/ n7 ?8 b+ m: K; N5.39.217.76那麼,在 1841 年 1 月 26 日起至《南京條約》簽訂前,香港是否屬於約開商埠?嚴格來說,由於香港在 1 月 25 日已被英軍佔領,並在翌日完成升旗禮之後,隨即象徵正式接管香港,香港成為英國海外領土。因此香港初期的開埠,並非基於不平等條約。4 L6 H4 Z P6 u& P$ N/ a, M; A
tvb now,tvbnow,bttvb& M* ?; A1 m8 ]6 S0 N
琦善和義律沒有就《穿鼻草約》達成協議,而雙方君主亦沒有批准草約,因此草約本身只是一紙空文,並不具法律效力 [2] 。即使有,香港割讓和開埠都並非以草約的法理為依據,而是建立在後來 1 月 26 日英軍的實際佔領之上。故此,在史學上一般認為,香港開埠為英軍舉行升旗禮的1月26日開始,而非義律宣佈《穿鼻草約》的 1 月 20 日。事實上,草約的宣佈,只是義律在追加法律確認之前,將佔領變為既定事實的手法。而這種經驗主義的行事方式,是英國殖民主義慣用解決問題的方法 [3] 。 2 k! H. U! ]! _6 J% A+ z3 S5 B5.39.217.76TVBNOW 含有熱門話題,最新最快電視,軟體,遊戲,電影,動漫及日常生活及興趣交流等資訊。8 d8 U, \5 m5 c6 s; A( q
《Convention of Chuenpee》原文 [4] : 4 G ^0 Y: n3 o3 A, ^1 Z" x5.39.217.76
“Her Majesty’s plenipotentiary has now to announce the conclusion of preliminary arrangements between the imperial commissioner and himself involving the following conditions: ; s% q: c9 k( \+ c
The cession of the island and harbour of Hongkong to the British crown. All just charges and duties tot the empire upon the commerce carried on there to be paid as if the trade were conducted at Whampoa.
An indemnity to the British government of six millions of dollars, on million payable at once, remainder in equal annual instalments ending in 1846.
Direct official intercourse between the countries upon equal footing.
The trade of the port of Canton to be opened within ten further arrangements are practicable at the new settlement."
" }6 ?5 O! F$ b2 w: C5.39.217.76
TVBNOW 含有熱門話題,最新最快電視,軟體,遊戲,電影,動漫及日常生活及興趣交流等資訊。& V& {) k& G G5 T, j& ?
5 ~ ^5 Q& c+ f+ u6 r0 N) x5.39.217.76現今泛指國際法這一詞,在 19 世紀後半葉一般稱為歐洲公法 (droit public de I’Europe, European public law) 。當時歐洲公法的特徵,主要都是圍繞著保障歐洲國際社會利益,例如歐洲中心主義、擴張主義等的法律秩序。歐洲認為公法是「文明國家之間的法律」,世界亦因而給劃分為歐洲文明國家、中國等半文明國家,和野蠻國家。為了要將侵略世界非文明國家的擴張行為合理化,歐洲公法乃成為一種帝國主義的法律工具 [6] 。 5 n8 P% H# _* x, A( Atvb now,tvbnow,bttvb公仔箱論壇# `6 X, k% X: W8 K0 Y
4 x, j* @! L$ c C% g為証明自己是公正無私的文明國家,並要迫使不文明國家遵循他們的價值觀和法理規範來行事,以維護其特權和利益,在 18 世紀初,國際法著作便成為這種擴張主義的白手套。而國際法作者的國藉,便顯得尤其關鍵 – 列強爭相出版國際法。而當中的焦點,便是那個國家更有資格代表普世價值。因此, 19 世紀最著名的國際法著作,1836年分別在倫敦和費城出版的《Elements of International Law》(中譯為《國際法原理》),能夠在 1864 年由美國傳教士丁韙良 (W. A. P. Martin, 1827-1916) 翻譯為漢語版《萬國公法》,美國政府對翻譯的推動,包括時任中國海關稅務司司長赫德 (Sir Robert Hart, 1835-1911) 的支持,實在不可或缺 [7] 。因此,當時國際法的約束力,較為適用於列強間的秩序維繫和利益分配,多於對國際間的無限擴張。 - y7 R! Z: M! k7 F+ U' h" p公仔箱論壇 $ L# A9 o& ?% T在過去一個多世紀,世界各地在國際法和平條約的領土割讓實例中,一般劃分為因征服而割讓 (subjugation) ,和因條約 (treaty) 買賣而割讓兩種,而兩者均必須以條約為法律依據。那麼,條約基於什麼條件才產生法律效力?《國際法原理》第二章第五節中指出,有效的條約必須首先由君主賦予全權的代表,在達成協議之後,雙方代表簽署才能正式生效 [8] :tvb now,tvbnow,bttvb: ], J6 C, d5 m3 r) C& Y4 L' _/ U
As to other public treaties: in order to enable a public minister or other diplomatic agent to conclude and sign a treaty with the government to which he is accredited, he must be furnished with a full power, independent of his general letter of credence. Grotius, and after him Puffendorf, consider treaties and conventions, thus negotiated and signed, as binding upon the sovereign in whose name they are concluded, in the same manner as any other contract made by a duly authorised agent binds his principal according to the general rules of civil jurisprudence.4 m3 `$ E: A, p8 V5 y; Y
