¹ Dennett, Tyler, Americans in Eastern Asia (New York, 1922), chap, xxxGoogle Scholar; Griswold, A. Whitney, The Far Eastern Policy of the United States (New York, 1938), 137–138, 146, 467-470Google Scholar; Kennan, George F., American Diplomacy, 1900-1950 (Chicago, 1951), chaps, ii and iiiGoogle Scholar; Varg, Paul A., “The Myth of the China Market,” chap, iii in his The Making of a Myth: The United States and China, 1897-1912 (East Lansing, Mich., 1968)Google Scholar; Young, Marilyn B., The Rhetoric of Empire: American China Policy, 1895-1901 (Cambridge, Mass., 1968)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Young, , “American Expansion, 1870-1900: The Far East,” in Bernstein, Barton, ed., Towards a New Past (New York, 1968), 176–201Google Scholar; Young, , “The Quest for Empire,” in May, Ernest R. and Thomson, James C. Jr., eds., American-East Asian Relations: A Survey (Cambridge, Mass., 1972), 131–142Google Scholar; and Cohen, Warren I., America's Response to China: An Interpretative History of Sino-American Relations (New York, 1971), 67–68Google Scholar.

² For export figures, see Liang-lin, Hsiao, China's Foreign Trade Statistics (Cambridge, Mass., 1974), 162–163Google Scholar; Chung-p'ing, Yenet al., comps., Chung-kuo chin-tai ching-chi shih t'ung-chi tzu-liao hsüan-chi [Selected statistical materials on modern Chinese economic history] (Peking, 1955), 65Google Scholar; and U.S. Bureau of the Census, Historical Statistics of the United States, Colonial Times to 1957 (Washington, 1960), 537, 551.Google Scholar

A look at the share of the China trade controlled by Americans reveals a more dramatic advance — a quadrupling between 1891 and 1931. The American share of China's imports increased from 4.5 per cent (1891-1893 average) to 19.2 per cent (1929-1931 average). The values were $4,500,000 in 1890, $16,400,000 in 1910, and $107,000,000 in 1930, near the peak year for China's overall foreign trade.

³ Investment statistics: Remer, Charles F., Foreign Investments in China (New York, 1933), 285–286, 332-333, 338, 405, 548Google Scholar; U.S. Bureau of the Census, Historical Statistics 565.

⁴ Varg, “The Myth of the China Market.”

⁵ Wilson, Joan Hoff, American Business and Foreign Policy, 1920-1933 (Lexington, Kentucky, 1971), 202–218Google Scholar.

⁸ Williams, William Appleman, The Tragedy of American Diplomacy (New York, 1959)Google Scholar; LaFeber, Walter, The New Empire: An Interpretation of American Expansion, 1860-1898 (Ithaca, N.Y., 1963)Google Scholar; McCormick, Thomas J., China Market: America's Quest for Informal Empire, 1893-1901 (Chicago, 1967)Google Scholar; McCormick, , “American Expansion in China,” American Historical Review, 85 (June, 1970), 1393–1396CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁷ See, for example, Scheiber, Harry N., “World War I as Entrepreneurial Opportunity: Willard Straight and the American International Corporation,” Political Science Quarterly, 84 (September, 1969), 486–511CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Mazuzan, George T., “‘Our New Gold Goes Adventuring’: The American International Corporation in China,” Pacific Historical Review, 43 (May, 1974), 212–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Pugach, Noel H., “American Shipping Promoters and the Shipping Crisis of 1914-1916: The Pacific and Eastern Steamship Company,” American Neptune, 35 (July, 1975), 166–182Google Scholar; Lorence, James J., “Coordinating Business Interests and the Open Door Policy: the American Asiatic Association, 1898-1904,” in Israel, Jerry, ed., Building The Organizational Society (New York, 1972), 127–142Google Scholar; Israel, Jerry, Progressivism and the Open Door: America and China, 1905-1921 (Pittsburgh, 1971)Google Scholar; Braisted, William R., “China, the United States Navy, and the Bethlehem Steel Company, 1909-1929,” Business History Review, 42 (Spring, 1968), 50–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Healy, David, US Expansionism: The Imperialist Urge in the 1890s (Madison, Wisconsin, 1970), chap, iv (on James H. Wilson)Google Scholar; McCormick, Thomas J., “The Wilson-McCook Scheme of 1896-1897,” Pacific Historical Review, 36 (February, 1967), 47–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Kahn, Helen Dodson, “Willard D. Straight and the Great Game of Empire,” in Merli, Frank J. and Wilson, Theodore A., eds., Makers of American Diplomacy (New York, 1974), vol. 2, pp. 29–54.Google Scholar

