SPECIAL ARTICLES

TAN CHUNG

China and the Brave New World

There are three schools of thought on tlte causes of the Opiul1l JVar, tlre mortershccl belit,celi
traditional and modem China. Karl l~lar.i :s NEW YORK TRIBUNE articles in 1850 adl’anced thc·
pe1’.BïJectil’e that the war mas oi’cr tlre import of opiul1l,’ hence the ¡ride spread of the term ’Opiul1l
6var’. Prof. John King Fairbank, i,eteran of tlre U.S. Clrina experts, has patronized cr iie)v cortcep-
tion that opiunt was only tlte occasion; the real catrse of the war was tlte conflict betll’t!(’n tlre
Eastern (Chinese) artcl Western (Briti.slt) cultures. Michael Greenberg leads a ntidclle-of tlre-rocrcl
interpretation that Britain fought China for opening her for f ree errterpri.se.s of the outside world.
Tlre influence of the latter two schools orer Western scholarship on modern China has been .so
oturnrholrning thcrt ‘Sinocentrism’ has now taken tlre place of ’opium l~rrpc’r-ralSr7t’ as tlte culprit
of history. For many years now Dr. Tall Chung has waged a single-.’randed battle against tlris
‘revisionisrn’ in interpreting Chinese history. His new theory, which challenges the ’cultural conflict’
and ’opening China’ schools, is not merely a reversal to the Marxian proposition. It is argued
at length in his new book: CHINA AND THE BRAVE NEW WORLD : A STUDY OF THE ORIGINS OF
THE OPIUM WAR 1840-42 (Allied Publishers, New Delhi, 1977), which is by far the best researched
work on the Opium War. It not only closely examines the Chinese government’s policies vis-a-vis
Sino-British trade and diplonratic contacts to refute such charges as Chinese tradition was ’anti-
foreign’ and ’anti-trade’, China’s ’insularism ’ stood in the way of developing normal relations mith
Britain and other foreign countrie.s. Dr. Tan also makes a study of Britain’s China trade to sholl’
the vital importance of opium in the expansion of Pax-Britannica. The author concltrdes his study
by critically examining the tensions arising from Sino-British contacts during tlre Canton trade
period (1760-1840), and by using the process of elimination he art-ii,es at tlre conclusion that tlre
term’ Opium War’ is not a misnomer. ,We publislt here excl!rpts from Dr. Tail’s book.-Editor.

1 (2) British violations of Chinese law leading

to judicial controversies, (3) British desire for
ANY MEANINGFUL study of war opens the vista a foothold in China, (4) uncertain diplomatic
of international tension areas which generate ties between the two governments, and (5)
the ultimate contradiction to be solved by British opium trade offensive against China.
means of armed conflict. There were five In examining the Chinese government
possible tension areas between China and policies vis-a-vis foreign trade we discover
Britain during the Canton trade period begin- that the central concern of Peking was how to
ning from 1760 and ending in 1 40: ( 1 ) conflict prevent the trade from being utilized by
arising from the Canton restrictions on the potential Han (native Chinese) rebels and
proceedings of the visiting British traders, foreign saboteurs to collude with each other to
Downloaded from chr.sagepub.com at University of Manitoba Libraries on June 10, 2015
12

undermine the authority of the alien Manchu dency : ’How long are Englishmen to succumb,
regime. The Manchu rulers were eager to how long are they to submit to insults, injus-
develop foreign trade, and thought it safe to tice, and extortion from such a Race [Chinese]’?’?
develop it by imposing the following restric- The commission of one twentieth part of
tions : which by any other nation would havc
(1) Foreign ships (except those from Japan, carried fire and sword through its provinces,
Korea and Russia) must call at Canton and no and certainly we are that much less causes for
other Chinese port. war have driven our country into an expense

(2) Foreign traders must deal only with the of Lives and Treasure than have existed in the
ten odd government-appointed hong Boca Tigris [off Canton] ....’
merchants and get all services including This observation highlights the extra-
accommodation from them and no one else. ordinary British self-restraint in dealing with
(3) They were allowed to stay at Canton China, to the extent that it made a mockery of
only when their ships anchored there, with a British intransigence elsewhere in the name of
relaxation of a couple of weeks both before the British honour and dignity. London’s response
arrival and after the departure of the ships. to the above complaint was voiced by Sir
(4) During their stay, they should not James Graham, First Lord of British Navy
stray from the Lien-hsing Street (or Thirteen (1830-34): ’Our grand object [in China] is to
Hong) Area without permission, nor enter keep peace, and by a plastic adaptation of
...

the Canton city without invitation. The our manners [Chinese ways] to extend our
sailors should not stay on shore. influence in China with the view of extending
(5) Foreign women should not be brought our commercial relations.’
to Canton. The British attitudc was clearly outlined by
(6) Foreign traders should not travel in Graham. It was neither cowardice nor magna-
sedan-chairs -

the transport of the privileged nimity. Britain was making the Chinese happy
Chinese. by trading pride for profit, since it was un-
(7) All communications between the foreign realistic to have both pride and profit in China
traders and the Canton authorities should be as elsewhere. This policy stood in good stead
routed through the hong merchants. to ward off three serious crises in the 1830s
(8) Foreigners should not carry arms to caused by British revolt against the Canton
Canton. System.
Other miscellaneous restrictions on the
(9) The 1830s dawned at Canton with three
foreign visitors’ learning Chinese language angry young men - William Baynes, Charles
through Chinese tutors, buying Chinese Millet and James Bannerman - controlling
history books, etc. the Select Committee of the East India
Company there. The Baynes Committee want-
ed to operate ’coercively’ to make the
BRITISH ARROGANCE AND SELF-RESTRAINT Chinese authorities conduct the Canton trade
on ’reasonable terms’. Apart from a deliberate
The British were quite an arrogant race during delay in sending the Company’s East Indiamen
the 18th and 19th centuries, and should have into the anchorage of Whampoa to start
reacted to the Canton restrictions as harshly another hectic trading season in 1829-30
as the following observation in the Bengal (assuming an appearance of boycotting the
C01nmerÔa! Report in 1820 penned by some Canton trade), six of the ships were sent to
self-respecting British official in the Board of indulge in illicit trade at a place called Hong
Customs, Salt & Opium in the Bengal Presi- Kong, a fishing village renamed Aberdeen iu
Downloaded from chr.sagepub.com at University of Manitoba Libraries on June 10, 2015
 13

