dispensation. We wish, in the following remarks, to draw attention to a case of considerable hardship and to several instances of peculiar misappropriation of the public money. Whether or not the bare merits of a case, unaided by interest, are sufficient to insure the consideration of Government, is a question which, we think, is sufficiently disposed of by the refusal to grant a pension to the family of the late Mr. THOM. This gentleman, our readers will recollect, was employed by the British Government for many years in China, during the period of which service he is represented to have so conducted himself as to obtain the approbation of his employers. A more zealous servant, it is said, could not be found among official employés, and his efficiency and capability are readily acknowledged. In the discharge of his duties he regarded not his personal safety, and he fell a victim to the climate of China. One would surely think that such a case as this would be considered sufficient to constitute a claim on the good-feeling of Government; but such unhappily is not the fact, and the family of a deserving public officer, who died in the service of his country, is left neglected and in penury. Now, when cases like this are passed over, it cannot but be inferred that those which receive the favourable notice of the Government must possess claims of peculiar strength. Doubtless they who are fortunate enough to get their names on the list of Government pensioners are men who deserve all they get and a great deal more. Of course, the cases where rewards have been given are perfectly irresistible; the only debateable ground being the amount of the draft upon the public benevolence. Some might perhaps think 3001., some 2007., and some 100l. a year proper sums in any particular case, but in every case where a pension is granted all would agree that, to some extent at least, it was deserved. This is a conclusion imperatively pressed upon the mind by the treatment of the family of Mr. THOM. For the satisfaction of the reader we will endeavour to illustrate its soundness by quoting the names of two or three persons who are in the enjoyment of pensionary allowances from Government. And first, as the recipient of the largest amount, we put forward the Rev. THEOBALD MATHEW, commonly called FATHEr MaTHEW. We confess that when we heard that a pension had been granted to this person, we began to tremble for the sanity of those by whom these matters are settled. A pension to FATHER MATHEW!! Why, what in the name of every humbug, from the obsolete delusions of the heathen mythology to the common-place escapades of JOSEPH ADY in our own day-what has FATHER MATTHEW done to deserve a pension? Is he eminent in learning, in art, or in science? Being charitably disposed, we are willing to believe that he is, for, as far as we know, no one has ever said that he is not. But yet, looking at the vast number of eminent and able men who descend to their graves unpensioned, we cannot but doubt whether his abilities and acquirements are such as entitle their possessor to any special mark of favour. Is the Padre illustrious as a public benefactor? Has he exhausted his means and impoverished himself in advancing any good work? Scarcely, we think; for the only work, good or bad, that we ever heard of his doing, was going about the country administering a certain thing called a tee-total pledge to as many fools as could be found gullible enough to take it and pay a shilling (for this, like oaths more legally imposed, was to be paid for)—and we confess, with shame, that the number was far greater than could have been influenced by any but a mountebank. The cost of traping about the country in search of asses, with a train of noodles at his heels, may have been considerable, and if the reverend water-drinker furnished the funds, he had need to have had a good fortune to begin with. But then he had his whistle for his money. He had the admiration of the gaping crowds who swallowed his pledge while he took their shillings. We know nothing of the Padre's circumstances, but we will suppose that when he took up the trade of teetotalling he was possessed of a beautiful estate of many thousand acres of bog, which has all disappeared under the flood of water with which he has deluged the country. Be it so-grant that the Padre has ruined himself if he were in a condition to render such a process possible-grant that the Padre has ruined himself by dabbling in cold water-what is that to the British public? Why must JOHN BULL be called upon to fill the Padre's pockets? Is the Government to offer a premium to those who squander their means away in folly? If so, we can recommend some very deserving objects who at present sojourn within a heavy-looking palace, situate in that delightful county, Surrey. We must remind our readers that our reasoning on this point is hypothetical. We do not know that the Padre started in life with any thing of his own, but we recollect that he did not give the pledge, but sold it. The usual