英国东印度公司、政府与制造商对华贸易垄断之争(1813~1833)

The Struggle to Maintain Monopoly:The East India Company's Competition with the British Government and Manufacturers,1813-1833

《1833年法案》中东印度公司对华贸易垄断权存废问题,体现出英国政府、英国北部工业城市制造商与东印度公司的三角博弈。为维持对华贸易垄断,英国东印度公司宣称茶叶利润与英国民众日常生活和国家税收、公司股息和债务偿还、印度属地政治管理四者息息相关。小斯当东(George Thomas Staunton,Baronet)等广州商馆职员竭力建构广州贸易的特殊性:英国北方工业城市的制造商和其他散商团体易与持有戒备心的清政府发生冲突,存在中英贸易中断的隐患;而英国派遣领事不受中方认可,贸易监督亦无法代替广州商馆管理中英贸易。东印度公司上述主张体现了东印度公司贸易垄断、公行垄断和粤海关监督体制三者为一的垄断利益共同体;广州商馆的权威及影响力,保证东印度公司与行商竞争时保持优势、面对粤海关监督的侵扰时作有限度的抵抗。广州贸易中粤海关监督和公行的阻碍反而成为东印度公司拒绝英国政府和制造商介入对华贸易的保护伞。

The Government of India Act in 1833 reflects the triangular competition between the British government,its manufacturers,and the East India Company.To safeguard its exclusive privileges,the East India Company argued that the profits derived from the tea trade with China were intricately tied to the daily lives of the British people,the government's tax revenues,debt and dividend payments,and the Company's administration in India.Sir George Thomas Staunton and other employees of the Canton Factory considered the Canton trade to be a unique and delicate matter.They observed that the involvement of private traders often clashed with the Chinese government's jealousy and sensitivity,which could put Sino-British commercial relations at risk.Moreover,the Qing authorities refused to recognize the authority of the British Consuls-General at Canton.The constraints imposed on the Canton trade by the Superintendants of Trade,or Hoppo,and the Co-hang acted as a protective barrier,preventing both the British government and private traders from their participation in the Sino-British trade.This situation aligned perfectly with the monopolistic tendencies of the East India Company and reinforced its refusal to allow British governmental authorities or private merchants to participate directly in the commerce with China.