banner



Home  ›  What Nation Controlled Most Of The Little Trade That Was Allowed

What Nation Controlled Most Of The Little Trade That Was Allowed

Written By Monday, June 13, 2022 Add Comment Edit

Chinese policy in which all foreign trade was restricted to Canton/Guangzhou (1757-1842)

Canton Organisation
Chinese 一口通商

Scene in Communist china (1852, p.Vignette)[1]

The Canton Organisation (1757–1842; Chinese: 一口通商; pinyin: Yīkǒu tōngshāng , lit. "Single [port] trading relations") served every bit a means for Qing People's republic of china to command trade with the West within its own land by focusing all merchandise on the southern port of Canton (now Guangzhou). The protectionist policy arose in 1757 as a response to a perceived political and commercial threat from abroad on the function of successive Chinese emperors.

From the late seventeenth century onwards, Chinese merchants, known every bit Hongs (Chinese: 行; pinyin: háng ), managed all trade in the port. Operating from the Xiii Factories located on the banks of the Pearl River exterior Canton, in 1760, by order of the Qing Qianlong Emperor, they became officially sanctioned as a monopoly known as the Cohong. Thereafter Chinese merchants dealing with foreign merchandise (Chinese: 洋行; pinyin: yángháng , lit. "sea traders", i.due east. "overseas traders" or "foreign traders") acted through the Cohong under the supervision of the Guangdong Customs Supervisor (Chinese: 粵海關部監督; pinyin: Yuèhǎi guānbù jiàn dù ; Jyutping: jyut6 hoi2 gwaan1 bou6 gaam1 duk1 ), informally known as the "Hoppo", and the Governor-general of Guangzhou and Guangxi.

History [edit]

Origins [edit]

At the starting time of his reign, the Kangxi Emperor (r.1661–1722) faced a number of challenges, non the least of which was to integrate his relatively new dynasty with the Chinese Han majority.[two] The Manchu-led Qing dynasty had only come to ability in 1644, replacing the Ming dynasty. Back up for the previous rulers remained stiff, specially in the south of the country.[iii]

Kangxi twice banned all maritime trade for strategic reasons, to prevent any possible waterborne insurrection attempt.[4] Several rebellions took identify, including one led past Ming loyalist Koxinga and separately the Rebellion of the 3 Feudatories,[five] which led to the capture of Taiwan in 1683. Once the rebellions had been quelled, in 1684 Kangxi issued an edict:

Now the whole land is unified, everywhere in that location is peace and quiet, Manchu-Han relations are fully integrated and so I command you to go abroad and trade to show the populous and affluent nature of our rule. Past royal decree I open the seas to trade.[6]

Hǎiguān (海关), or customs stations, were subsequently opened at Canton, Xiangshan County (Zhuhai and Zhongshan) and Macau in Guangdong Province; Foochow (Fuzhou), Nantai (Southern Fuzhou) and Amoy (Xiamen) in Fujian Province; Ningpo (Ningbo) and Dinghai County (Dinghai District) in Zhejiang Province; and Huating County (Huating Boondocks, Shanghai), Chongque (No longer exists) and Shanghai proper in Jiangsu Province.[7] I year afterwards in 1685, foreign traders received permission to enter Chinese ports.[8]

International cargoes arriving in Canton in 1741
United kingdom of great britain and northern ireland French republic The netherlands Sweden Denmark
East Bharat
Company		 Itinerant
traders
Number of Ships 4 1 2 2 4 i
Tonnage 2,250 350 1,450 1,450 2,600 850
Cannon 112 12 sixty 64 120 36
Crew 400 100 300 220 510 150
Black Tea (piculs) 7,194 viii,000 8,000 5,000
Dark-green Tea (piculs) 6,151 i,450 550 ane,400
Raw Silk (piculs) 28 250
Woven Silk (bales) 11,074 half-dozen,000 7,000 vii,500
Nankeens fifteen,699
Chinaware (chests) 844 600 800 400
Tutenagi (piculs) 1,800
1An alloy of copper, nickel and zinc source: Gao (2003)