the island which has assumed that name. ed at Macao waiting for the return of the East
Perhaps, the choice to christen the priceless Indiamen from London.
British colony Hong Kong was not unrelated The building and destructioirof the quay
to the memory of the first British defiance provided the threat for continuing Sino-British
against the Canton System. tension which was picked up by Baynes’
successor, Charles Marjoribanks, the new
President of the Canton Committee for the
THE CAN TON HARBOUR DRAMA 1830-31 trade. The Marjoribanks Committee
picked up a more sensitive issue from a report
The drama outside the Canton harbour was that the Acting-Viceroy of Canton had turned
followed by more defiance on the resumption his back to the portrait of a former British
of the year’s Sino-British Canton trade. The king inside the British factory while sitting
Chinese authorities were shocked to find an there to supervise the destruction work. The
objectionable visitor among the British traders Committee showered the Indian government
in the wife of William Baynes, now President with reports and suggestions for the following
of the East India Company’s Canton Commit- actions: (1) sending war-ships to China with
tee. Baynes also brought with him a junior troops, (2) letters of protest to be addressed
colleague, Astell, who, said to be ill, was by Lord Bentinck to the Chinese emperor and
carried in a sedan-chair to travel the distance the Canton Viceroy respectively, (3)
of a stone’s throw from the landing place to blockading the Pearl river and occupying the
the British factory. T~1e attention of Canton Bogue forts, and (4) seizing a foothold on
immediately concentrated on Mrs. Baynes, Chinese soil. Lord Bentinck jointly acted with
with the Chinese threatening to throw her out Rear-Admiral Owen, Commander-in-Chief
by force and with the British throwing a of Britain’s Pacific Fleet, to settle the dispute
hundred sailors and heavy canons around her without resorting to the extreme measures
for a show-down. suggested by their men at Canton.
But the Chinese did not want to precipitate The winding up of the East India Company’s
tension, while Baynes’ intransigence had little China trade monopoly in 1833 led to the
support from his superiors. He and the dispatch of Lord Napier from London to
Committee had, in fact, earnestly sought the China to assume the duties of the Chief Super-
intervention of Lord Bentinck, the British intende;nt of British trade at Canton. Napier
Governor-General in India, to no avail. confronted the Canton System by casting to
Baynes had to eat the humble pie by sending the winds the procedmes of contacts between
away his wife and completing the trade transac- the chiefs of the East India Company and the
tions as usual according to the Canton regula- Cantori government (through the intermediary
tions. But he inade a mischief before depart- of the hong merchants), and demanding direct
ing for the year by laying a new quay from the negotiations with no less a Chinese officer
landing place to the British factory without than the Canton Viceroy. The situation
Chinese permission, knowing full well that the was deadlocked with Napier preventing British

factory was the property of a hong merchant ships from entering Canton and the Chinese
while the land covered by the quay belonged cutting off the supply of provisions to the
to the Canton government. This led to strong British. Napier sent back to London many
admonitions from Peking which compelled proposals which, if implemented, would mean
the Acting-Viceroy of Canton, Chu Kui-chen, a large-scale war with China. But the British
to get the quay demolished under his personal government remained firm in preserving Sino-
supervision when the British traders hibernat- British. harmony at Canton. London did not
Downloaded from chr.sagepub.com at University of Manitoba Libraries on June 10, 2015
14

even shed a tear when Napier died at Macau British, on the other hand, had not much
in humiliation and anger, and normal trade respect for the government of any non-
continued until the eve of the Opium War. European culture. But the great majority of
them who came to China before 1834 were
employees of the East India Company, and
CULTURAL SHOCK were required to abide by Chinese laws lest it
affected the Company’s trading interests. The
The Canton restrictions have been cited by British government endorsed this position and
scholars as an important evidence of the placed all non-Company British citizens under
existence of a Sino-British cultural conflict, the consular jurisdiction of the Canton
and also of the allegation of Chinese insular- Committee of the East India Company. There
ism. The British visitors at Canton certainly was a dichotomy between the innate British
had their share of cultural shock when the tendency to slight the Chinese law and the
local authorities greeted the arrival of a highly British desire to abide by the Chinese law not
iespectable English lady with such unease and for the sake of the Chinese but for the sake of
agitation, as if Mrs. Baynes was a monster. smooth pursuit of trade. The Canton govern-
As for the Chinese hosts, they had also never ment had an insight of this split personality
seen foreign visitors so defiant and trouble- of the British. It kept a close watch on the
some as the British. Indeed, there was an British conduct at Canton, and used the trade
element of antagonism between the two embargo frequently to bring the British
peoples at Canton due to their different defaulters to book. All this constituted a
cultural backgrounds. But this never really potential tension area.
disturbed the continuous expansion of Sino- Tension rose in 1784 when the Lady Hughes,
British trade. Since the last British defiance a ’country’ (non-E.I.C.) ship from Bombay,

against the cultural ’tyranny’ of the Canton fired gun salutes at Whampoa and killed two
System died away with Napier in 1834, which Chinese. The Canton government immediately
was followed by many years of peaceful and demanded the surrender of the culprit for
profitable British trade at Canton, the factor punishment according to the principle of ’life
of cultural conflict could not have, in any way, for life’, while the British tried hard to save the
contributed to the 1840 war. The challenges of gunner. An embargo was declared upon British
Baynes, Marjoribanks and Napier were not trade. A non-Company British trader, who was
against Chinese insularism as such. To pure the consignee of the ship’s cargo, was kept
trade activities Canton was always wide open. under house arrest. The Company’s Canton
The Canton System was only aimed at the Committee was held responsible. Finally, the
curtailment of other British activities extra- gunner was surrendered and strangled by the
neous to trade. There is more evidence later to Canton government.
show that even the British government undet- There was another round of tension arising
stood the Chenese position. from a similar cause in 1800. A British naval
schooner, Providence, was at Whampoa wait-
ing for messages to be conveyed to the British
TENSION AREA man-of-war which was neo allowed to enter the
harbour. One night, the officer on vigil on
The Canton government was sensitive to the board the Providehce fired at and seriously
prestige of the Manchu authority, and would injured a Chinese in a boat. The Canton
react strongly to the violation of law either by government insisted on the officer being tried
Chinese citizens or by foreign visitors. The in a Chinese court. As the person involved was
Downloaded from chr.sagepub.com at University of Manitoba Libraries on June 10, 2015
 15

an officer of the British navy, there was much rage, two and injuring many residents
killing
resistance on the British side against the there, in addition to destroying property. This
Chinese move. Only thc prospect of damage to time the: British harped on the sacrosanctity
trad~ compelled the British to yield. Luckily, of the Royal Navy and refused to be involved
the wounded Chinese recovered miraculously in any negotiation about the crime. It was in
under British medical care, which helped to this year that the British-Indian opium ships
mitigate the punishment to a token impeach- had moved out of Whampoa under the order
ment of the British officer by a Chinese of the Canton Viceroy, Juan Yuan. Viceroy
court. Juan made an objective assessment of the
Seven years later there was another Chinese Sino-British situation and concluded that
trial of British sailors. The crew of East China could not afford to fight a war with
Indiaman, Neptune, became riotous at Britain. The imperial court listened to his
Whampoa in 1807, burning down a customs advice and compromised its dignity by letting
station, injuring an official therein, and killing off the foreign offenders.
a Chinese on the street. The Canton authorities These five occasions were the most seiious
demanded the trial of the culprits which was, Sino-British judicial contradictions during a
as usual, resisted by the British. There was a period of eighty years of peaceful and smooth
deadlock, and lrad was at a standstill. After bilateral trade. Tension there always was,
prolonged negotiations the British agreed to even in the less serious incidents that we have
allow fifty-two sailors to be tried by the not narrated, but the British traders did not
Chinese authorities who, in turn, showed miss a single trading season at Canton despite
magnanimity by imposing only a fine of Taels the recurrence of judicial disputes. The
12.42 (less than £4) on one of the sailors. Chinese government, as we have seen, was
One night in 1810, a Chinese named Huang quite within its rights to act as a sovereign
Ah-hsing was stabbed to death near the British power. On this point, no other government
factory. The murderer was alleged to be a would have acted differently. Even then, no
British sailor of the East Indiaman, Royal one can accuse the Canton government of
Charlotte. But there was no proof. As the lacking in conciliation and magnanimity in
British merchant fleet had already finished dealing with the British offenders. On the
loading and was about to sail out of the British side, too, there is ample evidence of
harbour, the Canton government withheld the respect for Chinese sovereignty and good will
issue of clearance pending an inquiry into the for peaceful co-existence. Sino-British judicial
death. Because trade was not at stake and, differences did not contribute to the 1840 war.
moreover, there was no evidence to establish
the crime, Captain Austin, the British naval
officer in charge of the convoy, played tough. BRITAIN’S AMBITION
He announced before the Chinese that the
British fleet had decided to move out with or It would be wrong to overlook Britain’s
without clearance. The Chinese were afraid ambitions vis-a-vis China by overemphasizing
of the broadside of the British ships, and her tolerance of the Canton restrictions and
yielded by dropping the case. the Chinese judicial assertions. The Sino-
There was one more occasion when the British intercourse at Canton brought immense
trade contacts were marred by British crime. economic gains to Britain, but these gains
Towards the end of the year 1821, sailors of a could not be institutionalized because China
British man-of-war H.M.S. Topaze committed was not a British colony. It would be ideal for
atrocity on a small island at the outer-ancho- Britain. if she had a foothold in China such as
Downloaded from chr.sagepub.com at University of Manitoba Libraries on June 10, 2015
16

