The British Presence in Macau, 1635–1793

6. Macau as a centre for Chinese control of the European “barbarians”

79 In 1719, the Kangxi Emperor (1662–1722) proposed to the Portuguese that foreign trade be centralised in Macau, where Western merchants would thenceforth reside. The city, relatively impoverished since the suppression of trade with Japan, viewed the imperial edict as permission for European rivals to enter an area in which the Portuguese still held a privileged position, and the Macau Senate, despite the profits it would gain from the sojourn of foreigners, refused the proposal, as it would again in 1733. In 1720 the viceroy of India rebuked the Senate for having refused the imperial proposal for the anchorage in Taipa, as the proposal would have allowed Macau to absorb a part of the enormous sums of money which the British annually spent in Canton; it would also have allowed for closer control of British trade. The Senate replied that it had merely attempted to avoid greater control of Chinese monitoring of the territory.1 Profits would derive from the totality of import duties offered by the emperor to the city, as well as from letting houses and the names of Portuguese trading businesses, a strategy which allowed the British to conduct their business in the enclave, for Portuguese law banned any foreigner from owning landed property or from opening businesses in Macau, which led to the Portuguese letting or selling the names of their businesses to British traders. In the meantime, the Portuguese administration concluded that the Qing dynasty’s efforts to control and keep foreigners away from mainland China were affecting business and everyday life in Macau, for in 1723 the emperor expelled all missionaries in China to the enclave and in 17252 he limited Macau’s sea-going fleet to a maximum of twenty-five vessels.3 6 Macau as a centre for Chinese control of the European “barbarians” The British Presence in Macau, 1635–1793 80 In 1720, after the EIC formed its rotating and seasonal Council in China, a Chinese “guild” was formed in Canton. The security (hong) merchants system turned into a cartel in 1760 called the co-hong4 (to which the supercargoes raised immediate opposition), which was constituted by the hong traders5 with a view to controlling foreign trade, its thirteen regulations defining the rights and duties of Chinese and Western traders.6 Created as a regulatory instrument, the co-hong was responsible for collecting taxes, keeping a distance between foreigners and the native population and regulating trade prices and transactions. From the 1740s onwards, this system also became a controlling mechanism used to enforce the Mandarinate’s orders, altering its modus operandi so as to respond to foreigners’ movements and demands, and upholding the status quo demanded by Chinese tradition. Faced with all these changes, in 1722 the EIC appointed a permanent Council in Canton, headed by James Naish.7 The Council’s objective was to demand from the Mandarinate and from local traders ever more favourable conditions for its regular trade. From this moment, the management mechanism of the EIC in China began to develop, and it would remain relatively unchanged up to the end of its trade monopoly in 1833. Since the British presence had been building up since 1700, Macau and Canton were subjected to greater control by the Mandarin authorities, for the Luso-Chinese enclave, besides being a port, was inhabited by foreigners who could shelter missionaries and rebels. Thus, in May 1723, on the arrival of the Walpole in Macau, the crew members were advised by the Chinese traders that they were not allowed to sail up to Canton because they were carrying firearms on board.8 The Portuguese governor offered the vessel his protection against the Chinese, but the British once again concluded that “so far from being able to afford protection against the Chinese, they themselves are hardly masters of the place, and the ships would be as safe in Canton River as here”.9 The supercargoes made their way to Canton where they rented accommodation and mentioned episodes of Macau’s political life which obviously influenced the British presence in China: “Received [July, 4, 1723] advice from a Macau of the arrival of a Portuguese ship of 250 Tons from Goa, with orders to reinstate the old Governor turned out last year”.10 In 1732 the governor, António do Amaral e Meneses, knowing of the coming visit of the viceroy of Canton to decide on the plan to centralise foreign trade in the enclave, wrote to the bishops of Beijing, [18.217...