In 1856, the Treaty of Paris nominally welcomed the Ottoman Empire into the Concert of Europe, but this exposed a deep fault line in international relations. Although the gesture implied full sovereign rights, it seemed incompatible with the extraterritorial privileges held by Europeans in Ottoman lands under the age-old capitulations. New commercial treaties complicated the issue by extending similar privileges to British subjects as far afield as China, Siam and Japan.
Consular jurisdiction soon became the focus of controversy inWestminster as extraterritoriality featured prominently in local disputes following British commercial expansion across Asia, among them the Arrow incident that led to the Second Opium War. In Japan and other states, it would also become a key grievance in popular campaigns against 'unequal treaties' and the injustices of informal empire. This analysis shows how, even before such narratives of resistance emerged, there was already a seam of ambivalence in Victorian political discourse on the question of extraterritoriality. In the Foreign Office it came as no surprise to be told of defects in these treaties, but it was the context of the existing debate, notably fresh initiatives to set up mixed courts, that framed the British response. Hawai'i was accorded full sovereign rights in 1846 on concluding treaties with Britain and France. Having converted to Christianity in 1820, this became the first non-European indigenous state admitted to the Family of Nations. 8No such understanding was shared with non-Christian states to the east. In the Ottoman Empire, customs, religion and laws were considered so fundamentally different that special concessions known as capitulations had long since exempted Venetian, Genoese and other merchants from local justice. These granted foreign residents the privilege of extraterritoriality by placing them under the protection of their own consuls. 9 Initially conferred as gifts of all-powerful sultans (notably Suleiman the Great to the king of France in 1536), such privileges were now viewed more as inherent rights. 10 Montesquieu, among others, had fostered a belief that Europeans were entitled to immunity from the barbarous laws that oriental despots used to enslave their own subjects. Fears of alleged tyranny and torture justified similar privileges as Western powers then made terms with China (1842), Siam (1855), and Japan (1858). 11 Extraterritoriality thus became a key element in the treaty port system extended across East Asia in the nineteenth century. The 1843 Foreign Jurisdiction Act provided a legal framework, confirming the authority of British courts overseas 'by treaty, capitulation, grant, usage, sufferance, and other lawful means'. 12 Soon after the Treaty of Paris, however, concerns were raised in some quarters about the wisdom or even justice of consular jurisdiction. In October 1856, it was at the heart of the Arrow incident, the dispute in Guangzhou that prompted the outbreak of the Second Opium War.