sh~ had in India before the Battle of Plassey, Chinese territory was within the capacity of
or in Portuguese Macau. Macau, indeed, Britain, but it was too adventurous to maintain
had several dimensions to the British policy- the existing trading channels with China un-
makers. First, the Portuguese were making impaired. A much safer approach was to take
good profit by charging the British and other over Macau from the Portuguese.
foreign traders for accommodation and ware- 1801, the war in Europe took a new turn
In
house facilities because the latter had to fall with the joint Franco-Spanish invasion of
back to Macau during the absence of their Portugal. London immediately issued an
ships from the China waters. Second, the order to Marquis Wellesley, Governor-General
Chinese lease of Macau to Portugal pointed of India, to send an expeditionary force to
to the possibility of negotiating for a foothold occupy Macau. Wellesley carried out the order
with China. Third, by virtue of her military by dispatching a force under the command
power, Britain, the strongest on earth, should of Captain Osborn of the Royal Navy which
deserve a more favourable treatment from reached China in March 1802.
China than the second class power which The Select Committee at Canton led by
Portugal was. James A. Drummond were strongly opposed
The kind of ideal foothold on Chinese soil to the occupation of Macau for the following
imagined by the British is described in reasons: (1) Chinese would object to it; (2)
London’s instructions to the ambassadors- Portuguese were controlling Macau under
designate to China in 1787 and 1792. It should ’humiliating conditions’; (3) Macau was not a
be a place most suitable for shipping and trade, good harbour; (4) Macau was vulnerable to
not far from China’s tea-growing areas, and Chinese attack and its supply lines could be
free from Chinese political and judicial inter- easily cut off; and (5) if France took over
ference. The first ambassador-designate, Macau (as was feared by Britain) it would be
Colonel Cathcart, died before he reached a liability to her.
China. Lord Macartney was the first British Meanwhile, the Portuguese at Macau had
ambassador to China, and he seriously nego- warned Peking about British intentions
tiated with the Peking government for the through their compatriots who were serving
lease of Chinese territory. Peking’s flat refusal in the imperial government. Father Joseph
of the British demand was stated in Emperor Bernard d’Almeida of the Jesuit mission, who
Ch’ien-lung’s letter to King George III to the was the Chairman of the Board of Astronomy,

following effect: (1) every jungle and cay was had written to the Deputy Minister of Works,
an integral part of the Celestial Dynasty, (2) Su Leng-o, who, in turn, memorialized the
no permission for opening up a new avenue emperor, revealing the aggressive designs of
for foreign trade could be given where no Britain vi.s-n-vis Macau. The Canton govern-
Peking-appointed hong merchants existed, ment was alerted. It became evident that there
and (3) an award of foothold to Britain would would be serious repercussions if British troops
set a precedent for similar demands from other were to land on Macau. The operation was
countries. finally givenup.
When diplomatic means failed, the alter- In 18d8, there was a second British attempt
native was of employing military force. Thus, on Macau with an expeditionary force led by
a serious tension area developed around the Rear-Admiral William O’Brien Drury appear-
British desire for a foothold in China. But ing in China waters on 11I September. On
still Britain was cautious in pursuing her goal 19 September, Drury addressed a letter to the
lest even the available trading opportunities Canton Viceroy, Wu Hsiung-kuang, and
were to be lost. The seizure of a tract of occupied Macau two days later. Viceroy Wu
Downloaded from chr.sagepub.com at University of Manitoba Libraries on June 10, 2015
 17

had previously sought help from the British stopped. On top of it, at no stage throughout
to suppress coastal piracy, and thus exposed the Canton Trade period did London plan to
his military weakness to the British. He hesi- occupy Hong Kong or any other ’Depot’ by
tated and then imposed an embargo on British force. The explanation for all this is twofold.
trade on 5 October. A belated memorial to In the first place, China was already ’open’
Peking was sent on 23 October. Anticipating enough for Britain to exact considerable trade
pressure from the high command, he further profit, and thus a foothold, though desirable,
cut off the supply of provisions to the British. was not an absolute necessity even from the
On 14 November, Drury led a flotilla to viewpoint of an expansive and aggressive
force his way into the Canton river. The commercial power like Britain. Secondly,
Chinese naval force blockaded the river and arising from the above reality, London’s
clashed with Drury’s fleet. The first shot bet- priority was to grasp the opportunities opened
ween the two nations was fired and one British up by China and exploit them in the best
sailor was killed. When Drury ordered the manner, instead of doing anything which
return of fire, the British sailors had already might close the opportunities. It is legitimate
fled from the spot. The deadlock continued and to argue that neither the quest for a foothold,
Drury faced increasing opposition among the nor any manner of ’opening’ of a country
non-Company traders. Meanwhile, the Chinese which had already opened so many avenues
emperor was furious at the ’weak-headed’ for British profit-making, was really a tension
Viceroy, and urged him to throw out the area which germinated the seed of Sino-
British from Macau. Seeing that a Chinese British war.
attack was imminent, Drury withdrew from
Macau on 20 December.
After the two abortive attempts on Macau, ii
Britain decided to suspend her quest for a
foothold. Both London and the Indian autho- Successful is often the alternative
diplomacy
rities turned down innumerable proposals to war, while, the other
on hand, it can also
from British individuals (Marjoribanks in be said that in the absence of stable diplomatic
1831, Napier in 1834, and others later) for r rations the chances of war between two
forcible occupation of an ’insular possession’ countries are greater than when such relations
on Chinese soil to challenge the Canton exist. lt is from this point of view that the issue
System. of Sino-British diplomatic relations is relevant
The British desire for a foothold in China to our discussion of the Opium War.
before the Opium War and her forcing the
Chinese to lease Hong Kong during and after
the war, have been often cited in support of THE ISSUE OF TRIBUTARY STAFFS
the ’opening China’ perspective in interpreting
the origins of the war. But, as we have seen, The Fairbankian perspective Lttributes the
the British government never gave the highest cause of the war to China’s out-moded manner