price for administering the pledge, as has already been noticed, was one shilling, and a dear bargain it was; but that is beside the question. There is, however, something to be said quite pertinent to it: from the many thousands who swallowed the pledge and the water, and paid a shilling a head for it, a good round sum must have been collected, to say nothing of the amount obtained from the superior pledgers, who paid half-a-crown. What, then, has become of all this money? If any account has ever been rendered of its application, we have been so unfortunate as to miss seeing it. And surely it would be but fitting that the appropriation of these vast sums should be stated, now that the Padre has become a burden on this already overburdened country. We have admitted that the expenses of his journeyings to and fro on the face of the earth must have cost him something, but we suspect the charge was unusually small, for wherever he went he met with rich worshippers, who opened their houses to him freely, received him graciously, and entertained him gratuitously. Lords, ladies, and bishops, all delighted to honour the gentle Padre, perhaps on the principle that "The pleasure is as great, Of being cheated as to cheat." Yet perhaps the lordly entertainers of the Padre were not cheated; and for the purpose of elucidating this matter, we should like to be informed whether sherry and such-like stimulants were excluded from the episcopal table at Norwich while the Padre was the bishop's guest. We had nearly forgotten the portraits as a source of revenue. Whereever the Padre was at work, his attendants were busy in the crowd enticing money out of the pockets of his silly hearers for a "porthrait uf his riverence." From all these circumstances we must conclude, till better informed, that the Rev. Padre MATHEW, So far from losing one farthing by teetotalism, must have gained very considerably, and so he gets a pension. Truly, the honest, the worthy, and the deserving may die in want, scorned and neglected, but he who is a proficient in any of the arts of quackery shall live in wealth and luxury, petted, patronised, and pensioned. If Government is prepared to reward trickery and shamming, let some of the gentlemen who used to frequent Capel Court be admitted to partake of its bounty. Why pass over the poor stags? Many of them are in great straits, and we really think that an experimentalist on human gullibility, who pockets a few discreditable pence by "rigging the market," a far more respectable character than he who comes forth arrayed in the solemn garb of religion to give currency to a monstrous humbug. And so much for the Padre. Come we next to a very different person, but one scarcely less fortunate-J. R. M'CULLOCH, Esq. This gentleman, our readers will recollect, is a statist and political economist, who has obtained considerable reputation by his published works. Some time back, the gentleman at the head of her Majesty's Stationary Office was induced to retire, report says, very unwillingly. It was natural to suppose that the officer next in seniority would be appointed to the vacant office; but her Majesty's Government did not adopt that course. Instead of the second being elevated to the first seat, and a general rise taking place throughout the office, the gentleman of whom we are speaking-who we believe had never been in the department at all-vaulted at once into the chief place. Without considering the injustice of passing over the stronger claims of so many others, we might be forgiven for asking, was Mr. M'CULLOCH as fit to fill the office as some of those who had passed their lives in the department, and had worked their way upwards, in the hope of obtaining the prize? Mr. M'CULLOCH has certainly had a good deal to do with paper in his time, and has covered a very considerable quantity with fruits of his researches and calculations, yet his knowledge of stationery was perhaps scarcely of the nature required in the office to which he was appointed. He might know the exact population of the Russian empire, with all particulars as to age, sex, occupation, &c., and yet not be a good judge of Bath post, foolscap, or demy. We do not, of course, impute to Mr. M'CULLOCH a deficient knowledge of the duties of his office-far from it; he is a man of business, and would readily acquire facility in the performance of any duties. But at the time of his appointment he could not be so well qualified for the office as were some of those whom he found placed under him. There is an old saying, that "misfortunes never come singly;" and it seems that with some men good luck never comes in single blessedness. Not content with giving Mr. M'CULLOCH a very lucrative office, Government determines to reconcile him to it by a pension of 2001. a year. Now 2007. a year is, without doubt, a very nice addition to any moderate man's income, and we can scarcely blame the eminent statist for accepting it. If a beneficent Government should throw in our way a similar bonus, we are not positive that we