⁸ Ta-nien, Liu, Mei-kuo ch'in-Hua shih [A history of American aggression against China] (Peking, 1951)Google Scholar; Chü-yin, T'ao, Mei-kuo ch'in-Hua shih-liao [Historical materials on American aggression against China] (Shanghai, 1951)Google Scholar; Sun Yü-t'ang, “The Historical Development and Aggressive Nature of American Imperialist Investment in China (1784-1914),” trans. Michael H. Hunt, Chinese Studies in History, 8 (Spring, 1975), 3–17. See also the editorial comments in the collection by Chu Shih-chia and in the several series on the modem Chinese economy, all cited below.

⁹ Cotton cloth and kerosene made up 80 per cent of the value of U.S. exports to China in 1895. By 1909 those same two products together with tobacco accounted for 84 per cent. By 1922 those three products had fallen to 49 per cent due largely to the decline in cotton cloth exports (off from 47 per cent in 1895 to 2 per cent in 1922). The drop was only partially offset by the increased export to China of raw cotton and tobacco products from the United States. Shu-lun, Pan, The Trade of the United States with China (New York, 1924), 59–60, 110-111Google Scholar; and Ping-yin, Ho, The Foreign Trade of China (Shanghai, 1935), 74–75Google Scholar.

¹⁰ The following picture of Standard Oil operations comes primarily from Hidy, Ralph W. and Hidy, Muriel E., Pioneering in Big Business, 1882-1911 (New York, 1955), 122–123, 147, 152-153, 237, 261-263, 265-268, 531, 547-548, 552-553, 750 n. 46Google Scholar. See also Chen, Ch'enet al., comps., Chung-kuo chin-tai kung-yeh shih tzu-liao, ti-erh chi [Historical materials on modern Chinese industry, second series] (Peking, 1958), 324–326, 335Google Scholar; and Allen, G. C. and Donnithorne, Audrey G., Western Enterprise in Far Eastern Economic Development: China and Japan (London, 1954), 100–101Google Scholar. On pricing, see Williamson, Harold F.et al., The American Petroleum Industry (2 vols; Evanston, Ill., 1959, 1963), I, 495, 728Google Scholar. On sales, see Williamson, I, 742, 752; Williamson, II, 277-278, 725; Remer, Charles F., The Foreign Trade of China (Shanghai, 1926), 56Google Scholar; Hidy and Hidy, Pioneering in Big Business, 415, 528; Yang, C. and Hau, H. B.et al., Statistics of China's Foreign Trade During the Last Sixty-Five Years (Shanghai [?], 1931), 45–46, 67Google Scholar; Gull, E. M., British Economic Interests in the Far East (London, 1943), 56.Google Scholar

¹¹ According to Ch'en Chen, Standard agents submitted regular reports not only on business conditions but also on political and military affairs in their districts, Chung-kuo chin-tai kung-yeh shih tzu-liao, ti-erh chi, 336. This potentially fascinating source for local history appears to have disappeared along with the rest of the firm's archives.

For a sense of the life of the Standard agent through the 1910s and early 1920s, see Oil for the Lamps of China (Indianapolis, 1933)Google Scholar, a novel by Alice Tisdale Hobart, who married into the firm.