priority to acquiring such an opening. When of treating all foreign countries as ’tributary
Macartney failed to acquire it, London did states’. The theory is supported by two kinds
not regard his Mission a failure. On the other of evidence: ( 1 ) China receiving the British
hand, the attempt to secure the opening throu- ambassadors, Lord Macartney and Lord
gh diplomatic manoeuvres was virtually given Amherst, as tributary envoys, and (2) the
up by the Foreign Office. After Drury’s failure description of Brita n as a ’tributary state’
to take over Macau, such an attempt was also in the A1anchu Collected Statutes and other
Downloaded from chr.sagepub.com at University of Manitoba Libraries on June 10, 2015
18

imperial documents. Let us examine the surprise and deceive the host country. Since
happenings to determine whether this so- the Cathcart mission turned back before
called ’tribute system’ was a real tension area. reaching the China waters, the Chinese were
First about Britain’s ’tributary state’ status. not informed about it at all. When Peking
The Manchu government maintained the learnt about the impending arrival of Macart-
same relations with France, the United States, ney in 1793, it was four months after Macart-
Holland, Portugal and England, but in the ney’s departure from England. London did
Collected Statutes only the latter three are not expect the Chinese to decline a reception
described as ’tributary states’. Moreover, the to him because, according to its instructions,
Collected Statute . was compiled in 1818. Henry Brown and his colleagues in the East
We also find that no Manchhu document India Company’s Canton Committee had
prior to 1793 the year of Macartney’s visit
-

conveyed to the Chinese authorities that the

to China - ever mentions England in the purpose of Macartney’s visit was to congratu-
way she is mentioned in the Collected Statutes. late the birthday of the Chinese emperor on
The conclusion is obvious: the Chinese govern- behalf of the English king. Emperoi Ch’ien-
ment, in its internal communications, allotted lung, a person of tremendous ego, was excited
the ’tributary’ status to Britain and all by the news that such a great power as Britain
other countries which had sent missions to had joined other tributary states to send a
China. For, the Chinese regarded them as goodwill mission to his birthday celebration.
tributary missions. It is also clear that the He issued a dozen edicts instructing about how
giving of such a status to a country by the the British ambassador should be received.
Chinese did not downgrade its real status in He discarded protocol and ordered high-
China’s international relations. Peking did not ranking officers to receive and conduct the
respect France and United States more because British mission. He also sanctioned huge
they were not tributary states, nor did it grants (including an additional levy of taxes)
respect Britain less because she was one. for providing hospitality to the guests as well
If the Chinese had erred in sticking to such as for beautifying the landscape all along
a meaningless convention (call it any system Macartney’s route to Peking in China.
you want), was the British government Macartney acted his part well in the diplo-
entirely nnocent in the matter? For an matic drama. When he was escorted by yachts
answer to this question we have to inquire from Tientsin to Tungchow on his way to
into the circumstances which led to the see the emperor in his summer palace in

dispatch of British ambassadors to China. Jehol in August 1793, the Manchu govern-
Special studies on the three British ment put a flag on each of the yachts bearing
embassies led by Cathcart, Macartney and the inscription: ’The English Ambassador
Amherst have confirmed that London knew bringing tribute to the Emperor of China.’
about the Chinese tribute convention long Macartney shut his eyes upon the flag and
before dispatching these missions. The ambas- ’made no complaint of it’, as he himself
sadors were sent exactly because of London’s admitted. This was the moment of the Chinese
intention to exploit the Chinese convention offer and British acceptance of the so-called
to get Sino-British relations improved and to ’tributary state’ status to Britain. But this
obtain trading and territorial concessions from deception tactic could not go very far because:
China consequent upon improved relations. (1) Emperor Ch’ieng-lung and his advisers
Theie was something extraordinary in the were shrewd enough to find out the reai

manner in which the three missions were sent intentions of the Macarntey mission; and
to China, viz. there was a calculated move to (2) the innate vigilance of the Manchu regime
Downloaded from chr.sagepub.com at University of Manitoba Libraries on June 10, 2015
 19

on foreign moves had already been activated and ’the cession of a small island near Chushan
by the warning of the Portuguese who were and another place near Canton’; (2) British
employed by the Chinese to conduct the British warships anchored off Macau for several
embassy. As a goodwill mission, the Macartney months in suspicious circumstances in 1802;
embassy was not a failure. But the material and (3) more than 700 British soldiers landed
aims of the embassy were not fulfilled because at Macau on the pretext of protecting the
they could not be fulfilled through a pseudo- Portuguese in 1808.
tributary mission.
Before the failure of the Amherst mission
in 1816, London had not learnt the lesson that THE KOTOW ISSUE
its pseudo-tributary game would not help
Britain to get a foothold and/oi other conces- After reading this memorial from Canton
sions from China. In May 1816, when T.J. the emperor’s mood about receiving the
Metcalfe of the East India Company informed Amherst embassy was predictably nasty. In
the Canton government about the impending his edict of 24 June he ordered Na-yen-ch’eng,
arrival of the Amherst embassy, a letter the Viceroy of Chihli, to give a banquet in
addressed by the Earl of Buckinghamshire, honour of the British ambassador at Tientsin
President of the Board of Control of Indian and to demand of Amherst to kotow ’to
Affairs, London, to the Chinese government show gratitude for the banquet’. But ’if the
was conveyed to Peking through the Canton ambassador is not willing to perform the
Viceroy. The Chinese translation of the letter, Chinese ceremony, he may be excused.’ In
which is extant, reads in part: ’Our king who another edict, he ordered not to repeat the
has owned a vast territory is now old and sick. 1793 precedent of levying additional taxes to
He has handed over his kingdom to the charge renovate historical monuments for the benefit
of the prince regent. The prince is often of the British visitor. In yet another edict
nostalgic about the eminent, benevolent and issued ten days later, the emperor suggested
virtuous rule of the [late] great Emperor that in case Amherst demonstrated his dis-
Ch’ien-lung, who was admired universally. inclination to kotow the emperor as
’Our country is at peace with othei countries Macartn.ey had done earlier, the British
now. Therefore, our prince regent is sending embassy be dismissed at Tientsin after some
a special envoy to visit the Celestial Dynasty ceremony.
and pay respects to His Great Majesty of The Chinese plan for reception was upset
China.’ by Amherst who, after landing at the mouth
In resuming the tactic of deception tried of Pei river near Tientsin, dispatched the
during the Macartney mission, London failed British ships to Canton immediately without
to reckon with the totally changed Sino- consulting the hosts. As the embassy now had
British relations in 1816. The new situation to be conducted through the inland route to
was highlighted by the Acting Viceroy of Canton and, thus, could not be dismissed
Canton, Tung Tseng-chiao, when he forwarded straightaway from Tientsin, the emperor
the message of the Earl of Buckinghamshire deemed the British behaviour ’extremely
to Peking. Viceroy Tung recommended that obnoxious’.
the British mission be received. At the same It is clear that there was no love lost for the
time, he reminded the imperial court about Amherst mission from the start. Its subsequent
past experiences with the British: (1) the dismissal from Peking without an imperial
English tributary envoy in 1793 put forward audience was only to be expected. But the
demands for ’trade at Tientsin and Ningpo’ direct cause of the British mission being asked
Downloaded from chr.sagepub.com at University of Manitoba Libraries on June 10, 2015
20

to leave Peking as soon as it arrived is the the Emperor, and) conforming to all the
kotow issue, a much commented topic. It ceremonials/ceremonies of that Court which
should be clarified that this ceremony and may not commit the hono(u)r of your
kotowing was a thousand year old Sovereign or lessen your own dignity, so as to
practice -