should have the virtue to refuse it; but then we are not at the head of her Majesty's Stationery Office; and should Lord JOHN RUSSELL be pleased to address to us one of those agreeable notes which he can write, intimating that such a sum annually is at our service, we shall, out of pure respect to his lordship, give the subject our earliest and fullest consideration. But to return; however acceptable such a grant might be to Mr. M'CULLOCH, however blameless he might be in taking it, the propriety of bestowing it is not obvious. The money which is thus applied might surely have been given to some one to whom the sum of 2001. a year might furnish the means, which would otherwise be wanting, of living in respectability and comfort. Mr. M'CULLOCH'S services had been fully recognised and amply compensated in the appointment bestowed on him. With respect to this case, we fear that there is but one word applicable to it, and that is "job." Even Mr. HUME, whose political sympathies are decidedly with Mr. M'CULLOCH, cries out against it. A third instance of the misapplication of a pension is furnished in the person of a fashionable poet, ALFRED TennySON, Esq. We all know that it is treason to ask a lady about the register of her birth, but we believe that it is not considered so culpable to speak of the age of a gentleman; therefore we presume that we shall incur no guilt in stating our belief that Mr. TENNYSON has not yet numbered years enough to entitle him to the privileges of even middle age. Yet he has for some time past been in the receipt of 2001. a year from the Government. Now it does seem to us that the grant of a pension to Mr. TENNYSON is a little premature. At his age the faculties of the mind are strong and vigorous (that is, in those persons whose faculties ever attain such a state); the exercise of them is not wearisome, and their vigour may be expected for a time to increase rather than to diminish. The gentle poet might therefore, we think, have been suffered to wait a little before he was pensioned. He writes verses which ladies love to quote, and he is blest with a sweetly romantic name,—a name that looks so nice upon paper, and sounds so charmingly, especially when breathed by lovely lips; yet still we cannot help exclaiming - Happy ALFRED! thus at the very outset of life to meet with patrons to reward your merits with a pension. If, while but a sucking poet, you are worth two hundred pounds a year, what sum will be a fit offering when you shall attain your poetic manhood? Surely a thousand pounds a year will scarcely be too much! And now for a contrast. A very young man, who has written what his friends please to consider very pretty verses, gets 2001. a year. A poet in the vale of years, one approaching to that age which both sacred authority and human experience fix as the ordinary limit of even a long life,—a man whose genius, as compared with that of the poetic pensioner, is as the midday sun to the glimmer of a rushlight, who has done more than any living man to rescue the dramatic literature of our age from the disgraceful state into which it fell during the age immediately preceding our own,-one justly ranked among the highest of the literary luminaries of our timehe, too, is thought worthy of a pension, and most justly; but of what amount? "Tell it ye winds, that all the world may hear." SHERIDAN KNOWLES's genius is appraised by her Majesty's ministers at 100l. per annum! ALFRED TENNYSON, 2001. SHERIDAN KNOWLES, 1007.!!! Reader, ponder well on this. We ask, in solemn earnestness, whether, while the Padre is receiving 300l., Mr. M'CULLOCH 200l., and Mr. ALFRED TENNYSON 2001., it were not an insult to offer the miserable sum of 100l. to such a man as SHERIDAN KNOWLES? We rely confidently on the assent of all who can appreciate true poetry, and desire to nurture and reward real genius. Mr. KNOWLES is now considerably past the meridian of his days, and it is to be feared that his works have not been so productive of solid advantage to the author as could be wished. But neither age nor circumstances have depressed his spirit. He most properly spurned the wretched gift insultingly tendered to him; and, we trust, that such an affront will never again be offered to any member of the literary profession, who has so just a claim on public gratitude as Mr. KNOWLES. Another pensioner of 2001. a year, the Rev. S. T. BLOOMFIELD, claims a word from us. Dr. BLOOMFIELD is a sound scholar, and a laborious and careful critic; an estimable man, and an ornament to his profession; but we would suggest that the proper mode of rewarding his merits is by the bestowal of Church preferment. If that which he possesses be not equal to his deserts, the Crown has abundant means of supplying the deficiency. Might he not have made as good a Dean of Westminster as the present possessor of that dignity? In our judgment, proficiency in the criticism of the Greek Testament is quite as good a qualification for ecclesiastical office as an intimate acquaintance with quartz and conglomerate