The Qing Courtroom under Kangxi set up upward a trading visitor in Canton in 1686 to deal with Western merchandise known equally the Yánghuò Háng (洋货行, literally "Ocean Trading Firm"). This dealt with both imports and exports with sub-offices responsible for taxes and import/export declarations respectively. When a transport arrived or departed, the Chinese merchant involved would visit the Ocean Trading House to pay any taxes due. This set up became the ground for the later Thirteen Factories through which all foreign trade would be conducted.[ix]

Although many ports on the coasts of China were open, most Westerners chose to merchandise at Canton as it is closer to Southeast Asia and it was non profitable to go further north.[10]

In 1704, the Baoshang organisation was established. This organisation licensed merchandise with Western merchants: licences were granted to a number of Chinese merchants as long as they helped to collect duties from the Westerners, successfully aligning trading interests with the government's revenue collection. This was the predecessor for the later Cohong system.[11]

Although he now had the foreign merchandise situation under control, Kangxi'south liberal attitude towards organized religion led to a clash between Chinese and Christian spiritual authorisation. After Pope Clement XI issued his 1715 papal bull Ex illa dice, which officially condemned Chinese religious practices,[12] Kangxi expelled all missionaries from Mainland china except those employed in a technical or scientific informational capacity past the Qing Court.[thirteen]

Implementation of the Cohong [edit]

In 1745, Kangxi's grandson the Qianlong Emperor ordered his court to implement changes to the Ocean Trading Firm organisation. Thereafter a local Chinese merchant stood equally guarantor for every foreign trading vessel entering Canton Harbour and took full responsibleness for the ship and its crew along with the captain and supercargo. Any tax payments due from a foreign trader were also to exist guaranteed by the local merchant. With permission from the authorities, in 1760 Hong merchant Pan Zhencheng (潘振成) and ix others hong specializing in the western trade joined together to become the intermediary between the Qing regime and the strange traders. The function of the new torso would exist to purchase goods on behalf of the foreigners and deduct any taxes and duties payable for imports and exports; at the same time, co-ordinate to Guangdong customs records (粤海關志, Yuèhǎi guān zhì), they established a new harbour authority to deal with tribute from Thailand and handle pay for the troops involved in trade too as manage domestic maritime trade in the South Red china Sea.[14] Henceforth, the Cohong possessed regal authority to levy taxes on the foreign merchants as they saw fit.

Flint Affair [edit]

In 1757 the Qianlong Emperor banned all not-Russian ships from the ports of northern China.[xv] Russians were still not allowed to utilize Canton. All community offices other than the one at Canton were closed. The emperor did this later receiving a petition regarding the presence of armed Western merchant ships all along the declension. The Western merchant ships were protected from pirates, and guarded against, by the Guangdong Navy, which was later on increased in force.[16]

Thereafter all such commerce was to exist conducted via a single port nether what became known as the Canton System (In Chinese: Yī kŏu tōngshāng (一口通商 literally, "Single-port commerce organisation"). During Qianlong's reign Qing foreign trade policies had a political attribute largely based on real or imagined threats from abroad; historian Angela Schottenhammer suggests that although the unmarried port trading policy arose in office from lobbying by officials and Chinese merchants, it was more probable triggered by the activities of Flint in what became known as The Flintstone Matter (Hóng Rènhuī Shìjiàn, 洪任辉事件).[15] Although the strange merchants knew of the Cohong restriction, they had to rest a alienation of etiquette against the risks of seeing their substantial investments in China destroyed by bribery and corruption. Englishman James Flint, a long-term East India Visitor supercargo and a fluent speaker of Chinese,[17] became the focus of the impetus for alter. Flint had been repeatedly warned to remain in Canton during the trading flavor and non to venture northward in search of commercial opportunities. Despite this, back in 1755 Flint, together with Visitor director Samuel Harrison, sailed north to explore possibilities for trade in Zhejiang. In 1759, he over again journeyed n to file a complaint in Ningbo over corruption amongst the officials in Canton. He had hoped that his criticisms of the current system would usher in a new era of free merchandise only instead, not only did his plan to open up the ports of Zhejiang fail, the Qing authorities reacted by imposing farther restrictions on strange trade.[9] Worse still, Flint establish himself deported to Macau where he was imprisoned between December 1759 and Nov 1762.[18]