¹² A copy of a Standard contract with a Chinese merchant is in Decimal File 393.115 St2/60, Record Group 59 (Records of the Department of State), National Archives, Washington, D.C. (hereafter DF file number/document number).

¹³ Gerretson, F. C., History of the Royal Dutch (4 vols.; Leiden, 1953-1957), III, 138, 189–191, 195-196, 249-250, 269, 289-307, and IV, 108-113, 119Google Scholar; Gibb, George S. and Knowlton, Evelyn H., The Resurgent Years, 1911-1927 (New York, 1956), 79Google Scholar; and Penrose, Edith T., The Large International Firm in Developing Countries: The International Petroleum Industry (London, 1968), 55–56, 104-105Google Scholar.

¹⁴ After the break-up of the Standard Oil trust in 1911, its former export arm in China, Standard Oil of New York, continued operations there.

¹⁵ Cochran, Sherman G., “Big Business in China: Sino-American Rivalry in the Tobacco Industry, 1890-1930” (Doctoral dissertation, Yale University, 1975), 11–16, 40-50, 56-62, 75-82, 89-90.Google Scholar See also Ching-yü, Wang, comp. Chung-kuo chin-tai kung-yeh shih tzu-liao, ti-erh chi, 1895-1914 nien [Historical materials on modem Chinese industry, second series, 1895-1914] (2 vols.; Peking, 1957), I, 209–215, 220 ffGoogle Scholar; Ch'en Chen, Chung-kuo chin-tai kung-yeh shih tzu-liao, ti-erh chi, 92-97, 129-133, 140-141; and Durden, Robert F., The Dukes of Durham, 1865-1929 (Durham, N.C., 1975), 76–80.Google Scholar

¹⁶ Thomas, James A., A Pioneer Tobacco Merchant in the Orient (Durham, N.C., 1928), 42Google Scholar. Thomas’ memoir conveys a sense of the spirit and resourcefulness of early BAT operations in China.

¹⁷ Chung-p'ing, Yen, Chung-kuo mien-fang-chih shih-kao, 1289-1937 [Draft history of cotton textiles in China, 1289-1937] (Peking, 1955), 87–91Google Scholar. For sales and production statistics, see Fong, H. D., Cotton Industry and Trade in China (2 vols.; Tientsin, 1932), I, 249Google Scholar; Tse-i, P'eng, comp., Chung-kuo chin-tai shou-kung-yeh shih tzu-liao (1840-1949) [Historical materials on modern Chinese handicraft industries, 1840-1949] (4 vols.; Peking, 1957), II, 457Google Scholar; Copeland, Melvin T., The Cotton Manufacturing Industry of the United States (Cambridge, Mass., 1912), 224Google Scholar.

¹⁸ Keishi, Ohara, comp. and ed., Japanese Trade and Industry in the Meiji-Taisho Era, trans, by Tamotsu, Okata (Tokyo, 1957), 300, 337-340, 344-369Google Scholar; Keizo, Seki, The Cotton Industry of Japan (Tokyo, 1956), 51–54, 59-62, 123-126Google Scholar; Hubbard, G. E., Eastern Industrialization and Its Effect on the West (Oxford, 1935), 50, 80-85, 111-112, 120Google Scholar; Yen, Chung-kuo mien-fang-chih shih-kao, 132-133; Allen and Donnithorne, Western Enterprise, 205; memo prepared jointly by the State Department's Division of Far Eastern Affairs and Bureau of Trade Relations, early spring 1908, Numerical File 12471/-1, Record Group 59 (Records of the Department of State), National Archives, Washington, D.C. (hereafter NF file number/document number); Blicksilver, Jack, Cotton Manufacturing in the Southeast: An Historical Analysis (Atlanta, 1959), 24, 113-116Google Scholar; Sandberg, Lars G., Lancashire in Decline: A Study in Entrepreneurship. Technology, and International Trade (Columbus, Ohio, 1974), chaps, x-xiGoogle Scholar; Clark, W. A. Graham, Cotton Goods in Japan and Their Competition in the Manchurian Market (Washington, D.C., 1914), 226–278Google Scholar; and Odell, Ralph M., Cotton Goods in China (Washington, D.C., 1916), 109–116, 142-156.Google Scholar