and an aptitude for knocking rocks to pieces with a hammer. But while Dr. BLOOMFIELD'S name remains on the pension list, he stands in the way of some deserving persons for whom no provision can be made in any other mode. One case more and we have done. A name appears on the Pension List, which, when we saw, we could scarcely believe the evidence of our eyes. We will not mention it, because it is just possible (though the name is a very uncommon one) that the pensioner may not be the person we suspect. If, however, our suspicion be right, our readers will partake of our astonishment when we tell them that the person to whom we refer is a socialist! Now we submit that the cases which we have quoted, taken at random as they are, bear us out in the assertion that the pension fund of Government is grossly abused. If such cases as at least one or two of the above should be multiplied, it will become a disgrace to be on the List, and a pension will be but another name for a discreditable exercise of patronage. We trust, however, that such instances will become every day more and more rare, to the benefit of those who have a really valid claim on the generosity of Government. As a relief to the above facts, we may mention that Lord JOHN RUSSELL has granted an additional pension of 50l. a year to each of the daughters of the late General M'CASKILL. A better bestowed grant was never made, and it contains a silent and just rebuke to the parsimony of the late Premier. LEIGH HUNT has had 2001. a year bestowed on him, and this will be generally approved. Without pledging ourselves to all his opinions, or to an unqualified admiration of all he has written, we may observe, that he has laboured in the literary field for a long series of years, contributing to the amusement of many, but deriving little benefit to himself. His political services naturally recommended him to the present dispenser of the bounty of the Crown, but we think the very pointed notice taken of them in the letter announcing the grant was not in the best taste. Mr. HUNT suffered in the cause of his party-most unjustly, we think; but while it was remembered that his sufferings were caused by the publication of what was deemed a libel in the palmy days of ex officio prosecutions, when Sir VICARY GIBBS did his best to establish his claim to the title, somewhat uncourteously bestowed on the Attorney-General, of Diabolus Regis, it should not have been forgotten that the object of the alleged libel, GEORGE the FOURTH, was the uncle of the illustrious lady to whom the veteran writer is indebted for the enjoyment of comfort in his old age. 'Mr. GEORGE BURGESS, another literary veteran, also has a pension. This too is well bestowed, and we are glad to find room for praise as well as for blame. Mr. BURGESS is a very distinguished scholar, and as scholarship is seldom the road to wealth, we always rejoice to find an instance in which its claims are not overlooked by those who have the means of rewarding it. And now, having freely and conscientiously distributed both censure and applause, let us return to the point from which we set out, and ask, will not the Government, even at this late period, make amends for the error which it has committed in refusing to entertain the claims established by so valuable a servant as Mr. THOM? OUR COMMERCIAL PROSPECTS IN CHINA. THE following is a summary of the Report of the Committee appointed by the House of Commons to inquire into the commercial relations between this country and China. The document is too lengthy to be given in extenso. The Report begins by stating, on undoubted evidence, that the trade with that country (China) has been for some time in a very unsatisfactory position, and that the result of our extended intercourse has by no means realized the just expectations which had been founded on a freer access to so magnificent a market." The exports of cotton manufactures declined between 1845-46 from £1,735,141 to £1,246,518 in value; those of woollens during the same period from £539,223 to £439,668, as will be seen from the following table, which shews the exports to China since 1843: : On a great proportion of the trade taken both ways-i.e. on the manufactures sent out and the tea brought home in payment-for 1846, the loss was as much as from 35 to 40 per cent., in consequence of which, some manufacturers have abandoned the trade, and the tea sent home has been forwarded on Chinese account, the English merchants not daring to risk the venture. The difficulties of the trade, it is stated, do not arise from a want of demand in China, nor from an increased competition of foreign nations, but solely from a difficulty in providing a return. The bulk of the Chinese commercial transactions are with England, British India, and the United States. The following tables will shew the value of the trade with the respective countries. Imports into China, 1845: From all countries .. } Drs. 43,390,784 16,073,682 2,909,669 23,000,000 41,983,351 1,407,433* Leaving a value for all other countries of • The amount for all other countries is stated in the Report at Drs.1,413,433, but this is clearly an error in calculation.