operated so great a change as to make the same person a strenuous advocate for opening the trade in 1833, who had stated to the Committee of 1830, that opening the trade would endanger its security-increase smuggling-raise the prices of teas-lower the English character, and be productive besides of many other evils.

We regret to perceive, moreover, a disposition to indulge in defamation. We can discover no reason why, in the very first paragraph of his 'Letter,' he should take occasion to fall foul of his ancient predecessors in China, and to represent them as 'persons of the most illiterate description;' which he illustrates by an extract of a letter from them to their masters in London, written, as he says, in the year 1660, viz. :

'We feel assured that to lose a hog would be the vastest imprudence for a halfpenny-worth of tar; and we will say this, that 'tis the part of sound policy to be as cunning as a serpent and harmless as a dove, and not to forget that we reckon that the Tartars and Chinese will stumble at a straw, provided in contradiction to their interests, and will jump over a mountain where they can catch the least advantage, though it be as high as the Monument.'-Letter, p. 2.

The mountain and the Monument make a very pretty alliteration for an illiterate' writer; and afford, at the same time, a convincing proof of second sight-so convincing, that it would probably have removed all Dr. Johnson's remaining doubts on that subject. In 1660 the letter was written; in 1666 the fire of London happened; and we fancy it must have been several years after this that the tall bully' lifted its head to commemorate the event.

The next who fall under the vituperation of Mr. Marjoribanks are the Hong merchants; a class of individuals to whom, he tells us, a very unmerited reputation has generally been attached. The letter-writer has had, he says, the pain to witness some otherwise intelligent men, in evidence before parliamentary committees, giving to Hong merchants the highest praise for liberality when they are only guilty of fraud and deception;' he pronounces them to be keen and cunning-rarely, except when prompted by self-interest, just-and, perhaps, the most accomplished liars in the world." If even it were true that they are liars,-if they should partake of this unfortunate frailty of their countrymen-all we can say is, that it is the vice of the people, not of the institution. But no such charges are brought against them by Mr. Marjoribanks in his evidence; in that of others, they are highly spoken of. Mr. John Aken being asked:

Do you conceive that the Hong merchants are liberal in their dealings, or otherwise ?—Answers—' Very liberal.'

Should you place confidence in their honesty and honour?-I have every reason to believe they are honest in every respect.

'Did

'Did they adhere to those contracts which they entered into?— Yes, I scarcely ever knew of any person ever suffering by them at all.' -China Committee, 1830.

Sir James Urmston, who was long chief of the factory, in giving his testimony to the character of the highly respectable and honourable' Hong merchants, says it would be the height of injustice on my part, were I not to bear my most cordial testimony to their liberal, and, indeed, most generous conduct towards Europeans, which I have had particular opportunities of knowing.' (Observations, &c.) Dr. Morrison says their transactions have been marked with the most perfect good faith and mutual confidence.' Sir George Staunton mentions two anecdotes of two of these merchants that do honour to human nature-such an instance of high-minded self-respect and independence in the one, and disinterested generosity in the other, as are rarely met with in any country.*

But Mr. Marjoribanks has not done yet in dealing out vituperation against these most useful and, we believe, in whatever manner the trade of China may hereafter be conducted, indispensable agents. He exhibits, most unceremoniously, and we think somewhat ill-naturedly, a list of eleven of them, by name, describing some as having been menial servants, some itinerant merchants, some shop-keepers, and half-a-dozen of them as bankrupts. Mr. Marjoribanks, we presume, cannot be ignorant that bankruptcies do sometimes occur in England, and in India also, as well as in China; or that, in his own country, men frequently rise from humble situations in life to the highest; that there are modern instances' of ministers and lord mayors,-nay-we might add,of emperors and of kings,-who have sprung from very low origins. It was, at any rate, unnecessary, and somewhat invidious, to hold up by name, and attempt to degrade, a whole body of honourable and generous men, who have so many times stood between him and his colleagues and the authorities of Canton, aye, and suffered most severely on his and their account. If, says one of the governor's edicts, prohibiting the supercargoes from going in sedanchairs, they presume to oppose, immediately shall the said Hong merchants be examined and degraded, without any clemency being extended to them.' (Papers on the Affairs of the E. I. Company, 1831-2.) In fact, as Sir J. Urmston says, the life of a Hong merchant is anything but an enviable one.'