¹⁹ Galambos, Louis, “The Trade Association Movement in Cotton Textiles, 1900-1935,” Explorations in Entrepreneurial History, 2nd series, 2 (Fall, 1964), 31–55Google Scholar; Fong, I, Cotton Industry, 59, 251-252, 268-269; Copeland, Cotton Manufacturing, 155-158, 170-171, 221, 226-230; Blicksilver, Cotton Manufacturing in The Southeast, 22-40, 55-56; Robson, R., The Cotton Industry in Britain (London, 1957), 358Google Scholar; Taussig, Frank W., The Tariff History of the United States (8th ed.; New York, 1931), 243, 266-267, 433, 466-467, 513.Google Scholar

²⁰ The literature is rich. Good places to start are Wright, Mary C., “The Rising Tide of Change,” in her China in Revolution: The First Phase, 1900-1913 (New Haven, Conn., 1968)Google Scholar; Rhoads, Edward, China's Republican Revolution: The Case of Kwangtung, 1895-1911 (Cambridge, Mass., 1975)Google Scholar; En-han, Li, Wan-Ch'ing shou-hui k'uang-ch'üan yün-tung [The movement to recover mining rights in the late Ch'ing] (Taipei, 1963)Google Scholar; Feng-t'ien, Chao, Wan-Ch'ing wu-shih-nien ching-chi ssu-hsiang shih [Economic thought during the last fifty years of the Ch'ing period] (Peiping, 1933)Google Scholar; Hou, Chi-ming, Foreign Investment and Economic Development in China, 1840-1937 (Cambridge, Mass., 1965), 1–4, 130-134, 150-152CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Des Forges, Roger V., Hsi-liang and the Chinese National Revolution (New Haven, Conn., 1973)Google Scholar.

²¹ On Russell and Company, see Liu, Kwang-chin, Anglo-American Steamship Rivalry in China, 1862-1876 (Cambridge, Mass., 1962)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Chung-kuo, shih-hsüeh hui, comp., Yang-wu yün-tung [The “foreign matters” movement] (8 vols.; Shanghai, 1961), VI, 16ffGoogle Scholar; and Chung-yang, yen-chiu yüan, chin-tai, shih yen-chiu so, comp., Hai-fang tang [Records on maritime defense] (9 vols.; Taipei, 1957)Google Scholar, “Kou-mai chuan p'ao” [Purchase of ships and guns], part 2, pp. 939ff. On the Shanghai plant, see Paulsen, George E., “Machinery for the Mills of China: 1882-1896,” Monumenta Serica, 27 (1968), 32–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar; U.S. Department of State Foreign Relations of the United States, 1883, 129-203 passim; and Yü-t'ang, Sun, comp., Chung-kuo chin-tai kung-yeh shih tzu-liao, ti-i chi, 1840-1895 nien [Historical materials on modern Chinese industry, first series, 1840-1895] (2 vols.; Peking, 1957), 162–165Google Scholar. On the railway concession, see Li En-han, “Chung-Mei shou-hui Yüeh-Han lu-ch'üan chiao-she” [Sino-American negotiations over the recovery of rights over the Hankow-Canton railroad], Chi-k'an [Bulletin of the Institute of Modern History, Academia Sinica], no. 1 (1969), 149-215.

²² Wang, Chung-kuo chin-tai kung-yeh shih tzu-liao, ti-erh chi, 1895-1914 nien, I, 26-28; Hou, Foreign Investment, 109-111; Allen and Donnithorne, Western Enterprise, 152.