The emperor and his officials became alarmed at this breach of normal protocol and realized that something had to be done to control the situation.[5] The Qing court's previous laxity had effectively allowed a coterie of Chinese merchants and local officials to take over foreign commerce in the southern port co-ordinate to their own best financial interests.[xix] One of the fundamental tenets of traditional Chinese diplomacy prohibited contact with Beijing except in the case of tributary envoys from other states.[20]

The new rules, known as the Vigilance Towards Foreign Barbarian Regulations (Fángfàn wàiyí guītiáo, 防范外夷规条) or Five Counter-Measures Against the Barbarians (Fáng yí wŭ shì, 防夷五事) contained the following provisions:

1) Merchandise past foreign barbarians in Canton is prohibited during the wintertime.
2) Strange barbarians coming to the city must reside in the foreign factories nether the supervision and command of the Cohong.
3) Chinese citizens are barred from borrowing majuscule from foreign barbarians and from employment by them.
four) Chinese citizens must not attempt to gain information on the electric current market state of affairs from foreign barbarians
5) Inbound foreign barbaric vessels must anchor in the Whampoa Roads and await inspection by the government.[21]

Evaluation [edit]

The discovery of hugger-mugger missionary action in the late 1750s may have contributed to the Emperor's decision to concentrate foreigners in a single port. In his edict to establish the restriction, the Emperor specifically mentioned concerns nigh the strategic value of the interior regions to foreigners: Chinese government consultants were enlightened of Western military technological superiority and Westerners' record of having "set out to conquer every land they visited". The Kangxi Emperor, considering the Westerners to be highly successful, intrepid, clever, and profitable, already had concerns early on about the serious omnidirectional Western threat to Mainland china, if China always became weakened.[22]

The Canton system did not completely touch Chinese trade with the rest of the world as Chinese merchants, with their large three-masted ocean junks, were heavily involved in global trade. Past sailing to and from Siam, Indonesia and Philippines, they were major facilitators of the global trading system; the era was fifty-fifty described past Carl Trocki as a "Chinese century" of global commerce.[23]

Under the system, the Qianlong Emperor restricted trade with foreigners on Chinese soil only for licensed Chinese merchants (Cohongs), while the British authorities on their part issued a monopoly lease for trade but to the British E India Company. This organization was not challenged until the 19th century when the idea of free trade was popularised in the West.[24] The concept of restricting trade to a unmarried port was besides used in Western countries such as Spain and Portugal. Chinese merchants could also merchandise freely and legally with Westerners (Spanish and Portuguese) in Xiamen and Macao, or with any country when trade was conducted through ports outside China such as Manila and Batavia.[25] Although shipping was regulated, the Qianlong emperor'due south assistants was diligent in accommodating the requisites of Western merchants. They hired a growing body of Western assistants for the Customs Office to assist manage their fellow countrymen. The order to stay in Macao during the winter was lifted, tax was exempted on food, drink and basic supplies for Western merchants, and protections were granted to Westerners and their belongings.[26] Chinese merchants were really banned by Qing law from suing foreigners in Chinese courts, as the Qianlong Emperor believed that good treatment of foreigners was essential for the government. In 1806, Chinese officials compromised with the British on the murder of a Chinese man by British seamen, as Westerners refused to exist punished under Chinese police, fifty-fifty though local citizens vigorously protested what they considered a miscarriage of justice. In 1816, the Jiaqing Emperor dismissed a British embassy for their refusal to kowtow, but he sent them an apologetic letter of the alphabet with gifts (the British simply discarded them in a storeroom without reading).[27] The Qianlong Emperor granted Lord Macartney a aureate scepter, an important symbol of peace and wealth, but this was dismissed past the British as worthless.[28] The British, on the other mitt, ignored Chinese laws and warnings not to deploy war machine forces in Chinese waters. The British landed troops in Macao despite a Chinese and Portuguese understanding to bar strange forces from Macao, and and then in the State of war of 1812 attacked American ships deep in the inner harbour of Canton (the Americans had previously robbed British ships in Chinese waters besides). These, in combination with the British back up to Nepal during their invasion of Tibet and later the British invasion of Nepal after it became a Chinese tributary country, led the Chinese government to go highly suspicious of British intentions.[29]

