Plenipotentiary was resolved to sanction no measure derogatory to the dignity of China, and that he was anxious to impress on his countrymen a sense of their own obligations so long as the Chinese did not hinder the progress of trade on the fair and supportable conditions which were now laid down in the most formal manner possible.

That the Chinese Government having once resolved to acquiesce in the extension of its trade relations should offer to the other nations of the outside world the privileges which had been snatched by the English, was only in accordance with the dictates of sound policy, as well as being under all the circumstances unavoidable. Keying accordingly issued a proclamation informing the public that henceforth trade at the five ports named in the treaty was open to "the men from afar" without distinction, and "the weapons of war being for ever laid aside, joy and profit shall be the perpetual lot of all." This result must not be attributed to the success of the English expedition exclusively, as the French Government had established official relations with the Canton authorities, and even deputed a Consul to that city; while the Government of the United States had been represented in the Bogue during the whole crisis by men-of-war. All that can be said is that had the English forces been defeated instead of being victorious, these concessions would not have been made to the general body of foreigners.

One point alone, but that unfortunately of the first importance, remained unsettled. Sir Henry Pottinger had not succeeded in obtaining the assent of the Chinese Government to the legalization of opium; and no reference is made to that article in the tariff or any part of the commercial treaty. The settlement which left undecided the principal point of all in controversy could not be considered completely satisfactory. The old sores might be re-opened at any moment. Yet Sir Henry Pottinger, notwithstanding that he had previously encouraged the expectation that the opium trade might be legalized, was sincere in his wish to uphold the stipulations of the treaty; and when, therefore, it was

and good faith in the estimation of the Government of China, and in the eyes of all other nations." 22nd of July, 1843.

OPIUM CONTRABAND.

151

suggested that opium should be held to come under the final clause of the tariff, which provided that all other articles of commerce not expressly named should be admitted at an ad valorem duty of five per cent., the Plenipotentiary, in his double capacity of diplomatist and Governor of Hongkong, issued a strongly-worded proclamation stating that such a construction was untenable, as "the traffic in opium was illegal and contraband by the laws and imperial edicts of China."

So far, therefore, as the opium trade could ever be said to have existed under the countenance of the English Government, that element of support was now withdrawn in the most complete and formal manner. But the Chinese were not able to comprehend the nice distinctions which, in international law, separate repudiation of participation in a stated proceeding from active prevention. The English Government withdrew its protection from those who pursued a forbidden traffic; but it rested with the Chinese to devise measures for the prevention of smuggling. This was strictly in accordance with international law, but the Chinese may be forgiven for failing to comprehend that the Government which denounced the opium traffic in language that seemed to borrow its moral fervour from some of the writers of the Hanlin, need take no steps towards stopping the arrival of the drug or cutting off the supply. The explanation of this difference was simple, but it was to prove the precursor of a long series of troubles which have not even in the present day reached a settlement or exhausted their power for mischief. Far better would it have been if Sir Henry Pottinger had openly declared that the settlement of the question did not lie in his hands, and that as the East India Company would continue to grow opium, so would it be exported from India to China, whether as contraband or not. The Government of Queen Victoria could do little or nothing in the matter. If the Chinese did not feel strong enough to guard their coasts, to enforce the laws both on their own people and on treaty-breaking foreigners, then the wisest and the most dignified policy to pursue was to legalize the import of opium. But Sir Henry Pottinger did not take this course, and the Chinese were left

to unravel for themselves as best they might the mystery of how the action of the Company, and of English and Indian merchants, was compatible with the solemn pledges and the sometimes indignant language of the representative of the English Queen.

With this important question left in doubt and unsettled it followed that there was a weak point in the arrangements made under the Treaty of Nankin. The continuance of friendly relations depended obviously on the exercise of forbearance on both sides, as well as on the continued belief of the Chinese authorities in their military inferiority and their consequent inability to reverse the decision of war. For a time the Chinese believed in the sincerity of the large promises conveyed by the official language of the English officers; but as they never realized the fact that English action was directed from two different sources, and controlled on this question by two opposite and antipathetic opinions, those of Leadenhall Street, and Whitehall, so did it never occur to them as being worthy of a moment's credence that the English Plenipotentiary did not possess the power to carry out his promises, and that his threats were in the eyes of English merchants devoid of terror. So long as opium was manufactured at Patna or Benares, so long as the poppy flowered on the plains of Malwa, so long could no human power, save the strong arm of Chinese authority itself, prevent its finding a way to the most profitable market in Canton or the other parts of China. The war and treaty of 1842 failed to provide a remedy of the evil, and the opium question was left unsettled to disturb the harmony of later relations.

