382 Boundaries and Beyond
From the viewpoint of the trade value, in a single voyage every
500 ton junk could carry an amount of cargo worth 20,300 Spanish
dollars, based on the lowest estimate at this point in time. The total
cargo value of a round trip was therefore 40,600 dollars. Going on
this calculation, the total trade value of the Chinese junks at this
time amounted to 6,918,240 dollars. In 1818 (the 23rd year of the
Jiaqing reign), the import value of all the foreign βirms [foreign-
owned yang hang] in Canton was 4,333, 750 dollars, and the
export value was 5,945, 603 dollars. The lowest estimate of the
trade value for the Chinese trading junks would reach a βigure of
only slightly below 70 per cent of the total import-export value of
all the foreign βirms.^117Combining the sources of information derived from works by John
Crawfurd and others, Sarasin Viraphol concludes:
In the early 1820s there were about 222 Chinese junks, averaging
200 tons each, from Fukien [Fujian], Kwangtung [Guangdong], and
Chekiang [Zhejiang] trading in the Eastern Seas, and 89 of these, or
about 40 per cent of the total force, involving over 2,000 crewmen,
traded annually to Siam, making it the most important junk port
of the period. The remaining junks traded elsewhere were: 8 to
Singapore, 20 to Japan, 13 to the Philippines, 4 to Sulu Seas Island,
2 to the Celebes, 13 to Borneo, 7 to Java, 10 to Sumatra, 1 to Rhio
[Riau], 6 to the east coastal of the Malay peninsula, 20 to Annam
[Vietnam], 9 to Cambodia, and 20 to Tonkin.^118A new destination of the Chinese junks in the early nineteenth century
was Singapore, which had adopted a free-trade policy after the arrival
of the British in 1819. The favorable trading environment attracted the
arrival of many merchant ships. In 1820, 20 Chinese junks anchored off
the pier. “Three came from China, two from Cochin China [the Vietnam
coast], and the remaining βifteen from Siam.”^119 In the following years,
four large junks, excluding those from Hainan that were usually smaller,
- T’ien Ju-k’ang, “Shiqi shiji zhi shijiu shiji zhongye zhongguo fanchuan”, pp. 16‒7.
- Sarasin Viraphol, Tribute and Proϔit, p. 188. The information concerning
the number of Chinese junks cited by Sarasin Viraphol originates from John
Crawfurd’s testimony delivered before the Select Committee of the House of
Commons on March 25, 1830, p. 452. - Lim How Seng 林孝胜, Xinjiapo huashe yu huashang 新加坡华社与华商
[Singapore Chinese community and entrepreneurs] (Singapore Society of Asian
Studies, 1995), p. 6.
http://www.ebook3000.com