[Sidenote:  Origin of the Mission.]

On October 8, 1856, a lorcha named ‘Arrow,’ registered as a British vessel, and carrying a British flag, was boarded by the authorities of Canton, the flag torn down, and the crew carried away as prisoners.  Such was the English account.  The Chinese denied that any flag was flying at the time of the capture:  the British ownership of the vessel, they maintained, was never more than colourable, and had expired a month before:  the crew were all their own subjects, apprehended on a charge of piracy.

The English authorities refused to listen to this.  They insisted on a written apology for the insult to their flag, and the formal restitution of the captured sailors.  And when these demands were refused, or incompletely fulfilled, they summoned the fleet, in the hope that a moderate amount of pressure would lead to the required concessions.  Shortly after, finding arms in their hands, they thought it a good opportunity to enforce the fulfilment of certain ‘long-evaded treaty obligations,’ including the right for all foreign representatives of free access to the authorities and the city of Canton.  With this view, fort after fort, suburb after suburb, was taken or demolished.  But the Chinese, after their manner, would neither yield nor fight; and contented themselves with offering large rewards for the head of every Englishman.

When this state of matters was reported to England, it was brought before the House of Commons on a motion by Mr. Cobden, condemnatory of ’the violent measures resorted to at Canton in the late affair of the “Arrow."’ The motion, supported by Mr. Gladstone in one of his splendid bursts of rhetoric, was carried against the Government by a majority of sixteen, in a full and excited house, on the morning of February 26, 1857.  But Lord Palmerston refused to accept the adverse vote as expressing the will of the people.  He appealed to the constituencies, candidly telling the House that, pending that appeal, ’there would be no change, and could be no change, in the policy of the Government with respect to events in China.’  At the same time he intimated that a special Envoy would be sent out to supersede the local authorities, armed with full powers to settle the relations between England and China on a broad and solid basis.

[Sidenote:  Appointment of Lord Elgin.]

But where was the man who, at a juncture so critical, in face of an adverse vote of the House of Commons, on the chance of its being rescinded by the country, could be trusted with so delicate a mission; who could be relied on, in the conduct of such an expedition against a foe alike stubborn and weak, to go far enough, and yet not too far—­to carry his point, by diplomatic skill and force of character, with the least possible infringement of the laws of humanity; a man with the ability and resolution to insure success, and the native strength that can afford to be merciful?  After ‘anxious deliberation,’ the choice of the Government fell upon Lord Elgin.