²³ Chung-yang, yen-chiu yüan, chin-tai, shih yen-chiu so, comp., K'uang-wu tang [Records on mining affairs] (8 vols.; Taipei, 1960), VI, documents 2324, 2327, 2336, 2338-2339, 2361–2374, VII, documents 2469-2472Google Scholar; Feng-shih, Lu, comp., Hsin-tsuan yüeh-chang ta-ch'üan [A new compilation of treaty terms] (Shanghai, 1909), ch. 13, 40–41Google Scholar.

²⁴ Preface, p. 9, of Shu-fen, Ch'i. Ti-kuo chu-i t'ieh-t'i hsia ti Chung-kuo [China under the imperialist heel] (Shanghai, 1925).Google Scholar

²⁵ Allen and Donnithorne, Western Enterprise, 50, 55, 74, 76, 82, 118, 142-143, 249.

²⁶ Cochran, “Big Business in China,” 33-39 and chaps, iii-viii; Wang, Y. C., “Free Enterprise in China: The Case of a Cigarette Concern, 1905-1953,” Pacific Historical Review, 29 (1960), 395–414CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and the entry for Chien Chao-nan in Boorman, Howard L., ed., Biographical Dictionary of Republican China (New York, 1967-1971), I, 364–365Google Scholar.

²⁷ Reports in NF 14732.

²⁸ P'eng, Chung-kuo chin-tai shou-kung-yeh shih tzu-liao, II, 166-170, 477-478. The quote is from p. 167. See also: Remer, Foreign Trade, 56-57, 94-95, 157; and Hidy and Hidy, Pioneering in Big Business, 137.

²⁹ Remer, Foreign Trade, 95; Hsiao, China's Foreign Trade Statistics, 96: P'eng, Chungkuo chin-tai shou-kung-yeh shih tzu-liao, II, 342-352; and Ta-chin, Yang, Chin-tai Chungkuo shih-yeh t'ung-chih [A guide to modem Chinese industry] (2 vols.; Nanking, 1933), I, 648.Google Scholar

³⁰ Pugach, Noel H., “Standard Oil and Petroleum Development in Early Republican China,” Business History Review, 45 (Winter, 1971), 452–473CrossRefGoogle Scholar: Ch'en Chen, Chung-kuo chin-tai kung-yeh shih tzu-liao, ti-erh chi, 327-331; and DF 893.00/2124 (on opposition in Changsha). See Chu, Samuel C., Reformer in Modern China: Chang Chien, 1853-1926 (New York, 1965)Google Scholar, and the entries in Boorman, Biographical Dictionary, for Hsiung Hsiling and Chou Tze-chi — all for evidence of the economic nationalism in Yüan's cabinet.

³¹ Ch'eng T'ien-tou, Shih-yu li-cho [Deliberations on petroleum] (Chung-shan district [Kwangtung?], 1930), chap. iii. This work was published by the Industrial and Commercial Petroleum Company [Kung-shang lien-yu kung-ssu].

³² Lu, Hsin-tsuan yüeh-chang, to-ch'üan, ch. 13, 16-18; Yen-wei, Wang and Liang, Wang, comps., Ch'ing-chi wai-chiao shih-liao [Historical materials on late Ch'ing diplomacy] (Peking, 1935)Google Scholar, Hsüan-t'ung years, ch. 22, 27-31; Shih-chia, Chu, comp., Shih-chiu shih-chi Mei-kuo ch'in-Hua tang-an shih-liao hsüan-chi [Selected archival materials on American aggression against China during the nineteenth century] (2 vols.; Peking, 1959), 350–351, 404-406Google Scholar; and numerous entries in U.S. Department of State, Foreign Relations of the United States (e.g., 1884, 1887, 1888, 1892, 1893, 1906, 1908, 1911, 1914, 1926).

