CHAPTER XIV. THE WAR OF 1860. THE events connected with this diplomatic struggle are so graphically illustrative of the attitude of the Chinese towards foreigners that they are worth recounting. By the treaty of 1842, the additional ports of Amoy, Foochow, Ning-po, and Shanghai were declared open to trade. This concession, it was understood, implied also the right of foreigners to go in and out of the cities. At all these ports this privilege was fully accorded, but at Canton it was peremptorily withheld. In China, as in all Eastern countries, the exclusion of foreigners from the ordinary rights belonging to the meanest of the natives is naturally regarded as evidence of inferiority. For us to accept such a position is to court insult and outrage. One effect of the treatment thus accorded to us at Canton was to imperil the life of any Englishman who dared to wander beyond the confines of the settlement. In 1847 a small party of Englishmen ventured as far as Fatshan, a city some miles from Canton, and were there set upon by the inhabitants, from whose hands they barely escaped with their lives. Sir John Davis, who was then Governor of Hong Kong, recognizing the danger of the position, determined to make a demonstration before Canton, and to demand the concession of the right to enter the walls of the town. Keying, the Governor-General of Canton, being quite unprepared for this action, was taken by surprise when, as he stated in his memorial on the subject to the emperor, * "Davis, the chief of the barbarians, with three steam vessels and upwards of twenty lorchas and boats, and a thousand and odd soldiers, came suddenly into the Canton river, and anchored off the thirteen hongs." He still refused, however, to receive Sir John Davis within the walls, but agreed to an interview at the foreign settlement, when, "having first reproved him for the guilt of breaking the treaty, he next inquired his reason for taking the field. ... His language," continued Keying, "was wrathful in the extreme, and, although after being repeatedly shown the right path he consented to let the Fatshan affair remain where it was, he continued obstinately bent upon the admission into the city. The desire of the barbarians to be admitted into the city proceeds," Keying was good enough to say, "from no other motive than that they consider it an honour to enter the official residencies, and visit the authorities."† Though such were the sentiments with which Keying regarded the demand, he yet thought it prudent to agree that the city should be opened to foreigners at the expiration of two years (1849). The comment passed by Keying's imperial master on these proceedings was condemnatory through"When he (Keying) was at Canton," wrote out. * Wade, "State of China, 1850-51" (privately printed). his majesty, "he did nothing but oppress the people to gratify the barbarians, never looking to the interests of the state. This was shown plainly in the discussion regarding their entry into the city. On the one hand he wronged the divine principle of justice; on the other he outraged their feelings till he all but occasioned hostilities."* With a foolish vanity which must be unintelligible to all those who are unacquainted with the feasts of adulation which are daily laid before his majesty, the emperor went on to say that, when summoned to an audience, Keying had spoken of the English barbarians, stating how much they were to be dreaded, and what need there would be for conciliating them should any difficulty present itself. He thought to deceive us,' ," adds his angered majesty, "into ignorance of his treachery, but while he strove to make sure of his office and emoluments, the longer he declaimed the more glaring appeared his loss of all principle. His speech was as the raving of a mad dog; he was even less an object of pity."† The history of all our negotiations with the Chinese goes to show that, when driven into a corner, they invariably yield on paper the concessions demanded of them. This they do, in nine cases out of ten, to pacify the barbarian, and without the least intention of faithfully fulfilling their engagements. So it was in this case. the time approached for the execution of Keying's promise to throw open the gates of Canton, the governor - general, who had succeeded him in * Wade, "State of China, 1850-51" (privately printed). As Like office, declined to act up to the agreement. Keying, Sir John Davis had yielded place to a successor, and Sir George Bonham being unaccustomed to the Chinese and their shifty diplomacy, unfortunately allowed himself to be cajoled into yielding the point, and allowed the matter to remain in abeyance. "Not long since," wrote the Emperor Taokwang, in an edict on the subject, "the English barbarians having once more put forward their claim to be admitted into the city of Canton, the Governor-General Sü and his colleagues had addressed a number of memorials to us, describing in succession the measures adopted by them. . . . They have this day announced by an express that, with the assistance of the money which the trading community of the place, actuated by a deep sense of patriotism, had subscribed to fend off dishonour, and with the co-operation of the gentry and literati, the question of admission into the city was set at rest. . . . Thus, without injury to a soldier, without firing an arrow, the governorgeneral and governor have given peace to the people and pacified the barbarians, whom they have reduced to obedience." * The result of this concession was, as might have been anticipated, an increase in the insults offered to foreigners, and of the restrictions which were put upon foreign trade. So plain and palpable did these evils become that when Sir John Bowring succeeded Sir George Bonham as minister he was instructed carefully to watch over and insist upon the performance by the Chinese authorities of their engagements. In the course of following * Wade, "State of China, 1850-51" (privately printed). out these injunctions, Sir John Bowring became convinced that, as he expressed himself in despatch to Lord Palmerston, "the purpose of the Chinese Government is now, as it ever was, not to invite, not to facilitate, but to impede and resist the access of foreigners. It must, then, ever be borne in mind, in considering the state of our relations with these regions, that the two Governments have objects at heart which are diametrically opposed." This is as true now as it was when it was written in 1852; and the view here expressed cannot be too often pressed upon the attention of foreign Governments. Matters began once more to drift into a condition which was dangerous to the maintenance of peace, and in 1854-five years after Keying had promised that Canton should be open to foreigners - Lord Clarendon wrote urging the desirability of "free and unrestricted intercourse with Chinese officials," and of "admission into some of the cities of China, especially Canton." Acting on the spirit of this despatch Sir John Bowring wrote to the celebrated Yeh, who had in his turn succeeded Sü, to propose an interview at Yeh's official residence, within the walls of the city. To this request Yeh replied that Keying's agreement, never having been acted upon, must be considered to have lapsed; that Sir John Bowring could not therefore be admitted into the city, but that he would be willing to meet him at a warehouse outside the city walls. This attitude runs on all fours with that assumed by the emperor in his relations with the foreign ministers at Peking. Just as forty years ago we were desirous to establish |