an outward demonstration of endanger the success of your negotiation/

reverence for the emperor rather than an Mission.’ This passage was written with the
abject humiliation of the person seeking his full knowledge that the British ambassadors
audience. (This point would be more easily were to be asked to kotow the Chinese
appreciated by Indians, Japanese and other emperor as a part of the ’ceremonies of that
Asian peoples who have similar customs than Court’. It also shows that London did not
by the Europeans.) In China people kotowed consider that kotow constituted an insult to
to deities, the king, the parents and even other the British nation and the British ambassadors.
seniors. While everyone kneeled before the The Amherst mission was a triumvir of (1)
emperor, he himself had to kneel before his the ambassador, (2) Sir George Thomas
own parents and the empress dowager who Staunton, his deputy, and (3) Henry Ellis, his
might not be his mother. For more than a successor, in case circumstances prevented
thousand years, foreign ambassadors who Amherst from performing his duties. The three
went to China to participate in state functions were divided in their opinions regarding
invariably joined the Chinese official to ko- kotow. Ellis was of the view that ’resistance
tow the emperor. It became such a convention upon this point was by no means essential to
and habit that the non-performance of kotow the support of our national respectability’,
would mean discourtesy and compromise of while Staunton, who was strongly opposed to
the dignity of the Chinese ruler. So, when the kotow, thought that the attainment of the
Chinese officials requested Macartney and ’objects of the present mission’ would not ’in
Amherst to kotow before the emperor along the smallest degree be promoted by the
with Chinese courtiers (including men of much compliance’. Both these leading lights of the
higher rank and official status than the two historical event did not attach the kind of
English gentlemen), it was only for honouring importance to the kotow issue vis-a-vis
and completing a solemn state function to the success of the Amherst mission that
which the British ambassadors had voluntarily modern scholars often like to attach.
come and been asked by their own government The Chinese legates who conducted the
to attend. There was no element of sino- Amherst mission should share the blame for
centrism, cultural chauvinism or inequality the explosion of the kotow issue which
between the nations involved. On the contrary, wrecked the proceedings of the embassy. They
the non-compliance of the request on the part sent a false report to the court that the
of the British envoys smacked of their superio- British ambassador had consented to
rity complex and discourtesy to their hosts, kotow, and planned to rush Amherst and
which would mean the defeat of the purpose of his colleagues straightaway to the royal
their own missions. audience on their arrival in Peking. While the
What was the British government’s attitude emperor was waiting with a full court for the
to the kotow issue? London’s instructions to ceremony, both Amherst and Staunton declin-
all the three ambassadors-designate contain ed to attend without proper rest. It was the
the following passage with the variations first time in the history of China that the
shown within brackets and after the obliques: emperor was made to wait for the arrival of a
’You will procure an Audience as early as foreign envoy to whom he was scheduled to
possible afier your arrival, (at from
Downloaded Court of
thechr.sagepub.com give
at University audience.
of Manitoba
’I have no face to see my sub-
Libraries on June 10, 2015
 21

ordinates’, he burst in rage, and ordered the Strangely, many scholars tend to regard the
British embassy to pack off. Afterwards he Napier episode as the culmination of Sino-
came to know of the legates’ false report and British diplomatic difficulties, or the begin-
the physical exhaustion of the British guests. ning of diplomatic instability between the two
He softened his attitude and wrote the countries because the removal of the shield of
following to the Canton Viceroy: ’Although the East India Company had resulted in direct
the [British] ambassador misbehaved by confrontation of the Chinese authorities with
showing discourtesy [to me], he has, after numerous British champions of free trade.
all, been sent here by his king to present a Dr. Hsin-pao Chang describes the Napier
letter and some tribute. In so doing he has affair
as a ’diplomatic crisis’.
sailed thousands of miles across one sea after By any criterion, Napier’s assignment at
another. Since he intends to show his Canton was not a diplomatic mission. There
obedience, we should not drive him too hard, was no communication from London to the
which only shows our own narrow-minded- Canton authorities about the nature of the
ness.’ He ordered the Viceroy to feast the appointment. Napier was not accredited to
ambassador with due courtesy and offer some the Chinese authorities as any diplomat
explanation about the emperor’s displeasure. should have been. Before the arrival of
There was also the consolation of a part of the Napier, the Canton Committee of the East
British presents being accepted, and the return India Company had already been playing the
gifts were accompanied by a reply from the role extraneous to the trading activities of the
emperor to the English ruler. The Amherst Company itself. To all British citizens at
mission thus came to a happy ending with all Canton-Macau and the outer-anchorages,
formalities being completed save the royal the Committee was the British consulate. The
audience. Committee also had a semi-diplomatic status
in negotiating with the Canton authorities.
Because of the termination of the Company’s
BRITISH INACTIVITY monopoly the Committee had to be wound
up. Napier was sent exactly to discharge the
The Opium War was still 14 years away when Committee’s above described functions. In
Amherst left China with honour and dignity. the instructions issued from London, Napier
By now London had realized the futility of the was repeatedly reminded to conform to the

pseudo-tributary missions, and did not send Chinese· law and regulations. The mode of
any more. The interim period between the communication between him and the Canton
exit of the Amherst embassy and the outbreak government (as Napier was a government
of the war was marked by London’s lack of officer, not a member of a trading concern like
diplomatic initiative in China. True, the the President of the East India Company’s
attention of the British Foreign Ofhce was Committee) could have been amicably solved
always absorbed by developments in Europe (perhaps with some help from London) if
and elsewhere. But it was also a fact that there the Chinese government was approached
was no outstanding issue between the govern- properly. But the nature of the dispute created
ments of Britain and China which called for by Napier assumed the character of personal
urgent action. London’s inactivity was reflect- wrangling between him and the Canton
ed in the low-key approach in effecting the Viceroy, Lu K’un. While Napier claimed
transition at Canton from the era of East parity with Viceroy Lu, the latter, who held
India Company monopoly to the era of ’free the rank of a cabinet minister and a
trade’ in 1834. general and the honorary title of Junior
Downloaded from chr.sagepub.com at University of Manitoba Libraries on June 10, 2015
22

Guardian of the Heir Apparent, could not even III

ascertain who and what Napier was. The
dispute, naturally, did not evoke any sympathy By this process of elimination, there is only
from the British government. one possible tension area left, i.e. the ever-