³³ See materials in NF 5260/40; NF 379/3-4; NF 13188/4; NF 8424/-16, 21-27; NF 788/164-167, 231-238; NF 8602/-10, 20-23; NF 3543/4-5; DF 693.116/43, 44, 47, 49, 54, 55; DF 393.115 St2/43, 45, 47, 50-51, 61, 64, 65, 69-71; DF 893.00/357, 389, 795, 2124.

The BAT experience is not instructive on the relationship between businessmen and Washington. Even though for the first two decades the firm's management was largely American — Duke, who guided its global operations (as well as provided the bulk of the start-up capital), and Thomas, who headed its China operations — the company looked primarily to the British Foreign Office for support and protection. British registry and the existence of its headquarters in London help account for this particular diplomatic orientation, but it may also reflect a calculation that the Foreign Office was more likely than the State Department to be solicitous and effective in guarding interests in China. In 1920 Thomas cut his ties with BAT, and in 1923 Duke died and control passed into the hands of the British members of the board, thus further strengthening the British character of the firm and its propensity to look to the Foreign Office.

³¹ DF 393.115 St2/28-42 passim.

³⁵ David A. Wilson, “Principles and Profits: Standard Oil Responds to Chinese Nationalism, 1925-1927,” Pacific Historical Review, forthcoming.

The BAT also agreed to taxation by the Nationalist government at this time. But the Nationalists, by taxing BAT at a rate lower than its Chinese competitor, in effect sacrificed economic nationalism to gain badly needed revenue. For the BAT settlement, see Cochran, “Big Business in China,” 351-353, 363-364; and Gittings, John, The World and China, 1922-1972 (New York, 1974), 28–29Google Scholar. More general accounts are Vincent, John Carter, The Extraterritorial System in China: Final Phase (Cambridge, Mass., 1970), chap, vCrossRefGoogle Scholar; Young, Arthur N.; China's Nation-Building Effort, 1927-1937: The Financial and Economic Record (Stanford, Calif., 1971), 22–23Google Scholar; and Hou, Foreign Investment, 105, 148.

³⁶ NF 1164/43-49, 55, 69-70.

³⁷ Julean Arnold (consul, Amoy) to the State Department, January 14, 1911, DF 393.115 St2/43.

³⁸ DF 393.115 St2/70; DF 893.00/795.

³⁹ Gittings, The World and China, 33.

⁴⁰ Yen, Chung-kuo mien-fang-chih shih-kao, 98-107; Sun, Chung-kuo chin-tai kung-yeh shih tzu-liao, ti-i chi, 1840-1895 nien, 1037ff; Samuel Chu, Reformer in Modem China, 17-21; Ho, The Foreign Trade of China, 497; Hou, Foreign Investment, 173-177; Feuerwerker, Albert, “Handicraft and Manufactured Cotton Textiles in China, 1871-1910,” Journal of Economic History, 30 (June, 1970), 346CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Myers, Ramon H., “Cotton Textile Handicraft and the Development of the Cotton Industry in Modern China,” Economic History Review, 2nd series, 18 (December, 1965), 627–628.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁴¹ Ho, The Foreign Trade of China, 74-76; Fong, Cotton Industry and Trade in China, I, 46-50, II, 35; Yang and Hau, Statistics of China's Foreign Trade, 66.

⁴² Wen-chih, Liet al., comps., Chung-kuo chin-tai nung-yeh shih tzu-liao, ti-i chi [Historical materials on modem Chinese agriculture, first series] (Peking, 1957), I, 890–895Google Scholar; Sun, Chung-kuo chin-tai kung-yeh shih tzu-liao, ti-i chi, 922-925; Yang-wu yün-tung, I, 556.

⁴³ Fong, Cotton Industry and Trade in China, II, 67. American manufacturers of textile machinery enjoyed a boom in sales to the growing Chinese textile industry during and immediately after World War I, but in general the industry in China showed a distinct preference for British machinery. Fong, I, 79-81, 84.

