Battle of Kowloon

From Infogalactic: the planetary knowledge core
Jump to: navigation, search

Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.

The Battle of Kowloon was fought between British and Chinese ships off Kowloon, China, on 4 September 1839. It has been called "the first shot of the First Opium War"[1] and arose following a fight in which a local Chinese died at the hands of British troops. The Chinese did not consider the punishment meted out to the perpetrators sufficient and as a result suspended supplies of food to the British, at the same time poisoning their water supplies. In retaliation the British summoned nearby warships in an attempt to force the Chinese to change their minds.

Background

On 7 July 1839, seamen from the Carnatic and Mangalore, both owned by Jardine, Matheson & Co., landed in Kowloon where they were joined by colleagues from other British and American ships. After a group of sailors consumed the rice liquor known as samshu, a local named Lin Weixi in the village of Tsim Sha Tsui was beaten in a drunken brawl and died the next day.[2][3][4] On 15 July, Chief Superintendent of British Trade in China, Charles Elliot, offered rewards of $200 for evidence leading to the conviction of those responsible for the murder and $100 for evidence leading to the instigators of the riot. He also gave $1,500 in compensation to Lin's family, $400 to protect them against extortion of that money from what he called the "lower mandarins", and $100 to be distributed among the villagers.[5]

Unlike English common law, Chinese law held the community, rather than the individual, responsible for transgressions. Imperial Commissioner Lin Zexu demanded the death of the culprit and was prepared to accept any sailor, whether innocent or guilty, to settle the matter. On 12 August, under an Act of Parliament of 1833, Elliot began a court of criminal and admiralty jurisdiction on board the Fort William in Hong Kong harbour, with himself as judge and a group of merchants as the jury.[6] Two men were found guilty of rioting, fined £15 each, and sentenced to three months hard labour to be served in England while a further three men were found guilty of assault and rioting, fined £25 each, and sentenced to six months imprisonment in similar conditions.[7] However, the Act was under review and after arriving in England, they were set free on the grounds that the trial held no jurisdiction. Elliot invited Lin to send observers to the trial, but none came.[6][8] Without the handover of a man to the Chinese, Lin was not satisfied with the proceedings.[7] He viewed the extraterritorial court as an infringement of China's sovereignty.[8]

On 15 August, Lin issued an edict that prevented the sale of food to the British.[6][9] Chinese labourers working for the British in Macao were withdrawn the next day. War junks arrived in coves along the Pearl River and notices above the fresh water springs warned that they were poisoned.[6] On 24 August, the Portuguese Governor of Macao, Don Adraio Accacio da Silveira Pinto, announced that the Chinese had ordered him to expel the British from the colony. He warned Lancelot Dent of the British hong Dent & Co. that the Chinese planned to seize the British dwellings in Macao.[10] On 25 August, former Superintendent John Astell proposed to Elliot that all British boats should evacuate to Hong Kong.[11] By the end of the month, 2,000 people in over 60 ships were in Hong Kong harbour, without fresh food or water. The ships held European merchants, lascars, and dozens of British families. The Volage of Captain Henry Smith and the Hyacinth sailed to Hong Kong on 30 August. Elliot warned Kowloon officials of escalating conflict if the embargo continued.[12]

Battle

On 4 September, Elliot sailed to Kowloon in the cutter Louisa for food supplies, accompanied by a small-armed vessel the Pearl, and a pinnace from the Volage of Captain Smith. Upon arrival, they encountered three anchored Chinese man-of-war junks, whose presence prevented the regular supplies of food. Elliot sent interpreter Karl Gützlaff in a small boat with two men to the centremost junk, which Elliot thought was the commanding vessel.[13] Gützlaff carried two documents from Elliot that he had translated. They included demands for food shipments to be restored and a plea not to repeat the poisoning of the colony's water springs. After a Chinese spokesman read the messages, he told Gützlaff that they lacked the authority to renew food shipments and directed him instead to another junk where a naval officer was said to reside.[1][14]

