and so on, was there a Stoppage of the Trade for those Innovations?

[670]

I understood the Question to allude to the principal Grievance, which was in regard to the Co-Hong; but when the Trade is stopped for a great Grievance, the Opportunity to tack on others that may exist is too good to let pass unprofited by.

Were all those Grievances before 1814?

They had existed before in some measure, perhaps, but it was then they became intolerable, and called forth firm Resistance.

Where no other Grievances existed than those little ones, is any Attempt made to resist them, or are they submitted to?

The East India Company's Servants in China are of course very sorry to stop the Trade, because the Experiment costs them dear, in the Demurrage of Vessels and other contingent Expences.

Can you state what Proportion of the Trade of the Americans or the Country Trade is conducted through Agency, and what Proportion is conducted through Supercargoes?

Indeed I cannot. I have but a vague Idea of the Matter, and it is of course a Proportion constantly fluctuating.

Do the Company usually deal through the Medium of bankrupt Merchants of the Hong, or the solvent?

All the Merchants comprising the Hong have a Share or Shares of the Business; the Company consequently deal with each of them according to the Extent of the Share or Shares they hold respectively.

In your Opinion, was any Advantage derived by you from the Circumstance of trading through Bankrupts?

Very great indeed in my Time; I often selected Bankrupts to deal with, because I very seldom could deal with the Merchants on fair Terms. Some of them were satisfied with the certain Profits on the Company's Business, and did not covet other Business very much.

State the Advantage, in your Opinion, from dealing with a Bankrupt?

They gave much better Prices; and too often, I suspect, they gave higher Prices than they could afford to do in the actual State of the Markets.

In what Manner did you conduct your Business when you conducted it through an Insolvent?

Precisely as I should have done had I dealt with a solvent Merchant; they held the same Rank, and conducted their Business in the same Manner.

Did you contract with them for what you wanted?

Frequently.

Did you trust the Money in their Hands, they being insolvent?

Constantly, and in very large Sums.

Were the other Hong Merchants answerable for them?

I do not call to mind an Instance in which I ever made a rich Hong Merchant responsible for a poor one; but I believe it has been done.

Then in fact no Person was responsible for those Bankrupts with whom you dealt?

No Person whatever; but I knew that they had Shares in the Company's Business, and I felt assured they would be able to pay me, which they were; I do not think my Constituents often lost in consequence of that System.

On what Circumstance was that Assurance of yours grounded, if those Bankrupts had no Money?

I think I stated, because I had Confidence in their Connection with The East India Company's Business, which was a very profitable one to those Merchants.

Did you trust to those Persons to make Contracts with the Teamen, or did you make your own Contracts with the Teamen, using the Names of the Bankrupts to cover the Transaction?

I do not think I ever made a Contract direct with a Teaman, or often with an Outside Merchant, though many of them were respectable; I almost systematically dealt with Hong Merchants.

[671]

Do you know to what Circumstance it was to be attributed that you obtained your Teas at a lower Price from the insolvent than the solvent Merchants?

The insolvent Merchants, having no Stake, and being exceedingly anxious to deal, were not of course so scrupulous about obtaining Profits on what they did as solvent Merchants would have been; I attribute it to that Cause; besides which, when an insolvent Man is in the habit of dealing largely, he wishes to continue to go on, or his Insolvency will become apparent; for instance, it was only by obtaining Possession of a Cargo To-day, he was enabled to pay for one he bought last Week or last Month; it is like Accommodation Bills in this Country; a Man depending upon a Number of such out, must put others forth when the current ones became due, if he has no real Resources to fall back upon.

Do the American Merchants conduct their Business usually with the Insolvents?

A great deal in my Time.

Did you understand that they considered it more profitable to do so?

I have no doubt they discovered it to be more profitable to do so.

Can you state why the Company did not deal much more with the insolvent Merchants, if it was more profitable to do so?

That of course would have involved a still greater Credit than they gave them; and the Servants of the Company, knowing their actual State, would of course not be disposed to do so.

If the Servants of the Company were not disposed to do so, why should it be so?

The Reason that I and others did this, with Security ultimately, in so many Cases, was, because the insolvent Part of the Hong derived great Advantages from their sharing The East India Company's Trade. If The East India Company had found it convenient or safe to deal equally with them as with the others, very likely they would not have become insolvent, but might have acquired Wealth.

If their Dealings with The East India Company were not so advantageous as to make them rich, what Advantage did they obtain in their Transactions with you?

The East India Company's Dealings might not be such as to make them solvent; but if The East India Company had not dealt with them at all, neither I nor any Person would have done so; and it was only on the Ground of their having a Share, though a small one, of that Trade, that we had Confidence to deal with them; it was a bad System, and I have understood it has been declining by Degrees since I quitted the Country.

Do you mean as to dealing with Insolvents?

As to having in the Hong Men notoriously insolvent.

If it was so advantageous to you, how has it been discovered since to be so bad and ruinous a System?

Because by Degrees the insolvent Hong Merchants, notwithstanding the Countenance of private Dealers like myself, would, in course of Time, become insolvent, and when they did so, were frequently indebted to The East India Company; consequently that proved what may be termed a ruinous System to them although individual Traders may have escaped; and I stated originally that I seldom lost, or any of my Constituents, being as vigilant as possible, as may be naturally supposed we would be.

Did The East India Company make Advances to them?

In the earlier Period of my Residence in China, largely; in the middle, more cautiously; and latterly they became still more contracted.

Then your Engagements with individual Merchants have been performed by the Advances of The East India Company?

That is the direct Inference, and it has happened so.

So that though it was very advantageous to individual Merchants to deal with those insolvent Merchants, that Advantage was obtained to them through the Losses of The East India Company?

[672]

I do not mean to go so far as that; the Company were Losers, of course, in proportion as the Insolvents were indebted to them at the Moment they ceased to do Hong Business.

State any other Advantages which, in your Opinion, were derived from the Existence of The East India Company as a great trading Company at Canton, otherwise than those you have mentioned-their being a Counterpoise to the Hong, and their supporting those Bankrupts?

I think I have already stated that, in the past and present State of Non-intercourse between the Government of this Country and that of China, it would be truly hazardous and rash for any British Merchant to settle there and trust his Property in the Hands of such an unjust and extortionate Government, without any protecting Power to look up to; and therefore so long as the present State of Things exists in China, I conceive The East India Company is a most valuable Protection to all British Interests; their Fleet visiting China every Season, consisting of about Twenty Ships efficiently equipped, and the Influence of their resident Servants, both from the excellent Character they have generally borne and the large Extent of Property always under their Charge, having enabled the British Factory to bestow great Benefits on individual British Traders, as well as on other Foreign Traders, in my Opinion.

The Witness is directed to withdraw.

Ordered, That this Committee be adjourned 'till To-morrow, One o'Clock.