關於代理君主的大臣之職權,文中寫道:7 _: B* Q0 D: R! X4 E
the sovereign is bound by the acts of his ambassadors, within the limits of his patent full-power, although the latter may have transcended or violated his secret instruction. But if the minister exceed his authority, or undertake to treat points not contained in his full-power and instructions, the sovereign is fully justified in delaying, or even refusing his ratification.tvb now,tvbnow,bttvb; W" ] V( z6 P) u
before a sovereign can honourably refuse to ratify that which has been concluded in virtue of a full power, he must have strong and solid reasons, and, in particular, he must show that his minister has deviated from his instruction. 7 V1 t- K7 [3 e4 j公仔箱論壇
另外,《國際法原理》第四節又指出,假如全權代表擅自立約,在沒有得到君主准許或授權的情況下作出超越其權力的約定或承諾,最終仍必須得到(君主)的准許: 5 |' c* t/ C) U1 h5 ^tvb now,tvbnow,bttvb
Such acts or engagements, which made without authority, or exceeding the limits of the authority under which they purport to be made, are called Sponions. These convention must be confirmed by express or tacit ratification.tvb now,tvbnow,bttvb6 ~% s9 \/ Z+ t* e+ H& K
此外,假如條約中包含了領土割讓,還需要得到被割讓一方的同意 [9] : + o! `: W" [6 y
the assent of the chambers, clothed with the forms of a legislative act, is considered essential to the ultimate validity of a treaty ceding any portion of the national territory. $ i: ~9 C5 Z8 U( V# @ n公仔箱論壇
最後,與當今國際法一樣,在第八節中,亦清楚說到,在文明國家的法學中,「恃強逼勒」的情況下所簽訂的條約,是不能生效的 [10] :TVBNOW 含有熱門話題,最新最快電視,軟體,遊戲,電影,動漫及日常生活及興趣交流等資訊。& S9 S7 [# K+ @5 L. I0 @% R
By the general principles of private jurisprudence, recognized by most, if not all, CIVILIZED COUNTRIES, a contract obtained by violence is void. Freedom of consent to the validity of every agreement, and contracts obtained under duress are void, because the general welfare of society requires that they should be so.(大寫為筆者所加) " Q" @9 {' \, t6 e& N) @# r
Her Majesty’s plenipotentiary has now to announce the conclusion of preliminary arrangements between the imperial commissioner and himself involving the following conditions: * u! D5 ~0 h1 W$ n
The cession of the island and harbour of Hongkong to the British crown. All just charges and duties tot the empire upon the commerce carried on there to be paid as if the trade were conducted at Whampoa.
An indemnity to the British government of six millions of dollars, on million payable at once, remainder in equal annual instalments ending in 1846.
Direct official intercourse between the countries upon equal footing.
The trade of the port of Canton to be opened within ten further arrangements are practicable at the new settlement.