The Beginning Opium War [edit]

A seemingly clamorous western demand for tea from China towards the end of the 18th century caused a significant deficit in the British balance of trade. The Chinese had little involvement in Western goods and would only accept silver in payment. This spurred the Due east Republic of india Company to sell opium grown on its plantations in India to independent traders, who shipped it on to China to sell in exchange for silver, despite the fact that opium was already illegal in Communist china.[30] China tried to stop the importation of this opium, but the traders persisted. Chinese attempts to regain control led to the Commencement Opium State of war, when British gunboat affairs quickly forced Prc to sign an unequal treaty of merchandise.[31] [32]

Abolition [edit]

Post-obit the signature of the 1842 Treaty of Nanking, British subjects are "allowed to reside, for the purpose of carrying on their mercantile pursuits, without molestation or restraint" at Canton, Shanghai, Amoy (Xiamen), Ningpo (Ningbo) and Foochow (Fuzhou). In add-on, Article V of the Treaty specifically abolishes the County arrangement, allowing British merchants, and eventually all foreign merchants, to deal with whomever they please in the newly-opened ports.[33]

In 1859 County'southward trade moved to a new site on the reclaimed sandbank of Shamian Island, a short distance w of the one-time factories. By so much of the strange merchandise with China had shifted to the past then British colony of Hong Kong (acquired under the Treaty of Nanking), and to the northern ports, with their advantage of proximity to Beijing also equally the Grand Canal and the Yellowish River, both vital arteries in the internal trade of Qing China. By 1866, only 18 foreign firms withal had offices in County while in that location were only 60 strange residents excluding British Indians and tidewaiters (who boarded boats as part of custom's inspections) employed by Sir Robert Hart's Purple Maritime Customs Service.[34]

Legacy [edit]

The Massachusetts General Hospital, McLean Hospital, the Boston Athenæum, the Bunker Hill Monuments, public libraries, and an orphanage were congenital with the proceeds of opium smuggling.[35]

Past the time Hong Kong became a full-fledged British Colony, many of the merchants would be led by a newer generation of western hong merchants. Many of these companies would become the backbone of the young Hong Kong economy.

Meet too [edit]

  • Century of humiliation
  • Economic history of China earlier 1912
  • Onetime Mainland china Trade
  • Hongs
  • Howqua
  • Thirteen Factories
  • Wu Tingju

Notes and references [edit]