⁴⁴ I draw my information but not mv interpretation from Borg, Dorothy, American Policy and the Chinese Revolution, 1925-1928 (New York, 1947)Google Scholar; Wilson, American Business, 215-216, 221; Vincent, The Extraterritorial System; Arthur Young, China's Nation-Building Effort, 17-18, 426; and Iriye, Akira, After Imperialism: The Search for a New Order in the Far East, 1921-1931 (Cambridge, Mass., 1965).Google Scholar For the Chinese perspective, see Cavendish, P., “Anti-imperialism in the Kuomingtang, 1923-28,” in Ch'en, Jerome and Tarling, Nicholas, eds., Studies in the Social History of China and South-east Asia (Cambridge, England, 1970), 23–56Google Scholar; and Cohen, Warren I., “The Development of Chinese Communist Policy Toward the United States, 1922-1933,” Orbis, 11 (Spring, 1967), 219–237.Google Scholar

⁴⁵ Steigerwalt, Albert K., The National Association of Manufacturers, 1895-1914: A Study in Business Leadership (Ann Arbor, Mich., 1964)Google Scholar; Kaufman, Burton I., “Organization for Foreign Trade Expansion in the Mississippi Valley, 1900-1920,” Business History Review, XLVI (Winter 1972), 444–465CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Kaufman, , “The Organizational Dimension of United States Economic Foreign Policy, 1900-1920,” Business History Review, 46 (Spring, 1972), 17–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Parrini, Carl P., Heir to Empire: United States Economic Diplomacy, 1916-1923 (Pittsburgh, 1969)Google Scholar; and Wilson, American Business.

⁴⁷ Paterson, Thomas G., “American Businessmen and Consular Service Reform, 1890's to 1906,” Business History Review, 40 (Spring, 1966), 77–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hunt, Michael H., Frontier Defense and the Open Door (New Haven, Conn., 1973)Google Scholar; Schmeckebier, Laurence F. and Weber, Gustavus A., The Bureau of Foreign and Domestic Commerce (Baltimore, 1924), 26-27, 38, 41, 85, 108–109.Google Scholar

⁴⁸ Wilkins, Mira, The Emergence of Multinational Enterprise: American Business Abroad from the Colonial Era to 1914 (Cambridge, Mass., 1970), 107Google Scholar; Allen and Donnithorne, Western Enterprise, 109, 118; Phelps, Clyde W., The Foreign Expansion of American Banks: American Branch Banking Abroad (New York, 1927), 37, 146-49, 212Google Scholar; K'o, Hsien, Chin-pai nien-lai ti-kuo chu-i tsai-Hua yin-hang fa-hsing chih-pi k'ai-k'uang [A general account of the issuance of paper currency in China by imperialist banks in the past hundred years] (Shanghai, 1958), 52, 57-58, 98-104, 172-173, 183-185Google Scholar; Pan Shu-lun, Trade of the U.S. with China, 324-328; Lee, Frederic E., Currency, Banking and Finance in China (Washington, D.C., 1926), 102-108, 115, 118–119Google Scholar.

⁴⁹ Hidy and Hidy, Pioneering in Big Business, 531.

⁵⁰ Libby to the State Department, February 6, 1911, DF 160/9. Singer, a pioneering American-based multinational, similarly depended on its own staff instead of consuls. Davies, Robert B., “‘Peacefully Working to Conquer the World’: The Singer Manufacturing Company in Foreign Markets, 1854-1889,” Business History Review, 43 (Autumn, 1969), 318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁵¹ Braisted, William R., “The United States and the American China Development Company,” Far Eastern Quarterly, 11 (February, 1952), 147–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and Kurgan-Van Hentenryk, G., Léopold II et les groupes financiers belges en Chine: La politique royale et ses prolongements (1895-1914) (Brussels, 1972), 226–254, 436-550Google Scholar, both on the Hankow-Canton railway concession lost in 1905; Hunt, Frontier Defense, chaps, xi-xiv, on Taft-Knox financial diplomacy; and Wilson, American Business, 202-207, on the second consortium.

