6
Inclosure 7 in No. 1.
11131113,
[This Document
C
the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government2
274
EGE 14 AUG C
Wai-wu Pu to Sir J. Jordan.
(Translation.) Sir,
April 22, 1909. WITH reference to your Excellency's note of the 12th instant, on the subject of certain regulations issued by the Opium Prohibition Bureaux of Chekiang, Hupei, and Anhui, which your Excellency regarded as indicating attempts to form a monopoly of the sale of opium and to impose restrictions on dealings in foreign opium inconsistent with treaty provisions, I have the honour to state that the board addressed telegraphic enquiries on the subject to the Viceroy at Hankow and the governors of Chekiang and Anhui, and from whom the following replies have now been received :-
The governor of Chekiang's telegram is as follows :------
"As regards the question of charging fees on permits to sell raw and prepared opium in the province of Chekiang and on smokers' licences, and that of inviting merchants to undertake management of opium shops, I have directed the Opium Prohibition Bureau to bring these proposals before the Chamber of Commerce for I have received a report discussion, but they have not yet been heen put into effect.
from the Ping Hu district magistrate stating that four prepared-opium shops had been opened in the city and suburbs, and that the various other dealers had agreed to amalgamate. He is taking this step as an experimental measure with a view to facilitating inspection, and it certainly does not constitute an official monopoly."
The Viceroy at Hankow telegraphs :-
"In accordance with the regulations opium smokers are required to obtain a licence in order to purchase the drug, and a tax is levied on smokers for the purpose of meeting the cost of enforcing the opium prohibition and of investigating the consumption of the raw drug and the number of smokers. The raw opium trade is being carried on as usual, taxes and li-kin are being levied as usual, and no change has been made. Public hongs have been established for the purpose of enquiring into the stock of raw opiam as a basis for investigating the amount of consumption, but the trade is not confined to one firm nor to one place of business, and there is absolutely no monopoly. On a previous occasion some British merchants at Hankow were under a similar misapprehension, and a letter of enquiry was received from His Majesty's consul-general, but after the matter had been fully explained to the merchants through him, no further objection was raised."
The
governor
of Anhui's telegram was as follows:-
"The Anhui Opium Prohibition Bureau is administered in every respect in conformity with the regulations laid down last year, and no new rules have been issued. At present the trade in both foreign and native opium is being carried on in exactly the same manner as before, and no distinction is made. The prohibition of cultivation is, however, being strictly enforced, but this has nothing to do with foreign opium."
The board have the honour to observe, with regard to the opening of prepared opium shops and the amalgamation of dealers in Chekiang, as well as the establishment of hongs in Hupei for the purpose of enquiring into the stocks of raw opium, that both these measures have been taken with a view to facilitating investigation, and cannot certainly be regarded as creating a monopoly, whilst in Anhui no new regulations have been issued.
In conclusion, I have the honour to point out that China is vigorously enforcing the prohibition of opium with a view to securing the eradication of the evil, and the arrangement already concluded between our two countries is evidence that both are animated by the same desire. The stringent prohibition of opium which is now being enforced in Chekiang and other provinces does not affect the foreign drug.
I avail, &c.
0
(Ministers of the Wai-wu Pu.)
CHINA TRADE.
CONFIDENTIAL.
[27485]
Sir,
No. 1.
[July 20.]
SECTION 3.
Messrs. Sassoon and Co. to Foreign Office.-(Received July 20.)
THE opium trade in China.
9, Fenchurch Avenue, London, July 19, 1909.
In July 1907 we had the honour to bring to your notice the attempt on the part of the Viceroy of Nanking to create an opium monopoly to the detriment of British merchants' interests. His Majesty's Secretary of State, through His Majesty's Minister at Peking, pointed out to the Viceroy that such a monopoly would constitute an infringement of article 5 of the treaty of Nanking, and the Wai-wu Pu were warned of the danger of permitting the provincial authorities to deal with a question which In this connection we beg to the two Governments had under their consideration. refer you to your letter of the 23rd August, 1907.
Since that time the provincial authorities have made sundry attempts to arrive at the same end by other means, viz., by constantly introducing harsh and restrictive measures with regard to the sale of foreign opium, which are having very injurious effects upon the trade, and threatening merchants like ourselves with enormous losses.
The attention of His Majesty's consul-general at Shanghae, and His Majesty's consul at Nanking has been called by our Shanghae, and His Majesty's consul at Nanking has been called by our Shanghac house to a further proclamation recently issued by the officials of the Bureau of Opium Suppression, Souchow, which contains many new and objectionable regulations, viz. :---
1. The trade is to be confined to three companies or associations (Koong Hong), the members of which alone are allowed to import and deal in opium, and no new hong is to be opened.
This creates a monopoly for the associations in contravention of existing treaties. 2. Only members of the said associations can obtain licences to import foreign opium, and the quality, quantity, and name of town whence imported are stated on such licences.
This entirely destroys the freedom of trade secured to us by treaties, and we may here mention a case which has just come to our knowledge in which four balls of Bengal opium, bearing the customs permit, when taken to Nanking were confiscated and the owner heavily fined for not possessing a licence.
3. Dealers are allowed to sell only to those who hold licences to purchase, and in quantities stated thereon.
4. Buyers' licences specify not only the quantity they are allowed to purchase, but also the name of the particular hong from whom alone they may obtain their supply.
It is true that the new regulations apply to the retail trade only, but any restriction imposed on the retail trade reacts on the wholesale.
We venture to suggest that as long as the trade in foreign opium is legitimate, no restriction of whatever nature should be placed on its sale in any part of China, and that as long as we are allowed to import it we have the right to ask for it, the same freedom of sale as it has hitherto enjoyed, whether the sales are made by us, or by the several dealers through whose hands it passes, no matter in how small quantities the sale may be made. We submit that the opium having once paid the duty and li-kin required by the Customs, should, according to existing treaties, be allowed to be conveyed to any part of China without hindrance.
British merchants are now placed in a very serious predicament, as they hold the necessary stocks to provide for their outstanding contracts with the Chinese dealers, which amount to millions of taels, and if the dealers' outlet for sale is restricted or closed, it will be impossible for them to fulfil their contracts, and the opium will be thrown back on the hands of the importers.
[2363 u-3]