根據草約所指,義律與琦善已達成「達成初步安排」 "the conclusion of preliminary arrangements between the imperial commissioner and himself" 。然而,這個「達成初步安排」的文據究竟是什麼呢?在義律發佈公吿後的第六天,即1841年1月26日英軍佔領香港這天,伯麥照會大鵬協副將賴恩爵,內容如下 [2] :tvb now,tvbnow,bttvb* f L# c7 Y/ S/ _- y% G
至此,什麼是義律所指「達成初步安排」的文據,還是不太清晰。6 `. n' T. `& B$ k9 m( z
其後,在 1841 年 2 月 1 和 2 月 2 日,伯麥和義律分別發出關於香港已割讓予英國的公告,統稱為義律公告 (Elliot’s Proclamations) [3] 。 - \! y$ P. R( ?$ d2 月 1 日,伯麥和義律發表的公告: x0 t1 O, m& S, x
Bremer, Commander-in-chief, and Elliot, Plenipotentiary, etc., by this proclamation make know to the inhabitant of the island of Hongkong, that that island has now become part of the dominions of the Queen of England by clear public agreement between the High Officers of the Celestial and British Courts…..TVBNOW 含有熱門話題,最新最快電視,軟體,遊戲,電影,動漫及日常生活及興趣交流等資訊。 N! b$ g. a& z9 c8 [# p- E
The island of Hongkong having been ceded to the British Crown under the seal of the Imperial Minister and High Commissioner Keshen, it has become necessary to provide the Government thereof, pending Her Majesty’s pleasure…… & ?3 A5 @: c+ S* X D6 }! e' \ _TVBNOW 含有熱門話題,最新最快電視,軟體,遊戲,電影,動漫及日常生活及興趣交流等資訊。
兩份公告目的在於曉喻香港居民,英國已經成為香港的新統治者。即便如此,民眾亦毋需惶恐,因為中國傳統禮儀習俗、宗教儀式、風俗習慣等個人權利不但會繼續保留,而且基於引入一種華洋分治,一島兩制的二元化法律體系 (a dual legal system) ,即華人將繼續依從中國法律及習慣,英國及其他各國人士則接受英國法的統治 [4] 。 & Z! H3 s+ g5 {- B/ ~公仔箱論壇根據中國社會科學院研究員劉存寛教授,在其著作《香港史論叢》第二章<英國強佔香港島與所謂「穿鼻條約」>中指出,這兩份公告的基礎,是以 1 月 20 日的通知為依據。換言之, 2 月 1 日公告中的 "clear public agreement between the High Officers of the Celestial and British Courts" ,和義律 2 月 2 日公告中所指的 "The island of Hongkong having been ceded to the British Crown under the seal of the Imperial Minister and High Commissioner Keshen" ,都是以義律在通知中的「達成初步安排」為依據。而這個有「達成」「安排」的「文據」,便是琦善在《穿鼻草約》蓋上的關防。5.39.217.76+ o) _- U2 S* d! y: @0 h: Z1 x* t+ n
對於義律要求放人的私請,琦善於兩天後的 1 月 18 日,復照說道 [10] :& D6 i0 ^& z( o, G, s
照會接據貴公使大臣來文,均衡已閱悉。現在諸事既經說定,所請釋放港腳黑人那密及法法蘭西國人單亞泥二人,本大臣爵閣部堂即飭去員,帶交貴公使大臣釋放可也。為此照會。5.39.217.761 F# D. J+ x! q3 e
首先,我們嘗試詮釋琦善復照的背景和內容。此照 (F. O. 682/858) 是琦蓋給義律請求放人的回覆。而復照中所指的「諸事」,究竟所謂何事?查中英雙方在1841年 1 月中旬的一番文書往來後,得知兩人的確就英方交還定海、沙角大角、中方代奏請給香港寄居,以及上述釋放二人的協議,因此已經「說定」 [11] 。就義律 14 日的照會來說,「將以沙角、大角二處送還」的代價是「將尖沙咀、香港各等處讓給英國主治」,既然琦善就「將以沙角、大角二處送還」為代價並以「止擇一處地方寄寓泊船」代奏道光帝,雙方即就此達成協議,那麼琦善便需履行承諾,為此口頭協議「代奏」道光帝,即琦善在 1 月 15 日的復照中「(惟尖沙咀與香港)代為籌計盡善」 [12] 。此時,琦善還說由於「諸事皆定」,亦不想因此一事而延誤談判。按邏輯說,只有「將尖沙咀、香港各等處讓給英國主治」,才符合作為退還二角的交換條件。可是,義律卻視「現在諸事既經說定」中琦善所承諾的「代奏」,偷梁換柱為承諾「讓給英國主治」。 1 月 20 日,義律復照琦善 [13] :5.39.217.76; O* |7 }4 U D8 H
照得貴大臣爵閣部堂二十六日來文,均已閲悉。現在事事既已說定,本公使大臣全賴貴大臣爵閣部堂誠信,知必如議,於二十一年正月初旬以內,就行開港貿易,茲備公文,咨會佰統師,請即讓還沙角、大角等處。所有兵船軍師,撤退九龍所近之香港島地駐剳,並請將日前所獲貴國舟師等船,一俟貴大臣爵閣部堂派弁。」# `. i2 O: w5 v: x: B6 f
