Page:Europe in China.djvu/455

Rh now, standing up for his predecessor, censured Sir Richard (May 1, 1869) for the peculiarly unbecoming tone of his remarks. The embroglio became intensified when Earl Granville complained (October 7, 1869), in view of Sir Richard's independence of action, that the clearest instructions addressed to him seemed insufficient to prevent misunderstanding, and actually threatened Sir Richard by saying (October 8, 1869) that he would view very seriously any further attempt to escape from a strict execution of his instructions. Later on (January 7, 1870) Earl Granville again censured Sir Richard for unwarrantably assuming that he (the Secretary of State) would sanction the proposal to charge against the Special Fund all expenditure of the Colony on police and education in excess of a fixed normal standard. The Governor was sternly ordered to repay into the Special Fund all unauthorized appropriations, amounting to $129,701, and was compelled thereby to sell the Colonial gun-boat and to devise other forms of retrenchment to the great dismay of the Colony.

The differences between Sir Richard and his superiors in Downing Street admitted of no compromise and his whole scheme was wrecked thereby. He had thought only of securing the co-operation of the Chinese licensees to suppress crime and to prevent the corruption of the police. They had been thinking only of their inability to defend in Parliament the raising of any revenue from vice. What Sir Richard fought for, was the farming system. What they objected to, was the raising of a revenue. 'Let the money be thrown into the sea as soon as it is paid, but do not let the hold which it gives the Government over the licensees be abandoned.' These words, addressed by Sir Richard to the Duke of Buckingham (January 30, 1868), contain the true key to an understanding of his policy. But, although in truth the raising of a revenue and not the use of it was the backbone of his scheme, yet the mere raising of a revenue from vice was the exact point in which the Earl of Carnarvon, the Duke of Buckingham and Earl Granville saw the real gravamen of the charges brought against Sir Richard by the opponents of his scheme. Moreover, having once raised a revenue from the