Mr. Marjoribanks himself has recorded an instance which shows what these calumniated men are liable to suffer on account of their connexion with the servants of the East India Company: In our public consultations on the 4th instant, we had to record a * Miscellaneous Notices on China, Part Second, p. 265.

very severe blow inflicted on our commerce by the imprisonment and death of Woo Yay, the conductor of Goqua's Hong. The cause of his unmerited misfortunes was avowedly his connexion with foreigners, or, in other words, his steady and valuable services as a merchant, not passive to the exactions of the local authorities, and pursuing a line of commercial conduct independent of that feeling of combination. which so generally prevails among the Chinese. The loss of one or two more respectable merchants, equally innocent, would render our commercial footing altogether untenable.'-Papers on Affairs of E. I. Company, 1831-2.

We have dwelt thus much on the character of the Hong merchants, because the Letter' of Mr. Marjoribanks must have excited a prejudice against them in the minds of the free traders, who will nevetheless be compelled to deal with them, and because we know that the censures are unjust. *

Mr. Marjoribanks next deals out, with no sparing hand, his diatribes against the government authorities at Canton, and, at the same time, visits the sins of his lateworthy good masters,' who, however, in their state of decadence, are still able to read him a lesson in return, by which if he had profited, as a prudent man would not fail to have done, his Letter to Mr. Grant would have worn a very different garb from that which it has assumed. He accuses the officers of government of fraud, falsehood, and corrupt connivance at abuses and offences against the laws; that is to say, with connivance, as far as we can collect, at the illicit importation of opium. Here,' says he, we have China and its rulers exhibited in all their weakness, presumption, and corruption, professing strict maxims of virtue, which become the more strongly contrasted with their gross immorality, affecting high political principle which they do not feel, and thundering forth proclamations which they never expect or wish to see obeyed.' (Letter.) The papers laid before parliament fully account for all this abuse-the gentlemen of the factory had, by their improper conduct, brought themselves into collision with the Chinese authorities, as we shall now state.

Mr. Baynes, when chief of the factory, took it into his head, with the knowledge, and in defiance, of an old prohibitory edict, most rigidly adhered to at all times by the Chinese, to bring up his wife from Macao to the factory. The viceroy issued his orders. through the Hong merchants, that Mrs. Baynes should forthwith be sent away. Mr. Baynes resisted it, and, in a very lack-a-dai

* We cannot omit this opportunity of referring to an affecting anecdote which we gave many years ago, of one of these calumniated men, which we know to be true to the letter, and the perusal of which we would recommend to Mr. Marjoribanks, in the hope that it will reach his heart, and make him relent.-Quarterly Review, vol. xvii., p. 484.

2 F 2

sical

sical epistle, pleaded the cruelty of separating husband and wife, which the Chinese answered admirably, and repeated the orders for her removal over and over again. The Hong merchants entreated the gentlemen of the factory to obey-appealing to their own hearts on account of the situation in which themselves were placed. The viceroy showed much more patience than could have been expected; but what line do the gentlemen of the factory take? why, they send down to Whampo for two carronades and a party of men, to be brought up to guard the factory against any attempt of the native authorities to enforce the observance of their prohibitory edict! The affair ended, as might have been foreseen, in the removal of Mrs. Baynes, and the carronades, and the party, from Canton,-Mr. Baynes himself narrowly escaping a Chinese cage.