-ED. The returns for 1846 are not complete, but it is expected that they will shew the same results. From England, China buys largely of manufactured goods. From the United States, the same articles, to the amount of £170,000. From British India, the chief articles are opium and cotton wool, to a very large amount. The payment for this large import is effected by tea, silk, and silver. Sugar, and Chinese grass, as a substitute for hemp, are expected be become hereafter of some importance as articles of export from China. The unrecognized nature of the opium trade‡ requiring an immediate settlement of accounts, absorbs the silver, to the amount, according to a good authority,§ of £2,000,000. This, of course, greatly inconveniences all other branches of commerce. Of tea and silk, England and the United States are nearly the sole consumers, and consequently the trade between those two countries and a civilized empire of 300,000,000 people is, in effect, limited by the extent to which the former are willing or able to take those articles. The silk trade is steadily on the increase, and as it is subject to no heavy restrictions in England or America, and as the access now opened to the port of Shanghai brings us in closer communion with the silk districts, it is hoped the present good prospects will continue. The value of the exports of this article to England in 1846 was £1,211,249. || To an increased consumption of tea, however, the Report goes on to state, must we look for the means of maintaining, still more of extending, our trade with China. Such an increase can only be obtained by a reduction in the price, unless we wait for the increase dependent on the augmentation of the number of the population. If a reduction on the first cost, which ranges, on the qualities in most demand, from 8d. to 10d. in the ports of China, could be effected, it would advantage the merchant, but not the consumer. To effect any advantage to the latter body, the Committee state that the only means is to reduce the duty, now about 200 per cent. on the average qualities of tea, and 350 on the worse sorts. This change the Committee recommend as leading to promote the increased use of this beverage as a "substitute for intoxicating liquors," and urge it as an act of justice to the Chinese, who tax our goods lightly, while we impose a very heavy duty on theirs imported into this country. The only difficulty, the Report states, in the way of a reduction of the duty on tea, is the effect it might have on the Exchequer. The following table exhibits the amount, value, &c. of tea imported into this country in the years specified : S. d. lb. £. s. d. £. s. d. In 1814-15 3 8 19,224,154 3,570,892 11 113,428,236 8 4 1831-32 22 31,458,409 3,509,834 13 7** 3,509,834 13 7 1846 1 4 46,728,208 3,115,213 17 45,110,897 15 9†† Taking the dollar at 4s. 4d. (the exchange allowed by the Committee in their calculation), the total amount in English coinage of imports into China, 1845, will be £9,401,336. 10s. 8d., and of exports, 8,001,716. 13s. 4d. Two errors occur in this part of the Report. The Committee state that "the imports into China, 1845, from all countries, were Drs. 20,390,784-£9,461,336," whereas it is clear that, in reducing the amount in dollars to English currency, the sum of Drs. 23,000,000, subsequently mentioned as the product of the opium sales, was included. Thus the entire imports will be as stated in the text, Drs. 43,390,784-9,401,336. 10s. 8d. The other error is in stating the amount of exports at 8,001,926, English money, instead of £8,001,716.-ED. The Report erroneously states the total of the exports to England, British India, and America, at Drs. 34,959,093, and the total for all other countries at Drs. 1,972,875.-ED. The following table, from Martin's China, Part III. p. 194, will shew the the state of this branch of commerce in the ten years, 1835-45. The fluctuation in prices is remarkable: According to the above, the value of opium for 1841-45, at 2s. per rupee, was £2,439.429. 48.-ED. § Mr. McGregor, British Consul at Canton.-Report. Returns for Trade, 1846, pp. 8-48-Report. The highest duty in China is 10 per cent.; the average 5 to 7.-Report. The fact of the cost and duty being exactly the same, seems to indicate a mistake. Probably the cost is wrongly stated, as Martin (China, Part. III. P. 152), gives the duty at nearly the same amount as the text, viz. £3,509,839.ED. Martin, quoting from Messrs. Thompson's Circular, gives the duty for 1846 at £5,199,000,-ED. Since 1821, the duty on coffee has been reduced from 1s. to 4d., and that on cocoa from 1s. to 2d. per pound. The increase in the consumption of the former article since the period above mentioned has been about 500 per cent., that of cocoa about 1,000, and of tea about 130. The duty on tea, the Report states, was enhanced during this period.