Page 229 - The colours of each piece: production and consumption of Chinese enamelled porcelain, c.1728-c.1780

CHAPTER 6 A New Context of Porcelain Trade 1760-1770

41
tendencies of the Co-Hong. The Co-Hong system only lasted for a decade, and
42
eventually, within the involvement of the EEIC, the Co-Hong was abolished in 1771.

Although the Co-Hong system was abolished in 1771, the networks of outside

merchants and shopkeepers remained. The Co-Hong were focused on trade in and

around Canton, so gradually Chinese inland merchants’ agents began to connect with

the Canton Trade, which had the effect of funnelling trade between the European

merchant and Chinese Canton merchants. From there, the shopkeepers, for example,

who were allowed to sell certain articles only to foreigners, were bound to ship them

off through a Hong merchant; and every series of five shopkeepers became joint-

security to a Hong merchant for payment of the duties in their trade. The Hong

merchants were, in turn bound mutually to the Government for duties owed by them

individually, and also for their respective debts incurred during their legitimate trade

with foreigners, for which the Government became a guarantor.

When Canton was confined to a single port, Co-Hong was eager to recruit

merchants to participate in the trade, as it found it difficult to deal with the ever

growing trade. As was noted,

Soon after the establishment of the Co-Hong, its merchants found that

they could not attend to every part of the immense business monopolized

& in consequence the trade in China ware, shoes, clothes, ivory & tortoise

shell works and a few other things was thrown open. The Hong still

retained in the trade of Tea and Silk. It was soon made the interests of

41 Ibid.
42 One common account of the Co-Hong’s demise, given mainly scholars working from the
records of the EIC, holds that the EIC paid a bribe of 100,000 taels to have the Co-Hong dissolved.
Van Dyke argued, however, because he finds it extremely unlikely that a one-time bribe could
have dissolved the Co-Hong. Instead, he posits that it was a decision made by the Qing
Government. Van Dyke, Politics and Strategies, p.62.
213