increasing export of Indian opium to China

engineered by the East India Company-
controlled British Raj with the approval of
TRIANGULAR TRADE FROM INDIA British Parliament and administration. When
modern Western researchers attempt to move
The perspective of treating 1834 as a turning away from the opium issue by over-exaggerat-
point in the history of Sino-British trade is ing the Sino-British contradictions in the
misconceived. It betrays lack of understanding cultural arena, they betray an indifference to
of the true nature of the triangular trade human suffering caused by this British opium
between Britain, India and China. As demon- trade offensive on China - the most inhuman
strated in an earlier chapter, the starting point in the history of international commerce.
of the trade triangle was India, and its generat-
ing force was the transmission of India’s
surplus revenue to Britain via China. The ‘free’
traders at Canton were not confronted by the INDIAN OPIUM FOR CHINA
Chinese authorities only after the winding up
of the East India Company. They had already In order to gain an insight into the extent of
been ’old China hands’, and their main concern tension generated by the opium trade offensive,
was to convert India’s surplus revenue in the we must try to estimate the number of people
form of opium and raw cotton into profitable affected and the extent of damage suffered by
remittances to Britain. In other words, they China mentally and materially. As the opium
were only the instruments of a trading machine traflic was a clandestine and illegal operation
controlled by the East India Company in within China there is no comprehensive
India. The Company still remained India’s record to go by. But we have some knowledge
supreme master after her China trade mono- about the average daily consumption of the
poly had been taken away. There was, thus, opium addicts, i.e., 0.025 taels a day. On the
no qualitative change in the trading front at other hand, there are fairly accurate statistics
Canton between Britain and China. In sum, about the quantities of opium exported from
there was continuity in Sino-British relations India to China. We also know that a catty of
throughout the Canton trade period. The Bengal opium could yield 7 taels (7 out of 16
Napier episode was, at best, an aberation of parts of a catty) of extract for Chinese smokers,
personality, which did not even effect the while a catty of Malwa opium could yield 12
smooth follow-up of the harmony-oriented taels of extracts. A chest of Bengal opium
East India Company politics by Napier’s contained two factory maunds, i.e. 149 lbs.
successors’ ’quiescent’ policy V%S-CI-V%.S the (a lb. being three fourths of a catty), while a
Canton trade. There was no diplomatic crisis chest of Malwa opium contained 100 catties.
throughout. Hence, the Opium War could not If we assume that all the Bengal and Malwa
have been the result of any accumulated opium exported from India to China was
tension arising from the two different modes in extracted and consumed by the Chinese
international affairs -China’s tribute orienta- according to the above-stated ratios, we can
tion versus Britain’s so-called ’family of deduce the number of Chinese consumers of
nations’ approach. the Bengal opium (Yl) from the number of
Downloaded from chr.sagepub.com at University of Manitoba Libraries on June 10, 2015
 23

chests of it (Xl) exported to China according Fairbank agrees with this premise and says
to the following formula : that the rapid increase of the opium trade was
stimulated by an ever-expanding Chinese
demand for the drug.
There is a loophole in this logic. The law of
Similarly, the number of chests of Malwa demand and supply holds true only in the
opium (X2) exported to China can help us to case of ordinary commodities. Opium is no
find out the number of Chinese consumers of ordinary commodity but a habit-forming
it (Y2) according to the following formula: narcotic. In the case of an ordinary
commodity, the consumer’s demand for it is
always subject to a limit. When consumption
reaches the limit, the saturation point is reach-
The computed results are shown below: ed. The supply of this commodity cannot

The estimated number of Chinese addicts of increase this saturation point. Every
beyond
Indian opium constitute 0.33 percent of the consumer draws a scheme of consuming a
total population in the 1820s, and 0.7 per cent variety of commodities. Within the limits of a
in the 1830s, which was alarming. certain purchasing power, the increase of
There can be two different ways of looking consumption of one commodity is held in
at this Chinese opium smoking mania. Sir check by the demand for other commodities.
Henry Pottinger, the British negotiator of the In the case of opium addiction, there is no
Treaty of Nanking, tried to put the blame saturation point, and the addict will sacrifice
entirely on the Chinese when he told his his consumption of other commodities to
Chinese counterpart, Ch’i-ying, in these ensure the stability and increase of consump-
words: ’If your people are virtuous, they will tion of the drug. As some Chinese writers
desist from the evil practice [opium smoking], depicted, the addict would go on indulging in
and if your officers are incorruptible and will opium-smoking even if his wife had no trou-
obey your orders, no opium can enter your sers to wear, or even if his children went

country. The discouragement of the growth of hungry. So, there is a different law of demand
the poppy in our territories rests principally and supply for narcotics. When the social-
with you, for nearly the entire produce moral fibre is weak and the government is
cultivated in India travels east to China.’ lethargic, supply creates the demand for
Downloaded from chr.sagepub.com at University of Manitoba Libraries on June 10, 2015
24

narcotics. Thus, the real truth is the reverse vessels made a pitiable Lilliputian appearance
of what Pottinger has stated. The un- on the Lintin in front of the Indian
scene

precedented opium-smoking mania in China opium clippers. Western witnesses often

from the beginning of the l9th century had its exaggerated the Chinese official connivance at
origin in British India where fertile lands were the opium traffic. In the face of British naval
increasingly used for poppy cultivation to superiority and often active interference in the
create a doubly profitable means for remitting encounters between the Chinese navy and the
and replenishing India’s surplus revenue, as Chinese smugglers, there was nothing else the
discussed in a previous chapter. government officials could do. Opium was
The British opium trade offensive against forced down the throat of China at gun point.
China was under a kind of self-restraint before Not only opium but other goods as well were
1820 only because India then did not export traded at Lintin. The opium clippers had to
to China even half theopium thatshe exported take cargo as ballast on their return voyage to
in the twenties and thirities. From 1820 on- India. They got tea, silk, the Nankeens and
wards, there was a spurt of enthusiasm to other Chinese goods at rates much cheaper
poison the Chinese race, and at once more than those in Canton (as they avoided the
than a million Chinese fell prey to it. It was no Canton taxation). Consequently, Calcutta
coincidence that coupled with the new-found became a good entrepot for these China
vigour in stepping up the export of the drug goods, re-exporting them to such American
from India was the new defiant mood of the and European traders as were saved the
British-Indian opium traders in China waters. trouble of sailing to Canton to obtain them.
A new area of trading activity opened up at The opium clippers even bought Chinese rice
Lintin rivalling the transactions under the at Lintin and resold it at Canton to claim the
Canton System. Chinese government’s tax concessions for
Lintin was the name of the inner sea next encouraging rice imports. Marjoribanks
to the Macau Road, covering the outer part estimated in 1831 that the illicit trade at
of the Canton Estuary. The Lintin trade Lintin was to the tune of two to three million
concentrated at three focal points: ( 1 ) the sterling per annum.
Inner Lintin Island right in the centre of the
sea, (2) Chin-hsing-men, a harbour on the left
coast lying between latitude N. 22°-20’ and A NEW TENSION AREA

22°-30’, and (3) Chi-shui-men, the area of

Ma-wan, the channels between Kowloon and The invigorated opium trade at Lintin
Lantao on the modern map. The characteri- created a new tension area which eclipsed
stics of the Lintin area may be highlighted. other potential tension areas. The Canton
First, it has innumerable accesses to the main- restrictions gradually lost their sphinx image
land on both flanks, facilitating traffic between with the Canton authorities’ loss of sovereign
the foreign importers and native smugglers. control and dignity at the outer-anchorages.
Second, it is fairly vast, open and rough, The Topaze episode bore evidence that judicial
an ideal place for contesting naval and naviga- differences between Britain and China became
tional supremacy. Third, it controls the ent- increasingly irrelevant. Britain was no longer
rance into the Canton river, a thoroughfare keenly interested in acquiring a foothold on
which the ships of foreign countries must pass Chinese soil, since the control of Lintin by
in order to get to Canton and Macau. The the British opium trade and naval influence had
Lintin base completely outwitted Chinese almost fulfilled the aims of a foothold. Diplo-
efforts to arrest the opium tra~c. The Chinese matic relations, however unsatisfactory, did
Downloaded from chr.sagepub.com at University of Manitoba Libraries on June 10, 2015
 25