從義律這復照的內容來看,他重複琦所說的「現在事事既已說定」,並不只是重申琦善復照中所說的釋放兩名港腳商人的決定,更不是重申琦善所承諾的「代奏」,而是對自己「讓還沙角、大角等處」、「兵船軍師撤退九龍所近之香港島地駐剳」等承諾的保証。換言之,義律已獨自將「尖沙咀、香港各等處讓給英國主治」變為既定事實。5 ?$ M T+ h b# m( f+ }
然而,義律在 20 日這復照仍沒有將香港主權問題包含在「現在事事既已說定」內。到了 1 月 28 日和 30 日,伯麥致廣東大鵬營協鎮和義律發給琦善的復照中,我們便可以清楚看到,兩人將生米當作熟飯吃的全景 [13] : ( C/ i8 x3 r. \. I [9 Z9 W 1 Y3 w) P2 W7 Q& F/ L& G" s公仔箱論壇伯麥:「照得本國公使大臣義。與欽差大臣爵閣部堂琦。說定諸事,議將香港等處全島地方,讓給英國主掌,已有文據在案。」 ' k4 p1 y" u- K3 _" k. atvb now,tvbnow,bttvb義律:「照得先日與貴大臣爵閣部堂,議香港一島讓給英國主治,其對面之尖沙嘴地,聽照大臣爵閣部堂來意,不請兼給,當經面為說明。」 7 f: s: h0 p: o. H公仔箱論壇TVBNOW 含有熱門話題,最新最快電視,軟體,遊戲,電影,動漫及日常生活及興趣交流等資訊。( l# [# K7 ]& t- @* r% Q; D, ]: m
對於讓出香港給英國主治,琦善究竟有何回應呢?琦善遲遲沒有回答關於香港島的主權問題。由義律在以上 1 月 30 日宣佈「議香港一島讓給英國主治」起,直至 6 天後的 2 月 5 日,琦善才在發給義律的復照中稱義律應就他於 1 月 5 日的「開列各條」(當中以戰爭脅迫琦善懲治林鄧二人、平等行書模式、償還款項、歸還定海等事宜,但不包括香港寄居或主治)來砌商 [15] ,不能「更改等語」。亦由於義律的要求與其在 1 月 8 日擬訂的《酌定草底》,即 2 月 13 日給琦善《善定事宜》的草約「不甚相遠,不過漢文通順,是以語句字面,每有不同」為由,並要求與義侓再晤詳談 [16] 。 $ N# M8 n2 B) p! b. h0 v5.39.217.76 ; b' H3 A U. o. l% E! g& R' T. {8 UTVBNOW 含有熱門話題,最新最快電視,軟體,遊戲,電影,動漫及日常生活及興趣交流等資訊。到了 2 月 13 日,心急如焚的義律仍未等到琦善的實際回覆,亦沒有面談草約細節,於是義律照會促請琦善說道 [17] : 0 Z/ ~8 z4 s9 r' O9 n公仔箱論壇
今將昨經貴大臣爵閣部堂與本公使大臣議擬陳列善定事宜條款,逐一繕寫漢英同文一張送閲。惟照英國之例,須應兩國欽差大使,均在一所,同時當面蓋印,是故特請貴大臣爵閣部堂,指出面會處所,定於早日再晤,幸得蓋印完結。TVBNOW 含有熱門話題,最新最快電視,軟體,遊戲,電影,動漫及日常生活及興趣交流等資訊。7 o4 O/ L' G! x7 v
You have obtained the Cession of Hong Kong, a barren Island with hardly a House upon it; and even this Cession as it is called, seems to me, from the conditions with which it is clogged, not to be a cession of the Sovereignty of the Island, which could only be made by the signature of the Emperor, but to be a permission to us to make a Settlement there, upon the same footing on which the Portuguese have an establishment at Macao. - M, m4 a$ `. }1 b2 s5.39.217.76
With reference to the Proclamation which has appeared in the Newspapers of this Country, issued by you to Her Majesty’s Subjects in China, in which you declare the Island of Hong Kong to be annexed forever tot the British dominions, I have to observe to you that no part of the Territory belonging to one Sovereign can be ceded and made over to another Sovereign, except by a formal Treaty, ratified by the Sovereign by whom the cession is made, and that no Subject has the power to alienate any portion of the territory of his Sovereign. Consequently, the agreement made by Keshen that Hong Kong should be ceded to the British Crown, EVEN IF THAT AGREEMENT HAS BEEN RECORDED IN THE FORMAL SHAPE OF A TREATY, would