Another cause of grievance, which led to as much discussion as bringing up females, was an edict prohibiting foreigners from coming into the factory in sedan-chairs or ascending shouldercarriages. The whole factory, with that learned Theban, Dr. Morrison, were puzzled to find out what these shoulder-carriages could mean, and, in a remonstrance to the viceroy, they tell him they cannot suspect him of supposing that a person is to be hoisted on a man's shoulders, or conveyed in a basket such as pigs are carried in.' We apprehend, however, that such was his excellency's meaning. Speaking of the guards in Lord Macartney's Embassy, Mr. Barrow says, the soldiers were carried in open bamboo-chairs, shoulder-height; but, seeing the wretched condition of the bearers, and feeling themselves with their feathers and their firelocks somewhat ridiculously placed, they got down, and insisted on carrying the Chinese in their turn.' We think the viceroy might have conceded shoulder-carriages.

6

But systematically to disregard, disobey, and act in defiance of the viceroy's edicts, and, if necessary, apologise afterwards, is the doctrine we find inculcated by Mr. Lindsay, in his voyage up the Yellow Sea. The directors of the East India Company have other notions as to the propriety of submitting to the authorities of a country, to which we resort by mere sufferance for our own benefit. They tell their servants—

It is a notion too commonly entertained and acted upon by you, and encouraged by foreign merchants residing at Canton, that nothing is to be gained from the Chinese by obedience to their laws and edicts, but that much may be obtained by intimidation. You may have succeeded, for the moment, in setting the government at defiance, but that government has not only taken the first opportunity to assert its dominion, but also, with the view of making you feel the consequences of disobedience, it has almost invariably deprived you of

some

some advantages which it had either tacitly or avowedly yielded to friendly remonstrances.'-Papers on Affairs of E. I. Company, 1831-2.

The saucy letter of the Supercargoes to the viceroy, about shoulder-carriages, was followed up by a still more saucy act. They stuck up this notice :

-

To all whom it may concern.-In consequence of a certain occurrence, the Select Committee who direct the affairs of an English Company, have in council resolved, That hereafter every class of persons sitting in sedan-chairs shall be disallowed to enter the gate of the Company's factory. The porter is ordered to intercept all chairs, and prevent their entering. If any person refuses to listen to him, both the chair and the individual will assuredly be expelled by force. Every one will do well not to try the experiment with his person.'-Papers on Affairs of E. I. Company, 1832.

We entirely acquit Mr. Marjoribanks of any participation in the origin of these petulant and impotent attacks carried on, in his absence, against the constituted authorities. However foolish it may appear to us to prohibit ladies from visiting Canton, and childish not to allow the Company's servants to be carried in sedan-chairs or shoulder-carriages, the orders emanating from Pekin must be obeyed; and no doubt they have their reasons for issuing such orders. If a Chinese lady should appear hobbling abroad with her little cramped feet, she would be looked upon in no better light than that in which we regard a street-walker, and be insulted. The Chinese know well enough that English ladies will walk abroad, and that in Canton they would most assuredly be insulted, and they can pretty well guess the consequence; in fact they love peace and quietness. Then as to sedan-chairs, no people on earth are more tenacious of rank and privileges than the Chinese. Merchants (mai-mai-yin, buying and selling men) are not privileged to be so carried. Young Mr. Astell, the son of the eminent director, was seen parading in one of these chairs, on which the restriction was promulgated anew. Practically, this restriction. was certainly of little consequence, and we, therefore, think the gentlemen of the factory might have passed it over without making it an intolerable grievance.

But a daring outrage, of a more flagrant nature, was committed by the company's servants against the Chinese authorities. Wishing to enlarge the quay before the factory, as a walk or flowergarden, they were permitted to do so to a certain extent; they far exceeded the limits allowed, and, according to the old adage, stretched the inch to an ell. They were directed to confine themselves to the original grant-they still persisted. Complaints were made that the encroachment on the river was injurious; that it interfered with a ferry; that by its setting the stream to the oppo