Notes

  1. ^ "Scene in China" (PDF). The Wesleyan Juvenile Offering: A Miscellany of Missionary Information for Young Persons. Wesleyan Missionary Society. Nine: Vignette. 1852. Retrieved 24 February 2016.
  2. ^ Li, X. (2012). China at State of war: An Encyclopedia. ABC-CLIO. p. 201. ISBN978-1-59884-415-three.
  3. ^ Mote, F.Due west. (2003). Imperial Prc 900-1800. Harvard Academy Press. p. 850. ISBN978-0-674-01212-7.
  4. ^ Schottenhammer 2007, p. 31.
  5. ^ a b Li 1977, p. 363.
  6. ^ 今海内一统，寰宇宁谧，满汉人民相同一体，令出洋贸易，以彰富庶之治，得旨开海贸易 from 周膺; 吴晶 (2011). Research report on Hangzhou Trade in the Late Qing and Republican Eras (晚清民国杭商研究) (in Chinese). Hangzhou Publishing Firm (杭州出版社). ISBN978-7-80758-499-5.
  7. ^ Schottenhammer 2010, p. 126.
  8. ^ Taipei Research Institute (台北研究院) (1987). "Fifth compilation of Ming/Qing historical material (明清史料戊编)". 1. Taipei: Zhonghua Publishing Bureau (台北: 中华书局).: 102.
  9. ^ a b 吴伯娅 (January one, 2010). "A Complaint about the Single Port Trading Policy (一纸诉状与一口通商)" (in Chinese). Chinese Culture MediaCentre (中国文化传媒网). Archived from the original on February 2, 2014. Retrieved January 27, 2014.
  10. ^ Po, Chung-yam (28 June 2013). Conceptualizing the Blueish Borderland: The Great Qing and the Maritime World in the Long Eighteenth Century (PDF) (Thesis). Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg. p. 186.
  11. ^ Ronald C. Po (2018). The Blueish Frontier: Maritime Vision and Power in the Qing Empire. Cambridge University Press. p. 152. ISBN978-1108424615.
  12. ^ Mantienne 1999, p. 178.
  13. ^ Dun 1969, p. 22.
  14. ^ Gao & Feng 2003, p. 109.
  15. ^ a b Schottenhammer 2007, p. 33.
  16. ^ Po, Chung-yam (28 June 2013). Conceptualizing the Bluish Frontier: The Great Qing and the Maritime Earth in the Long Eighteenth Century (PDF) (Thesis). Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg. pp. 147–149.
  17. ^ Stifler 1938.
  18. ^ Shurtleff & Aoyagi 2012, p. 1711.
  19. ^ Farmer, Edward Fifty. (1963), "James Flint Versus the Canton Interest (1755–1760)", Papers on China, East Asian Research Heart, Harvard University (17): 38–66
  20. ^ Fairbank & Têng 1941.
  21. ^ "Western Cultural Policies during the Qianlong and Jiaqing Eras (乾嘉时期清廷的西方文化政策)" (in Chinese). Historychina.internet (中華歷史网). Retrieved Jan 30, 2014.
  22. ^ Po, Chung-yam (28 June 2013). Conceptualizing the Blue Frontier: The Great Qing and the Maritime World in the Long Eighteenth Century (PDF) (Thesis). Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg. pp. 174, 183, 200–201.
  23. ^ Po, Chung-yam (28 June 2013). Conceptualizing the Blueish Borderland: The Great Qing and the Maritime Globe in the Long Eighteenth Century (PDF) (Thesis). Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg. pp. 149–150.
  24. ^ Conrad Schirokauer; Miranda Brown (2012). A Brief History of Chinese Civilization (4, illustrated ed.). Cengage Learning. p. 221. ISBN978-0495913238.
  25. ^ Peer Vries (2015). State, Economy and the Great Departure: Great Uk and China, 1680s-1850s. Bloomsbury Publishing. pp. 353–354. ISBN978-1472526403.
  26. ^ Po, Chung-yam (28 June 2013). Conceptualizing the Bluish Frontier: The Nifty Qing and the Maritime World in the Long Eighteenth Century (PDF) (Thesis). Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg. pp. 203–204.
  27. ^ Waley-Cohen, Joanna (2000). The Sextants of Beijing: Global Currents in Chinese History. New York, London: W. W. Norton and Company. pp. 136–137. ISBN039324251X.
  28. ^ Waley-Cohen, Joanna (2000). The Sextants of Beijing: Global Currents in Chinese History. New York, London: W. W. Norton and Company. p. 104. ISBN039324251X.
  29. ^ Waley-Cohen, Joanna (2000). The Sextants of Beijing: Global Currents in Chinese History. New York, London: W. W. Norton and Company. pp. 126, 129–131. ISBN039324251X.
  30. ^ Fay, Peter Ward, The Opium State of war, 1840–1842: Barbarians in the Celestial Empire in the early office of the nineteenth century and the manner past which they forced the gates ajar (Chapel Colina, North Carolina: Academy of North Carolina Press, 2000) pp.73-4
  31. ^ Julia Lovell, The Opium State of war: Drug, Dreams and the Making of China (2011)
  32. ^ Peter Ward Fay, Opium War, 1840-1842: Barbarians in the Angelic Empire in the Early Office of the Nineteenth Century and the War by Which They Forced Her Gates (1998)
  33. ^ "The Government of China having compelled the British Merchants trading at Canton to bargain exclusively with certain Chinese Merchants called Hong Merchants (or Cohong) who had been licensed by the Chinese Government for that purpose, the Emperor of Prc agrees to cancel that exercise in future at all Ports where British Merchants may reside, and to let them to behave on their mercantile transactions with whatever persons they please".
  34. ^ Dennys 1867, p. 138.
  35. ^ Martha Bebinger (July 31, 2017). "How Profits From Opium Shaped 19th-Century Boston". WBUR. Archived from the original on 31 July 2017.