⁵² The realist case is systematically argued in Varg, “The Myth of the China Market,” 37-43.

⁵³ For general challenges to the conclusions of this school, see Hou, Foreign Investment; Hou, , “The Oppression Argument on Foreign Investment in China, 1895-1937,” Journal of Asian Studies, 20 (August, 1961), 435–448CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Nathan, Andrew J., “Imperialism's Effects on China,” Bulletin of Concerned Asian Scholars, 4 (December, 1972), 3–8Google Scholar; and Murphey, Rhoads, The Treaty Ports and China's Modernization: What Went Wrong? (Ann Arbor, Mich., 1970)Google Scholar.

⁵⁴ For an early and wide-ranging application to the BAT of this Chinese critique of foreign enterprise, see Ch'ao, Hsi, “Ying-Mei yen kung-ssu tui-yü Chung-kuo kuo-min ching-chi ti ch'in-shih” [BAT encroachment on China's national economy], in Chung-kuo, ching-chi ch'ing-pao she, ed., Chung-kuo ching-chi lun-wen chi [Collected essays on the Chinese economy] (Shanghai, 1936)Google Scholar, first series, 91-99. The recent treatment by Gittings, The World and China, 17-30, is in the same vein. By way of comparison, see Cochran's (in “Big Business in China”) somewhat more cautious conclusions on the BAT's impact drawn from ampler evidence.

⁵⁵ For a discussion of the impact of imported cotton yarn and cloth on handicrafts, see Myers, “Cotton Textile Handicraft,” 616-625; Feuerwerker, “Handicraft and Manufactured Cotton Textiles,” 339-348, 373-378; and Reynolds, Bruce L., “Weft: The Technological Sanctuary of Chinese Handspun Yarn,” Ching-shih wen-t'i, 3 (December, 1974), 1–19.Google Scholar

⁵⁶ Hu, Liu, “Shih-nien lai chih chih-wu yu cha lien kung-yeh” [The vegetable oil extracting and refining industry in the last decade], in Hsi-hung, T'an, ed., Shih-nien lai chih Chung-kuo ching-chi [China's economy in the last decade] (3 vols.; preface 1948; Taipei reprint), I, 252.Google Scholar

⁵⁷ Chen, Ch'en, comp., Chung-kuo chin-tai kung-yeh shih tzu-liao, ti-san chi [Historical materials on modern Chinese industry, third series] (2 vols.; Peking, 1961), I, 649–662Google Scholar; Ch'en Chen, Chung-kuo chin-tai kung-yeh shih tzu-liao, ti-erh chi, 328.

⁵⁸ In addition to the works by Cochran (“Big Business in China”) and Wilkins (“Emergence of Multinational Enterprise”) cited above, see Wilkins, Mira, The Maturing of Multinational Enterprise: American Business Abroad from 1914 to 1970 (Cambridge, Mass., 1974)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Becker, William H., “American Manufacturers and Foreign Markets, 1870-1900: Business Historians and the ‘New Economic Determinists,’” Business History Review, 47 (Winter, 1973), 466–481CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Becker, “Foreign Markets for Iron and Steel, 1893-1913: A New Perspective on the Williams School of Diplomatic History,” and his exchange with Schonberger, Harold, Pacific Historical Review, 44 (May, 1975), 233–262.Google Scholar

⁵⁹ Chung-kuo, k'o-hsüeh yüan, Shang-hai, ching-chi yen-chiu so, and Shang-hai, she-hui k'o-hsüeh yüan, ching-chi, yen-chiu so, comps., Nan-yang hsiung-ti yen-ts'ao kung-ssu shih-liao [Historical materials on the Nanyang Brothers Tobacco Company] (Shanghai, 1958).Google Scholar