One unqualified good had resulted from the war, for there will be none to deny that the study of the Chinese language and literature received an immense impetus from the events which have just been recorded. The missionaries of the Church of Rome had long enjoyed and utilized opportunities denied to other foreigners, of learning the Chinese tongue, and of becoming conversant with its peculiarities as well as with much of the accumulated mass of its literature. Yet although they fully and freely placed their knowledge at the service of the world by narrating the history, describing the

customs and the geography of the Chinese people and nation, they did nothing towards the increase of the knowledge of the Chinese tongue itself. Without accusing them of having any settled policy on the subject, the fact remains that they possessed, and did nothing to lose, the exclusive knowledge of the Chinese language. So, when the mission of Lord Macartney to Pekin was determined upon and despatched, there was for a moment complete uncertainty on the important point as to who should be the interpreter. As has been said, there was no man eligible for that employment then existing in the British dominions.

The difficulty was fortunately averted on that occasion by the appointment of Mr., afterwards Sir George, Staunton, then at Canton, who, perhaps, of all English sinologues, best deserves the grateful remembrance of his countrymen for the services he rendered not merely as a diplomatist, but as an illustrator and expositor of the laws of China. Staunton had a greater incentive and a more practical object in taking up the language of the country than had Stanislas Julien, who was the first among Continentals to prosecute the research from motives apart from religious zeal, and who must always be remembered for both the work he did and the difficulties he overcame as one of the foremost and most brilliant of Chinese scholars. Four secretaries possessing a knowledge of Chinese accompanied the mission of Lord Amherst, and of these two became well known in their respective spheresSir John Davis and Dr. Morrison. Both did excellent service in their way, the former in work that will endure longer perhaps than the more laborious and erudite productions of his colleague. These early seekers in a new field left more than an example to the generation then growing up. They helped by their teaching and guidance the studies of those who in name, as well as in a common pursuit, continued their labour and made it more familiar. Dr. Morrison left a son,* who was chief interpreter to Sir Henry Pottinger, and who was thought by some to possess a more finished style of Chinese conversation than his father. To him Mr. Charles Gutzlaff could hardly be considered inferior, for they had

* Mr. John Robert Morrison, who died prematurely in 1843.

both been trained at the same school, and had derived inspiration from a common source. But there were others too numerous to name, the opportunity of whose service did not afford them the same occasion of distinction as their predecessors in an age when Chinese scholarship was the privilege of a few individuals. Two alone need be named— the missionary Dr. Medhurst, and Professor James Legge, who began more than forty years ago those studies which gained for him no fleeting reputation as an erudite and conscientious investigator of a language presenting unusual difficulties to the inquirer and student. It will be sufficient, and the present purpose will be served, if in recalling the incidents and results of the first foreign war some small allowance be made for the undoubted impetus which it gave to the study of the Chinese language.

Nor must it be supposed that viewed in its larger aspect the war of 1840-42 was only disastrous in its incidents and unfortunate in its consequences. Those who never fail to apply to the action of the English Government the test of a standard not yet attained, and perhaps unattainable, in international relations, have not refrained from denouncing this war as iniquitous. They have sought to give it, as an opprobrious title, the name of "The Opium War." Never was a title given with less pretence of a justification. On the same principle many wars in this continent might have been termed wars of brandy or whisky-articles much more injurious in their effects when abused or taken to excess, than opium used in the only form known among the Chinese. But although one of the early incidents in the struggle had been the destruction of the stock of opium by Commissioner Lin, the subject of opium sank into the background, and was hardly mentioned after the fervour of the literary class had been checked by the failure of their schemes, and the disgrace of their foremost representative. True it is that compensation had been demanded and obtained; but this was not because it was opium, but because it was the merchandise of English subjects. Had it been wheat or cotton the demand would still have been made.

But while there is not room to doubt that the war was not