Your search within this document for '<%VALUE%>' resulted in eleven matching pages.
1

“...CORRESPONDENCE RELATIVE TO THE ACTUAL VALUE OF THE OPIUM DELIVERED UP TO THE CHINESE AUTHORITIES IN 1839. Presented to both Houses of Parliament, by Command of Her Majesty, 1843. LONDON: PRINTED BY T. R. HARRISON, ST. MARTIN’S LANE....”
2

“...CORRESPONDENCE RELATIVE TO THE ACTUAL VALUE OF THE OPIUM DELIVERED UP TO THE CHINESE AUTHORITIES IN 1839. No. 1, Mr. Trevelyan to Viscount Canning. (Extract.) December 18, 1841. MY Lords request you will state to Lord Aberdeen, that they consider it to be of importance that specific instructions should be transmitted to Sir Henry Pottinger, (by the next mail,) to make every necessary enquiry at the earliest practicable period, with a view to ascertain what was the actual value which each description of opium confiscated by the Chinese Authorities in the months of March and April, 1839, bore in the market at the time when that confiscation took place, and to report the result, together with any observations he may have to make on the subject. My Lords at the same time direct me to suggest that it may be proper that Sir Henry Pottinger’s attention should be called to the trial which took place last year before the Supreme Court at Calcutta, in the case of “ Ramsa-buck Mullick v. de Souza...”
3

“...who, according to the evidence on the trial, had not been able to realize the invoice prices. The only evidence which the plaintiff had given of the price—and it was on him to prove distinctly the value at the time of the breach—was, that when the bad news came from China, about June, opium fell here to about 200 rupees, showing the fall in China to be great; and that the opium scrip had been then sold in China for from 300 to 400 rupees per chest. This was the whole of the evidence of the market price of the drug which the plaintiff had produced. He, therefore, submitted that the verdict ought to be reduced either to nominal damages, or to 200 rupees per chest; the price in June, from which the price in Lintin, might be presumed, or from 300 to 400 rupees per chest, which was the market value of the scrip which was received by the agent in China from Captain Elliot, and which defendant had offered to give the plaintiff on account of the proceeds of the consignment. Chief Justice Ryan. At...”
4

“...letter of the 18th instant, stating that it is desirable that information should be obtained with respect to the value which each description of opium confiscated by the Chinese authorities in the months of March and April, 1839, bore in the market in China at the time when the confiscation took place, I am directed by the Earl of Aberdeen to transmit to you, for the information of the Lords Commissioners of Her Majesty’s Treasury, a copy of an instruction which his Lordship has addressed to Her Majesty’s Plenipotentiary in China upon this subject. I am, &c., (Signed) CANNING. Inclosure in No. 3. The Farl of Aberdeen to Sir Henry Pottinger. Sir, Foreign Office, December 22, 1841. I HAVE to acquaint you that the Lords of the Treasury have stated to me, that it is desirable that you should make every inquiry at the earliesCprac-ticable period, with a view to ascertain what was the value which each description of opium confiscated by the Chinese authorities in the months of March and April, 1839...”
5

“...receipts in discharge of their engagement], the Court found for the plaintiff, and assessed the damages at 400 rupees per chest, upon the express ground of value in the market, when and where the contract was held to be broken by delivery of the opium to me, in consideration of my receipts, i. e., in China, on the 27th of March, 1839; and this assessment was made, because that price was the best which had been procured for my receipts up to that time. The reason for rating the assessment upon this principle seems to have been to supply the deficiency of evidence of market price in China, on the 27th of March, 1839 ; and certainly failing a market price there on the 27th of March, 1839, the price which persons were willing to give for the receipts I had granted for the opium handed to me on that day, was the nearest approximation to the value it might be supposed to have in China at that date, which the Court could reach. It was worth nothing, or it was worth that. But I would wish to observe...”
6

“...most liberal maximum point for the highest description of the opium on the 27th of March, between which point and the Chief Justice’s decision at Calcutta, would be the rate of compensation for the highest class. I am not aware what price had been obtained for the receipts I had granted for Malwa opium, at the date of the decision in Calcutta, but the best rate paid for those receipts up to that time (6th of July, 1840), would, by the same rule, constitute the minimum point in determining the value of that description of opium. Assuming that 400 rupees (or 186 dollars) was the best price paid for the receipts for Malwa opium, and as well as the receipts for Bengal opium, the compensation for Malwa opium would lie between 208 and 186 dollars. The mean prices of the three descriptions of opium estimated on these principles, would be,— Patna • - 218 dollars per chest. Benares - - 209 dollars per chest. Malwa - - 199 dollars per chest. My position with relation to the subject is so peculiar...”
7