not hamper Napier’s successors in operating the opium evils infuriated the new emperor
as Britain’s Chief Superintendent of China Tao-kuang, who had the dubious honour of
Trade on board the opium ships at Lintin. being enthroned at the commencement of the
To look at the issue from another angle, Lintin trade. Why was it that the opium hulks
Britain’s interest in the China trade exercised (storage ships) had never anchored there before
a restraining influence on occasions when his coronation, he asked with indignation.
irritations emerged from non-trading spheres. Imperial edicts issued in his name began to
Britain adopted a clever policy of maintaining reflect a strong sentiment against the ’great
a conciliatory attitude regarding all non- scourge’ opium - and the determination
-

trading affairs in Sino-British contacts on the to reform the ’decadent trend’ opium -

one hand, and working very aggressively in smoking. Orders from Peking bombarded
exacting ever increasing profits from the China Canton asking to put a stop to the opium
trade. The basic contradiction between the two import and drive away foreign opium ships
countries lay in this ruthless mood of exploita- from China waters. But this was easier said
tion by one of them. Before the Lintin era, than done. Intellectuals at Canton knew that
this basic contradiction lay deeply hidden. a war on opium meant war with Britain,

After 1820, it shot out into the open. which would be disastrous. They formed the
Truth suddenly dawned on the Chinese that lobby for the legalization of opium trade,
the mud-like stuff -

they called opium the advocating: ( 1 ) freedom to buy and sell and
’Foreign Mud’ - was stealthily staging a smoke opium, (2) bartering tea for opium with
coup d’etat in China’s social, political and foreigners but forbidding the outflow of silver,
economic life. They called it a ’flowing poison’ and (3) allowing and encouraging cultivation
and a ’percolation’ of China’s treasures. The of poppy in China to compete with foreign
devastating effect of opium was vividly impori.s. The lobby found a daring spokesman
summed up in a poem written in 1832: in a courtier at Peking, who was the Assistant

Oh, marvellous magic plant

Thy name is Opium !
With ambition to supplant _

All victuals worth their names.

’

Thousands and thousands of ’te7el

From the proud and prodigal,
Spend hours of the lamp-lit calm,
For the indulgence of thy charm.
’
Breezy streets where the beggars lie
Befuddled eternally.
From sea ships come thy odour, .

Calling check-posts to feather their nests.

In and out flow money and goods,
With wind, vigour disappear.
Society in silken repose,
While war and disaster draw near.
And the mankind dilapidates,
Into dust everything fades.

The growing Chinese resentment against Director of Religious Ceremonies, Hsu

Downloaded from chr.sagepub.com at University of Manitoba Libraries on June 10, 2015
26

Nai-chi. His memorial to the emperor was in copper cash. Tax-payers and grain-tribute
debated among senior officials all over the contributors who had to remit in silver ingots
country in 1836-38. The focus of the debate were hard hit. Commerce was crippled, and

shifted to the memorial of Huang Chueh-tsu, the imperial revenue dwindled. Troops were
Director of Reception for Foreign Missions, rendered ineffective by opium in the suppres-
which was dated June 1838. Huang accused sion of riots and rebellions. The entire country
Hsu of treason, and proposed a vigorous was on the road of rapid decline. Naturally,

implementation of the century-old opium the emperor was worried and agitated. He
prohibition. This marked the launching of an threw his weight on the side of the hard-liners
anti-opium campaign in China. and quietened the demand for legalization by
demoting Hsu Nai-chi. Next, he appointed Lin
’
Tse-hsu, in 1839, as Imperial Commissioner
A WAR ON OPIUM with extraordinary authority to go to Canton
to eradicate the opium scourge.
Emperor Tao-kuang’s strong sentiment against Dr. William Jardien, the ’merchant prince’,
opium, Huang Chueh-tsu’s counter-proposal pioneer among Britain’s ’free traders’ in
against the legalization move, and the majority China, and a leading light of the opium trade
opinion within the Manchu bureaucracy in interests, who had always been eager to
favour of a war on the opium evils, were the consign any Chinese prohibitory order to the
corollary of the intensified opium trade offen- waste-paper basket, by now realized the
sive of Britain against China. As an officer- gravity of the situation. ’I kept a vessel ready
scholar pointed out, in spite of a prolonged to send to Calcutta to stop purchases at the
peaceful and stable internal situation without first Calcutta sale’, he admitted later. He had
extraordinary natural calamity, prosperity earlier ignored the Chinese order of eviction
eluded China. Opium was the new man-made served on him ’at least a dozen times’. But he
disaster. Talented young men, the hope of the decided now to quit the scene before Commis-
future, were poisoned. They even died in sioner Lin’s arrival. Lin carried with him the
examination cells for want of timely supply of image of a tough man determined to bring
the drug. Government officials were corrupted an end to the opium traffic. This image made

by the drug, leading to inefficiency, mis- Jardine and his friends believe that Lin’s offi-
management and general social disorder cial appearance at Canton had been preceded
because of the non-enforcement of law. The by his stay in the vicinity of Canton incognito,
inflow of opium was matched by a corres- which was pure imagination.
ponding outflow of silver, which impoverished
social wealth. Worse still, the scarcity of
silver ingots created by the scramble for them CHINA WINS FIRST ROUND
by the opium importers seriously impaired the
health of China’s twin-metal-based fiscal The British opium traders had been embolden-
system. The official rate of exchange of the ed by Chinese inaction for too long to shed
two currencies, i.e. one tael of silver for 1,000 their touch-me-not attitude vIs-a-vis the
copper coins, could not be maintained. Silver Canton authorities. ’No one who had resided
prices shot up to more than 2,000 cash, lead- in China any number of years could have
ing to the devaluation of the copper currency, expected that Commissioner Lin would
and, in turn, harmed the welfare of the soldiers, have acted as he did’, said Jardine. The British
low-ranking government employees and complacence was quickly overtaken by events.
labourers who received aDownloaded
part of their income Within ten days
from chr.sagepub.com at University of Manitoba Libraries
of his arrival at Canton, Lin
on June 10, 2015
 27

Tse-hsu issued an ultimatum to the foreign when the first British officer stationing in
traders there to declare the opium stocks in China, Napier, was declined a decent
their possession in three days. The grace reception by the Canton Viceroy and died of
period passed without any response on the humiliation in 1834; on all these occasions
part of the British and other foreign opium London did not show the least remorse, or
traders. Lin, then, besieged the foreign inclination to settle scores with China. But in
factories and ordered the arrest of Lancelot 1839, although no British life was lost in the
D ent, proprietor of the second largest concern Sino-British tension, in contrast to the blood-
in opium trade, and one who had resisted most shed suffered by the Chinese at the hands of the
against the compliance with the Commis- British sailors during the naval clashes at
sioner’s order. Captain Charles Elliot, Britain’s Kowloon and Ch’uanpi, London convened a
Chief Superintendent of China Trade, rushed special debate in the Parliament in 1840, the
from Macau to Canton to discharge his duty British queen delivered an anti-China speech,
as the protector of the British subjects under and an expeditionary force was sent from
siege, who were all opium traders. The British India forthwith to teach the Chinese a lesson.
first thought that Lin would accept ’a certain
quantity’ of opium ’to satisfy the Emperor, BRITAIN ACTS
and let the ships go away with what remained’.
They were mistaken. Lin had done sufficient The crisis of 1839-40 was not merely caused by
home work to know the approximate quantity the loss of property by the British opium
which was stored at Lintin. He finally won the traders. The stoppage of opium trade meant
battle of wits and secured the surrender of the total disruption of the Britain-India-China
3,168,339 Ibs. of opium, mainly from the trade triangle which was so vital to the British
British traders. This was destroyed by him exploitation of the Indian colony. A rough
thoroughly in a well-organized and solemn estimate of the sum total of British economic
manner in twenty three days. China won the gain from various aspects of the China trade
first round of the anti-opium war. during the 1830s was to the tune of ten million
It is important to compare the reactions of pounds a year, which was equivalent of half
the British government on different occasions the India revenue. What Commissioner Lin
when trouble erupted between Britain and did at Canton amounted to depriving Britain
China. On all previous occasions when James of an invisible colony half of India’s worth.
Flint, a supercargo of the East India Com- Such a grave consequence called for action.
pany, was jailed by the Canton government for Modern scholars generally date the Opium
several years from 1759 onwards; or when a War from 1839, which shows a confusion of
British gunner of the Lady Hughes was chronology. It emerges from our study that
strangled by Chinese justice in 1784; or the tension area of opium trade generated two
when Peking branded Britain a ’tributary wars between Britain and China. The first
state’ in 1793; or when Drury ingloriously war was waged by the Chinese against the

