666 / Notes to pages 55–9
C. A. Bayly and D. H. Kolff (eds.), Two Colonial Empires:
Comparative Essays on the History of India and Indonesia in the
Nineteenth Century (The Hague, 1986), pp. 111–35; S. David, The
Indian Mutiny (2002); F. Robinson, ‘The Muslims of Upper India and
the Shock of the Mutiny’, in his Islam and Muslim History in South
Asia (New Delhi, 2000), pp. 138–55.
111.PP1867 (478) VII.197, 553, Select Committee to Inquire into
the Duties of the British Army in India and the Colonies: Report,
Proceedings, Minutes of Evidence, p. 327: Minute by Lord Dalhousie,
13 September 1854.
112. Graham, Britain and the Modernization of Brazil,chs.1–3.
113. See P. Gootenburg, Between Silver and Guano: Commercial
Policy and the State in Postindependence Peru (Princeton, 1989).
114. Chapman, Merchant Enterprise, pp. 203–4.
115. C. Trocki, Singapore: Wealth, Power and the Culture of Control
(2006), pp. 14–15.
116. Trocki, Singapore,p.24.
117. Opium made up 33 per cent of Chinese imports in 1868, cotton
goods 29 per cent: F. E. Hyde, Far Eastern Trade 1860–1914 (1973),
p. 217; for legalisation, see S. T. Wang, The Margary Affair and the
Chefoo Agreement (Oxford, 1940), p. 120.
118. N. Pelcovits, The Old China Hands and the Foreign Office (New
York, 1948), pp. 35, 42.
119. Pelcovits, Old China Hands,p.42.
120.Y.P.Hao,The Commercial Revolution in Nineteenth-Century
China (1986), p. 355.
121. See PP 1877 (5), Report and Statistical Tables Relating to
Emigration and Immigration, 1876, Table XIII.
122. Dilke, Greater Britain (1869), p. vii.
123. For the debate on the motives behind Peel’s decision to repeal
the Corn Laws, see B. Hilton, ‘Peel: A Reappraisal’, Historical
Journal, 22 (1979); B. Hilton, The Age of Atonement: The Influence