* The following tables will explain this part of the subject:— CONSUMPTION OF COFFEE. The consumption of tea per head in the Isle of Man, is 21b. 10oz.; in Jersey and Guernsey, 4lb. 4oz. ; and in Newfoundland and Australia, a very considerably larger proportion. An objection is, however, urged to a reduction of the duty on tea, in the assertion that the Chinese grower and the merchant will be the only benefited parties, as the effect of the lowering of the duty would be, according to the opinion of the committee, to increase the demand. The large demand on the Chinese markets would consequently, it was thought, enhance the value of the article, and increase the expense to the merchant. To meet this objection, the report states that the supply would always be equal to, if not greater than, the demand. In support of this assertion, reference is made to the increased demand for tea for some years past, and to the fact, that the market has never been drained, but that a surplus has always been left. The increased consumption of sugar, the report states, would tend to make up for any loss to the treasury by a reduction of the tea duties. S On the nature of the duty, the committee are of opinion that a single fixed rate is the best, and earnestly recommend to the house a consideration of the whole subject. The provisions of the treaty effected by Sir H. Pottinger appear to have been faithfully carried out, except at Canton, and In 1820, the duty on tea was as follows: if sold at above 2s. per lb. £100 per cent. ad valorem, if sold at or under 2s. per lb. £96 per cent. ad valorem This continued until 1834, when the following rates were substitued: bohea 1s. 6d. per lb., congou, twankay, hyson skin, orange pekoe and campoi, 2s. 2d. ; other sorts, 3s. In 1836, a fixed duty was imposed of 2s. id. per lb. on all sorts; this was raised, in 1840, to 2s. 21d. per lb.-Martin ut supra.-ED. The consumption per head of coffee is taken on the population of England alone, that of tea on the population of the United Kingdom.- Report. Of course these are ad valorem duties. The British Consul observes Despatch, Feb. 15, 1847), "How long the Chinese will be able to sustain this continual drain (i.e, of £2,000,000 for opium, noticed above) of the precious metals, is impossible to determine; but the fact being now well established, that the export of tea to England cannot be increased under the present system of duties, it is not difficult to foresee that, unless a new opening be found for a larger consumption of Chinese exports in our markets, a gradual reduction must take place either in the quan tity or the prices of our imports into China. The China trade being essentially a direct barter trade, it is obvious that, unless means can be found to take from the Chinese a larger amount of the principal export, tea, there seems but a limited prospect of deriving for the British manufacturing interests all those advantages which the new position we hold in the country, consequent on the late war, must lead them to expect."-Report. there the difficulties that have arisen, seem to be more attributable to the turbulent character of the populace, and the weakness of a remote government, than to any ill-will or want of faith on the part of the authorities. Shanghai, from its position, being adjacent to the richest districts of the empire, and especially to those producing the most valuable export articles, promises to rival Canton. It furnished 16,000 out of the 20,000 bales of silk, and 10,000,000 out of the 57,000,000 lbs. of tea which were required for the British markets last year. Amoy purchases opium and British goods to the amount of 500,000 dollars, paying almost entirely in silver. The trade at Ningpo and Foochowfoo is but trifling; at the latter place, however, the opium trade flourishes with its usual demoralizing influences on the people, and embarrassing effects on the monetary system. Were the trade legalized, the latter of the two evils, it is asserted, would be diminished. The navigation of the China seas seems to be freer from difficulties than formerly; Captain Collinson has finished some good charts of these seas. A few beacons, buoys, and moorings, are recommended at the approaches to Shanghai and Foochowfoo. A regular post-office communication between Hong Kong and Canton is also recommended. With reference to the position and prospects of Hong Kong, the report says: "From Hong Kong we cannot be said to have derived directly much commercial advantage, nor indeed does it seem likely, by its position, to become the seat of an extended commerce. It has no considerable population of its own to feed and clothe, and has no right to expect to draw away the established trade of the populous town and provinces of Canton, to which it is adjacent. From the only traffic for which it is fitted, that of a depôt for the neighbouring coasts, it is in a great degree debarred (except in regard to the five ports), by treaties which stipulate distinctly for the observance of the restriction. In addition, however, to these natural and necessary