withdrew from Macau with the additional opium trade, which dragged on, after the
loss of the life of a British sailor in 1808; destruction of the opium surrendered, for
or when the British ambassador, Amherst, about a year till the arrival of the British
was rudely ordered out of Peking without expeditionary forces in June 1840. This anti-
granting a royal audience by the Chinese opium war was not one fought between two
emperor in 1816; or when a respectable governments. The Chinese had only declared
English lady, Mrs. Baynes, was forced out of war on the opium trade, but not on Britain.

Canton, as if she were a demon in 1830; or Only the subjects of two countries, Britain
Downloaded from chr.sagepub.com at University of Manitoba Libraries on June 10, 2015
28

and the U.S.A., were primarily involved in the the ancient war cries of ’crusade’ and ’jihad’
opium traffic. The two groups had a united which only served to invest socio-economic
front only up to the surrender of the opium. conflicts with a higher purpose. There was no
Afterwards, the U.S. opium traders relented. war in
history fought purely for an ideological
They witnessed the destruction of the drug. cause. Strangely, Britain, who never had a
They pledged not to ship any opium to China better international image during the 18th and
in future. They continued their trade with l9th centuries than that of a ’Nation of Shop-
China throughout, even during the Opium keepers’ is now painted as a cultural crusader
War. The British group led by the government against the moribund civilization of Confu-
official, Captain Elliot, took up Commissioner cianism. However respectable the British
Lin’s challenge, and refused to yield further cultural cause was in the Chinese context, it
after the surrender of their opium. They did stunk once it was mixed with opium. The 1840
not sign the bond pledging discontinuation of war was thus described by a British statesman,

the opium trade. They withdrew from Canton William Edward Gladstone, as the most
and boycotted the legal trade. Commissioner ’unjust in its origin’, and an unprecedented
Lin pressed on, and pursued the British at act ’calculated to cover’ Britain ’with perma-
Macau after the Lin Wei-hsi tragedy. The nent disgrace’. Those who advocate the
British took flight from Macau to take refuge cultural conflict theory have never tried to
on board the opium ships. Commissioner Lin argue with Gladstone to remove the stigma of
was still on the offensive by cutting off supplies this war.
of provisions to the British and threatened to Dr. Hsin-pao Chang’s conviction that the
poison the spring water which could kill the basic cause of the conflict was the British
British on the coastal islands. This sparked commercial expansion versus the Chinese
off naval clashes. All this formed the process containment of it, prompts him to say that the
of the anti-opium war, with Elliot and his opium trade was but ’an indispensable
British friends keeping alive the resistance vehicle’ for facilitating British commercial
against Lin Tse-hsu’s ambition of eradicating expansion, which might have been substituted
the opium traffic. by molasses or rice. Whatever the commodity
Britain’s war against China was virtually involved, the war was an inevitability, whether
declared by Queen Victoria on 16 January it is known as the Opium War or Molasses
1840. On 20 February Admiral George Elliot War or Rice War. By using his mathematical
was appointed British Envoy Extraordinary skills, Dr. Chang has converted the Opium
to lead the British expedition. The British war into an X-war, with the algebraic X
war against China could not have begun standing for any commodity which Britain
earlier than these two dates. This British war might have chosen as an ’indispensable
was the sequel of the Chinese war, and was vehicle’ for her inevitable commercial expan-
launched to defeat the Chinese aim. It can, sion vis-a-vis China. If history as an academic
thus, be best described as an anti-anti-opium subject can be replaced by mathematics, we
war. But the term seems clumsy. The two can have no quarrel with Dr. Chang’s formula.

negatives cancel each other out. To call it the In the present stage of advancement of
Opium War is most appropriate. historical studies, the maxim that history is
not written with ifs and buts still holds
good. There is a basic mistake in Dr. Chang’s
THE THEORY OF CULTURAL CONFLICT analysis of first creating an imaginary force of
‘British commercial expansion’ without taking
The theory of cultural conflict reminds us of into consideration the opium trade reality in
Downloaded from chr.sagepub.com at University of Manitoba Libraries on June 10, 2015
 29

the context of the triangular relationship for resisting the rude intrusion of the Brave
between Britain, India and China, and, then, New World into China, he voiced the following
treating opium as a free variable to fit into sentiments:
the imaginary framework. Besides, no student
of economic history can treat opium as an
Oh, great and vast continent
ordinary commodity like molasses and rice. Surrounded by tiny seas.
The X-war interpretation of Chinese history
is unacceptable.
I lon; to ride osr the Triton, -

And cruise the blue expanse.

To sum up, there is no going back from the
Here, in this abandonment,
proposition of war-due-to-opium conceived I wear no ceremonial robe.
by the authors of the term ’Opium War’ How I wish to blow my flute, .

among whom was Karl Marx. As the American Arrd make my strong feeling.s
historian, S.W. Williams, has truly remarked, ’
,

the 1840 war will always be looked upon ’by

Resounding the gigantic desert i
the candid historian and known as the Opium
War’. It shall not go down in history as the China’s strong feelings against the Brave
dawn of the modern era in China, but shall New World were continuously and stridently
remain an eternal example of the extent of blared by the Taiping rebels in 1850-63, by
degeneration of moral culture which the un- the Boxers in 1899-1900, by Dr. Sun Yat-sen’s
ending quest for international exploitation revolutionary followers, and by the modern
can lead to, viz. using gunboats to force disciples of Marx and Lenin. The unfulfilled
another nation to consume opium. Beneath desire of Lin Tse-hsu haunted the Chinese
the veneer of a cultural conflict, we see the patriots for exactly a century. It was on
black hand of the ’Nation of Shopkeepers’ I October 1949, when Mao Tse-tung declared
to create a ’Nation of Opium-smokers’ in East from the ramparts of the Gate of Heavenly
Asia. Peace that ’the Chinese people have stood up’,
When the anti-opium hero, Lin Tse-hsu, that concluded the fierce struggle between
was dismissed and exiled to the Gobi desert China and the Brave New World.

Downloaded from chr.sagepub.com at University of Manitoba Libraries on June 10, 2015