There, Gützlaff restated his request to allow people to come out and sell provisions. He repeatedly went back and forth between the two parties, repeating details of the conversation with Elliot.[14] After five or six hours of what Elliot called "delay and irritating evasion", he sent a boatload of people to shore with money to purchase supplies, which they accomplished, but were then obliged by authorities to return the provisions. In his report, Elliot wrote that he felt "greatly provoked" upon hearing this and opened fire on the junks, which returned fire with help from the shore battery.[13] They engaged for almost half an hour before the British ships ran low on ammunition and sailed away. After replenishing their cartridges, the Louisa and Pearl re-engaged the junks, which retreated to their former positions.[15][16] The battle ended in a stalemate.[1] Three British were reported wounded[15] and "several" Chinese were killed.[17][18]

Aftermath

During the evening, Elliot and Smith discussed continuing the battle next morning to destroy the three junks and deploy men to attack the battery, but Smith acceded to Elliot's recommendation not to do so. Elliot wrote that an attack would destroy the village and cause "great injury and irritation" to the inhabitants.[15] He circulated a paper on shore the following day which stated:

<templatestyles src="Template:Blockquote/styles.css" />

The men of the English nation desire nothing but peace; but they cannot submit to be poisoned and starved. The Imperial cruizers they have no wish to molest or impede; but they must not prevent the people from selling. To deprive men of food is the act only of the unfriendly and hostile.[14]

Notes

  1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 Hanes & Sanello 2004, p. 66
  2. ↑ Hoe & Roebuck 1999, p. 91
  3. ↑ Hanes & Sanello 2004, p. 61
  4. ↑ Fay 1975, p. 171
  5. ↑ Correspondence 1840, p. 432
  6. ↑ 6.0 6.1 6.2 6.3 Hoe & Roebuck 1999, p. 92
  7. ↑ 7.0 7.1 Correspondence 1840, p. 433
  8. ↑ 8.0 8.1 Hanes & Sanello 2004, p. 62
  9. ↑ The Chinese Repository vol. 8, p. 216
  10. ↑ Hanes & Sanello 2004, p. 63
  11. ↑ Correspondence 1840, p. 435
  12. ↑ Hoe & Roebuck 1999, p. 93
  13. ↑ 13.0 13.1 Correspondence 1840, p. 446
  14. ↑ 14.0 14.1 14.2 Correspondence 1840, p. 449
  15. ↑ 15.0 15.1 15.2 Correspondence 1840, p. 447
  16. ↑ Elleman 2001, p. 18
  17. ↑ Janin 1999, p. 116
  18. ↑ Hoe & Roebuck 1999, p. 95
Bibliography
  • Correspondence Relating to China (1840). London: Printed by T. R. Harrison.
  • The Chinese Repository (1840). Volume 8.
  • Elleman, Bruce A. (2001). Modern Chinese warfare, 1795–1989. Routledge. ISBN 0-415-21473-4.
  • Fay, Peter Ward (1975). The Opium War, 1840–1842. University of North Carolina Press. ISBN 0-8078-1243-9.
  • Hanes, William Travis; Sanello; Frank (2004). The Opium Wars: The Addiction of One Empire and the Corruption of Another. Sourcebooks. ISBN 1-4022-0149-4.
  • Hoe, Susanna; Roebuck, Derek (1999). The Taking of Hong Kong: Charles and Clara Elliot in China Waters. Curzon Press. ISBN 0-7007-1145-7.
  • Janin, Hunt (1999). The India-China Opium Trade in the Nineteenth Century. McFarland. ISBN 0-7864-0715-8.
  • Waley, Arthur (1958). The Opium War Through Chinese Eyes. Stanford University Press. ISBN 0-8047-0611-5.


Retrieved from "https://infogalactic.com/w/index.php?title=Battle_of_Kowloon&oldid=2538618"