disadvantages, it appears to have laboured under others, created by a system of monopolies and forms, and petty regulations peculiarly unsuited to its position, and prejudicial to its progress. These seem to have arisen partly from an attempt to struggle with the difficulties in the way of establishing order and security in the midst of the vagabond and piratical population which frequent its waters and infests its coasts, and partly from a desire to raise a revenue in the island, in some degree adequate to the maintenance of its civil government. To this latter object, however, we think it unwise to sacrifice the real interests of the settlement, which can only prosper under the greatest amount of freedom of intercourse and traffic which is consistent with the engagement of treaties and internal order; nor do we think it right that the burden of maintaining that which is rather a post for general influence, and the protection of the general trade in the China seas, than a colony in the ordinary sense, should be thrown in any great degree upon the merchants or other persons who may be resident upon it." A revision of the whole system is recommended, as also of the establishment of the settlement, which is stated to be on a footing of needless expense.' * The following tables, compiled from the Parliamentary estimates, will bear out the just censure passed by the Committee:EXPENSES, 1847-48, HONG-KONG (EXCLUSIVE OF CONSULAR ESTAB.) The Governor is responsible to two authorities at home, to the Colonial office, as governor of a colony, and to the Foreign office, as representative of the Crown at a foreign court, and superintendent of trade. The inconvenience arising hence is noticed, and a more simple relation advised. A short code is recommended to be drawn up to supersede the general reference to the English laws, "as far as they are applicable to the case," which in the colony is the sole guidance, and that drafts of new laws should be published for three or six months before taking effect, as in India. A share of the government should also be given to the British residents, by some system of municipal administration. A good court of Review for the decision of the Consular Courts is recommended. The report suggests that facilities should be given to the acquisition of the native language, especially among the consular officers. The transit duties are recommended to the attention of the officials. A petition was referred to the committee, complaining that the land sales had been effected for seventy-five years only, instead of for a more advanced period, as was originally held out to the purchaser. It is stated that there was some ground for such a complaint, but that no charge has been sustained against the public officers engaged in the transaction. A petition was also presented, complaining of the want of vigour on the part of the governor, in protecting the interests of British subjects in their intercourse with the Chinese. The committee do not offer any opinion on the subject. SIR GEORGE POLLOCK, G. C. B. The following is the official letter announcing the recent grant of an annuity from the East-India Company to Sir George Pollock, and the answer of that distinguished officer: No. I.-From J. C. Melvill, Esq., to Major-General Sir East-India House, July 27, 1847. Sir, I have the honour to acquaint you that the attention of the Court of Directors of the East-India Company having been called by the Chairman to your arrival in England, the Court, adverting to the eminent services by which you have distinguished yourself, have resolved that, as a special mark of the sense which they entertain of the foresight, judgment, decision, and energetic resolution evinced by you whilst in command of the forces at Peshawur, during your brilliant and successful operations in the Khyber Pass for the relief 200 0 0 5,000 0 0 Salaries: 27,025 10 0 IN CHINA. Colonial Secretary and Auditor's de partment Expenses. £. s. d. L. s. d. Colonial Treasurer's department 1,825 0 8000 Colonial establishments, Hong-Kong Consular establishments in China 59,000 0 0 27,025 10 0 Surveyor-General and Civil Engi neer's department 11 Registrar-General's department 4 Harbour-Master and Marine Magis 2,620 0 0 6,955 0 0 Amount to be contributed by the East-India Company for one year ending 31st March, 1846* 165 5,386 0 0 36,000 0 0 Medical department 2 512 10 0 33,922 1 8 We recommend the above tables to the serious attention of our readers. It does appear monstrous that it should be necessary, in order to keep possession of a miserable, barren, death-dealing rock in the China seas, to maintain an establishment of 274 persons for civil purposes, entirely omitting the military forces, and at an expense for the civil establishment alone of £59,000. The total expenses of civil and consular establishment in China are £86,000 (in round numbers), of which sum £50,000 is furnished directly from the Home Government. The total number of persons in the employ of the British Government in China is 325.-ED. Total |