Bibliography

  • Dennys, N.B. (1867). The Treaty Ports of China and Japan: A Complete Guide to the Open up Ports of Those Countries, Together with Peking, Yedo, Hongkong and Macao. London: Trubner. p. 138. ISBN978-ane-108-04590-two.
  • Dun, Jen Li (Trans.) (1969). China in transition, 1517–1911. New York, Van Nostrand Reinhold, Inc. ISBN0-442-04778-9.
  • Fairbank, J.K.; Têng, South.Y. (1941). "On the Ch'ing Tributary System". Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies. 6 (2): 135–246. doi:10.2307/2718006. JSTOR 2718006.
  • Li, V. H. (1977). Police force and Politics in China's Foreign Trade. Asian law serial. Academy of Washington Press. ISBN978-0-295-80387-6.
  • Mantienne, Frédéric (1999). Monseigneur Pigneau de Béhaine (in French). Paris: Editions Eglises d'Asie. ISBN978-2-914402-20-0.
  • Schottenhammer, Angela (2007). The E Asian Maritime World 1400–1800: Its Fabrics of Power and Dynamics of Exchanges. East Asian economical and socio-cultural studies. Harrassowitz. ISBN978-iii-447-05474-4.
  • Schottenhammer, Angela (2010). Trading networks in early modern East asia. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag. ISBN978-iii-447-06227-five.
  • Stifler, S.R. (1938). "The language of students of the East India Company'due south Canton factory". Journal of the Northward Cathay Co-operative of the Majestic Asiatic Society. 69.
  • Gao, Shujuan(高淑娟); Feng, Bin (冯斌) (2003). Comparative Outline of Chinese and Japanese Strange Policy: Central Merchandise Policy in the Concluding Years of the Imperial Era (中日对外经济政策比较史纲: 以封建末期贸易政策为中心). Qinghua University Chinese Economic Historiography Series (清华大学中国经济史学丛书) (in Chinese). Qinghua University Publishing (清华大学出版社). ISBN978-7-302-07517-ii.
  • Shurtleff, W.; Aoyagi, A. (2012). History of Soy Sauce (160 CE To 2012). Soyinfo Center. ISBN9781928914440.

Farther reading [edit]

  • Louis Dermigny, La Chine et l'Occident: le commerce à Canton au XVIIIe siècle, 1719–1833. Paris: SEVPEN, 1964.
  • Downs, Jacques Chiliad. (1997). The Golden Ghetto: The American Commercial Community at Canton and the Shaping of American Mainland china Policy, 1784-1844. Bethlehem, PA: Lehigh University Printing; reprinted, Hong Kong University Press, 2014. ISBN0934223351.
  • Liu Yong, The Dutch Due east India Visitor'south Tea Trade with Mainland china, 1757–1781. Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2007. ISBN xc-04-15599-6
  • Hoh-Cheung Mui and H. Lorna Mui, The Management of Monopoly: A Report of the Due east India Company's Acquit of Its Tea Trade, 1784–1833. Vancouver: Academy of British Columbia Printing, 1984. ISBN 0-7748-0198-0
  • Johnson, Kendall A. (2017). The New Center Kingdom: China and the Early on American Romance of Free Trade. Johns Hopkins University Printing. ISBN9781421422510.
  • Paul Arthur Van Dyke. The Canton Merchandise: Life and Enterprise on the Communist china Coast, 1700–1845. Hong Kong University Press, 2005. ISBN 962-209-749-9.
  • Paul Arthur Van Dyke. Merchants of Canton and Macao: Politics and Strategies in Eighteenth-Century Chinese Merchandise. Hong Kong University Press.2011. ISBN 978-988-8028-91-7
  • Zhuang Guotu, Tea, Silver, Opium, and War: The International Tea Trade and Western Commercial Expansion into China in 1740–1840. Xiamen: Xiamen University Press, 1993.

What Nation Controlled Most Of The Little Trade That Was Allowed,

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canton_System

Posted by: wetzelfooper.blogspot.com

0 Response to "What Nation Controlled Most Of The Little Trade That Was Allowed"

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Iklan Atas Artikel

Iklan Tengah Artikel 1

Iklan Tengah Artikel 2

Iklan Bawah Artikel