have been of NO VALUE or force until it had been ratified by The Emperor of China. Your Proclamation was therefore ENTIRELY PREMATURE, inasmuch as it does not appear that any formal Treaty for the cession of Hong Kong had been signed between you and Keshen; and that all events, it is certain that at the time when you issued your Proclamation, no such Treaty, even if signed by Keshen, had been ratified by the Emperor.(大寫為筆者所加) 4 d) U" s! R9 }6 A$ w6 g
In ignorance of Captain Elliot’s proposals of Jan 8, 1841, it is impossible to state clearly what was agreed to on this point; but it would appear that the Island of Hong Kong had been ceded as a place of settlement; clogged, however, with a condition that all duties are to be paired there in the same manner as they have hitherto been paid at Whampoa; that is (it is presumed) that they should be assessed and collected at Hong Kong by Chinese officers. In fact, IT DOES NOT CLEARLY APPEAR THAT HONG KONG IS CEDED TO GREAT BRITAIN IN ABSOLUTE SOVEREIGNTY.(大寫為筆者所加)tvb now,tvbnow,bttvb2 E% V; U9 _& Y% i2 ^+ h0 i7 e
F.O., London, April 21, 1841, Lord Palmerston to captain Elliot, R.N, 《International relation of the Chinese empire》, H.B. Morse, p.642.# i( `( `1 u, f* {- T: r5 W
另有中文譯文: . L a& Z$ J' { o# h「你已經爭得香港的割讓,一處連一所房子都難找到的荒島;甚至這一種所謂的割讓,據我看,由於受種種條件的牽制,也不是一種非經皇帝簽署才能辦到的島嶼主權的割讓,而只是我們在那裏建一居留區的一種許可,其地位是同葡萄牙人在澳門所有的那一種制度一樣。」公仔箱論壇; r2 x3 y0 j% B5 O2 b
《中華帝國對外關係史》,第一卷,馬士著,第 728 頁。
F.O., London, May 14, 1841, Lord Palmerston to captain Elliot, R.N, 《International relation of the Chinese empire》, H.B. Morse, p.647. 1 O9 N( U% ?9 ?- }3 m4 H+ ytvb now,tvbnow,bttvb另有中文譯文: $ e1 ^9 G8 D" h, n: \* M6 w5.39.217.76「除非是通過一項由進行割讓的君主所批准的正式條約,沒有一部份屬於一位君主的領土,能割讓予和轉讓給另一位君主,並且沒有一個臣民有權把他君主的領土任何部分割讓與人。因此,琦善所作的把香港割讓予英國君主的協議,縱使該恊議已經寫成一個條約的正式形式,但在中國皇帝予以批准之前,也不會有任何價值或效力的。在你和琦善之間,對於割讓香港一節,并不象是簽訂了任何正式條約,而已無論如何,我們可斷言在你發布通告的當時,這種條約即使經過琦善簽字,也絕不是已經由皇帝批准的,因此你的通告全然是為時太早。」 7 R3 e' f7 l. `0 [# f4 O0 Wtvb now,tvbnow,bttvb《中華帝國對外關係史》,第一卷,馬士著,第 735 頁。
STATEMENT, B. DEMANDS 4, 《International relation of the Chinese empire》, H.B. Morse, p. 646.
The government of China is perfectly convinced that the Island of Hong Kong will not be yielded up, and if it suited the purposes or character of Her Majesty’s Government to accept it under any such modification as would save the appearance of its formal cession, and declaration were made that we were satisfied with that extent of territorial possession, they would be well content to adjust affairs at once. $ B$ t# \4 |, K. |5.39.217.76