“...inclose, and from which your Lordship will find that, in the opinion of this Government, the course of proceeding suggested by the Lords Commissioners of Her Majesty’s Treasury, in order to ascertain the value of the opium extorted by the Chinese Authorities, would be attended with difficulty, delay, and uncertainty as to the correctness of its results; and that the returns of the Government opium sales, and the price-current of opium in the markets of China and India, as reported in the published commercial accounts of Canton, Calcutta, and Bombay, immediately before the prices of opium were affected byj the violent proceedings of the Imperial Commissioner at Canton, will afford a fair and impartial test of the marketable value of the drug at the period referred to ; and that, as a certain value has been given judicially by the Supreme Court of this Presidency to a portion of the opium confiscated by the Imperial Commissioner, which does not vary very materially from the aggregate results deduced...”
8

“...Treasury*, that a full and searching inquiry should be made, at the earliest practicable period, into the actual value which each description of opium confiscated by the Chinese authorities in the months of March and April, 1839, bore in the market, at the time when that confiscation took place; and that the result of this inquiry, with copies of the evidence, and other documents connected with the subject, should be communicated, with any remarks which the Governor-General in Council may think proper to make in elucidation of the subject. To the Governor^General in Council, it appears that a close investigation to effect the object of the Treasury, ought to be instituted and conducted in China, rather than at Calcutta or Bombay, and that even there it would be attended with much difficulty and uncertainty. The only evidence which could be procured to prove the actual value of the opium confiscated, would be that of interested parties, and from that cause the investigation could hardly...”
9

“...prices demanded in China, in March, 1839, but even then there were no purchasers at those prices; and, considering the large accumulation of opium at the mouth of the Canton River, the great quantity of the drug ready to follow from India, and the rapid decline in the value of the article in the Calcutta market from the 14th of April to the 9th of May, it may fairly be calculated that the stock in the China market would soon have been depreciated, and that the prices quoted above could not have been realized. It is supposed, that in point of fact, to a large number of the speculators in opium, the loss of that portion of their property delivered to the Imperial Commissioner was in some measure compensated by the additional value thus given to the opium already purchased and subsequently imported into China by them. The amount of the Canton ransom money remitted to Calcutta in specie and bills has been estimated at 686,233Z. 16s.; but the mint returns from which the exact amount will be ascertained...”
10

“...It was contended for the defence, that the criterion was not what the opium was got for, but what could be got for the opium. The damages were ultimately reduced to 26,000 rupees, which is equivalent to 400 rupees per chest. No. 7. Mr. Addington to Mr. Trevelyan. Sir, Foreign Office, October 14, 1842. I AM directed by the Earl of Aberdeen to transmit to you, for the information of the Lords Commissioners of Her Majesty’s Treasury, a copy of a despatch from Sir Henry Pottinger, relative to the value of the opium given up by Captain Elliot to the Chinese authorities in the year 1839. I am, &c., (Signed) H. U. ADDINGTON. Inclosure in No. 7. Sir Henry Pottinger to the Earl of Aberdeen, Government House, My Lord, Hong Kong, May 17, 1842. A OUR Lordship’s despatch of the 22nd of December, only came to hand on the 13th instant. I now beg to acquaint your Lordship, that the inquiries which I felt it my duty to institute, have only tended to satisfy me that it is absolutely...”
11

“...11 impossible to arrive at any conclusive or satisfactory opinion as to the actual value of the opium which was delivered up by the merchants to Captain Elliot in 1839, and by him transferred to the Chinese Government, at the time of such delivery and transfer, because the stringent measures which had been adopted not only at Canton, but all along the Eastern coast, had rendered prices, even where they are quoted ££ nominal,” and the stock in hand superabundant. It is stated in the Canton price-currents of that period, £t some of the holders appear disposed to sell at any price, but there are no buyers.” ££ There are reports of both Patna and Malwa selling in Macao at from 200 to 300 dollars per chest, in small quantities.” ££ The trade is entirely suspended, not a chest being saleable here.” ££ From the east coast the accounts are nearly as unfavourable.” ££ There is absolutely nothing doing, and we, therefore, withdraw our quotations;” from which remarks Her Majesty’s Government will...”