Never been enslaved, but real slave

The New light of Myanmar Monday, 21 May, 2001

BY Dr Ma Tin Win ( Institute of Education)

I am going to write about King Mongkut called King Rama IV, using facts from a book by Siamese (Thai) history professor Rong Syamananda. If I happened to refer to the book of others, I might be thought to be writing out of ill will against Siam. Rong Syamananda is history professor of Chulalongkorn University.It is safe to quote his book.

In his book,

It is said that a British officer by the name of Sir John Bowring called on King Mongkut on 16 April 1855. The purpose of his call was to ask for extraterritorial jurisdiction power for the British in Siam.

Mongkut also wanted to be allied with Britain. In addition, if he had refused, Britain would not have exercised patience. This being the case,Mongkut signed a friendship and commercial agreement on 18 April 1855.

The conditions of the agreement were as follows:

1. Long-lasting peace and friendship was to be established;
2. The British had the right to do commercial activities at any Siamese ports they liked;
3. They had the right to settle themselves in Bangkok; they could do so wherever they could reach by boat in 24 hours;
4. They had the right to freedom of faith;
5. The British who registered at the British Consular Office had the right to buy plots of land in the area of 4-mile perimetre around the wall of Bangkok;
6. If a dispute arose between the British and the Siamese, a British representative himself as well as a Siamese officer would hear the case, no matter who was a culprit.
7. Siam had to give the British the right to import opium, gold bullion,silver bullion and personal goods without having to pay customs on them.
8. Customs duties are to be assessed on other imports by not more than 3 percent without classification.
9. The Great Britain enjoyed the status of a most-favoured nation.
10. The agreement was not to be cancelled. If the agreement was to be amended, it could be amended only with the consent of both parties.

Bowring put his success on records. It was recorded that the rights which the Siamese were enjoying, the system of restricting sale of royal goods and privileges which the king and his entourage and persons of high ranks were holding could be rooted out. If Bowring wanted to boast about his success, he should do so. There were many rights gained without having to fight even a battle and to spend even a penny. The tenth condition was very clear, so I don' need to explain it again.

History Professor Rong said that after the agreement was reached with Bowring, Siam lost its jurisdiction power and the right to the use of money. It is because if a person was granted a certificate as a citizen or a British subject, Siamese courts did not have jurisdiction power over him. The royal goods department had to be closed once and for all.

In the agreement, there was no time frame. If Siam did not sign it, Bowring would coerce it into doing so. Rong's book stated that Bowring said like this. Mongkut conferred Siamese titles on Bowring who asked him to sign the agreement. In addition, Mongkut helped Bowring collect facts for the latter's book " Siamese Kingdom and subjects." That book was published in two volumes in 1857. It was published in London. Oxford University Press reprinted it in 1969. I have these two volumes. I know how to put ideas into words whenever I write an article. I present whatever ideas I come up with.

Now what I would like to present is that as Great King Mongkut did not dare to oppose the British, who beat Myanmar as well as the Chinese in the first opium war, he met Sir John Bowring on 16-4-1855 and signed the agreement on 18-4-1855. In view of these facts, the conditions of the agreement did not seem to be approved through negotiations. I think that Great Mongkut had to put his sign on the agreement which was written in advance by Bowring.

It is very astonishing to learn that they had to give the British tax exemption for opium, gold bullion and silver bullion according to the agreement. When Rantabo treaty was signed after Myanmar lost the first Anglo-Myanmar war, Myanmar did not have to give such conditions to the British. After the second war, Myanmar refused to sign an agreement. Therefore, there was no such a kind of agreement. There were no such things as extraterritorial jurisdiction and the status of a most-favoured nation in the treaty signed by Myanmar.

Why did Great King Mongkut easily signed the agreement as bidden by Bowring. I can say one thing surely. If he gave all the things the British wanted, he did not lose the throne. He thus gave away the country to keep his throne.

In fact, it is even at the very earlier time that the British introduced Neocolonialism to Siam. There was no expenses for war. Nor were there management costs. They, keeping the king of Siam on the throne, just asked him for whatever they wanted. Siam was not enslaved. If I have to say with constraint, its jurisdiction traditions were broken, and its monetary system was upset. It, in fact, become a real slave.

In 1856, the US tried to follow in the footsteps of Britain and to sign a new agreement with Siam. US President Franklin Pierce sent Townsand Harris as an ambassador. At that time Townsand Harris was American Consul-General to Japan. The US representative Townsand Harris arrived at Chao Phraya Port on 15 April 1856. On 29 the same year, he signed a new agreement with Siam. American missionary Stephen Matton was appointed as US ambassador to Siam. What was included in the American-Siamese agreement was the same as those included in the agreement of Bowring. In the place of the name of Britain, the name USA was just put.

For example, Britain would have the right to a most-favoured nation status. In this sentence, the name Britain was replaced with the name USA.

In 1856, the agreement signed by representative of the Napoleon III of France M de Montingny and Siamese was the same as the agreement of Bowring. The agreements which were identical to the agreement of Bowring, were signed by Denmark and Portuguese in 1858, Netherlands in 1860, Prussia (German Customs Union) in 1865 and Sweden, Belgiun and Italy in 1868. Before 1852, only English, Dutch and Portuguese merchants came to Siamese. Bowring's agreement was followed by many other agreements signed with other nations. As a result,in 1856 there were even about 200 international ships entering Bangkok Port.

That's right. I do not know how much there were opium on 200 ships, for which no customs duties needed to be given. If rowdy sailors created problems in Bangkok, Siamese courts didn't need to do anything but hand over them to respective nations. Their men were just to take their own medicines. If they died, there was nothing to do but bury them. Formerly, Cambodia was under the influence of Siam. Cambodia had to present gifts to Siam. Although Siam did not directly rule over Cambodia, it got gifts regularly and had dignity. In July 1867, Siam concluded an agreement with France. According to that agreement, Siam had to recognize Cambodia as a nation under the protection of France. A sentence which said that the agreement signed by Siam and Cambodia formerly was null and void, was included in the agreement concluded with France.

The fact that the term " Most-favoured nation status" had to be included in every agreement concluded with any countries, raises a question. According to this term, if a right was given to Britain, other nations would have that right automatically. They were also most-favoured nations. They got the right to extraterritorial jurisdiction power. When Siam signed an agreement with France, it had to give whatever France asked for. If they said that they had occupied the place belonging to Siam, Siam had to sign for it. It had to give other things as extra gifts. They had to promise that French boats and ships were allowed to cruise in Mekhong River as well as in the royal lake and assistance would be given to them if necessary. That's why I said so. As King Mongkut was on the throne of Siam, there was no one who would say that Siam was enslaved. Its people would not know it. But it is a real slave. It is nothing else but a slave.