2.
native opium, further outlets for the Indian article will be closed. The two first named absorb about 400 chests monthly of Indian opium, although the demand in the latter has fallen off somewhat owing, it is said, to the large harvest gathered in the poppy fields of Southern Fukien this year.
With regard to the effect which will be produced by the second cause, viz., the ratification of The Hague Convention of 1912, various indications point to the likelihood that ratification will be quickly followed by a Chinese request for the closing of the opium shops at Shanghai under article 18 of the convention. It will not be easy to evade a request of this kind, and even if only a percentage of the shops in question be closed in the first year the confidence in the minds of the native dealers will experience a shock and the sales will receive a set-back.
The third and last of the causes requiring consideration in its bearing on the sales of the stocks at Shanghai and Hong Kong is the proposed increase of the export of uncertificated opium by 4,200 chests. The amount of uncertificated opium allowed for exportation to non-China markets during the years 1910-1913 was 16,000, 14,000, 13,200, and 9,000 respectively. For the year 1914 no official intimation has been received at this legation, but from notices in the press it would appear that the Indian Government intend to raise the figure to 13,200. In my despatch No. 220 of the 9th May, 1912, I laid stress upon the fact that 14,000 chests were in excess of the requirements of the non-China markets, and urged very strongly the desirability of reducing the export to the actual needs of countries outside China, and a few days later I received a letter from the Hong Kong Chamber of Commerce in which the following passage occurs: "It is further a fact that the sales of uncertificated opium by the Indian Government exceed the estimated legitimate requirements of the Middle and Far East by some 5,000 chests per annum. This surplus is, we have every reason to believe, ultimately disposed of in China to the detriment of the bond fide trade." Again, in my despatch No. 371 of the 14th September, 1912, I added that there could be little doubt that the amount of Indian opium smuggled into China represented the difference between the total uncertified export from India and the actual requirements of non-China consumers. The Hague Convention of 1912, moreover, expresses a determination on the part of the contracting parties to suppress the abuse of opium, so that it may fairly be expected that the demand of non-China markets should show a tendency to diminish, and, in the absence of further information, I am inclined to place the maximum requirements of countries outsirie China at 9,000 chests of Indian opium for 1914. Any allotment beyond this figure will in all probability be smuggled into China and enter into competition with the existing stocks of certificated opium thereby retarding their sales, and in connection with the question of smuggling I would invite your reference, Sir, to your despatch No. 177 of the 27th June last and the enclosure from the Colonial Office respecting the traffic in opium in Kuangchanwan.
The obstacles in the way of the disposal of the stocks were fully explained to representative foreign opium merchants at Shanghai and Hong Kong by Mr. Wilton, the opium commissioner, during his recent tour in September and October, and he is satisfied that at present the merchants are not holding back sales in order to force prices up unduly.
I have, &c.
J. N. JORDAN.
[This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.]
C. O. 6 406
OPIUM.
REC
CONFIDENTIAL.
REG 19 FEB 14
[January 16.]
SECTION 1.
[2215]
No. 1.
Home Office to Foreign Office.-(Received January 16).
Sir,
Home Office, January 15, 1914. IN reply to your letter of the 28th November, 1913, with regard to the proposal made by the Colonial Office for the appointment of a Departmental Committee to consider the question of introducing legislation to give effect in this country to the provisions of the International Opium Convention of 1912, I am directed by Mr. Secretary McKenna to say, for the information of Secretary Sir E. Grey, that the Privy Council Office is the Department charged with the duty of administering the Poisons and Pharmacy Acts (see Section 25 of the Pharmacy Act, 1868), and would, therefore, be the Department principally concerned in regard to any new legislation or administrative proceedings for the control of the sale and distribution in this country of opium, morphia, and cocaine; as regards the export and import of these drugs the Board of Trade or Board of Customs and Excise would appear to be the Department concerned. In these circumstances, Mr. McKenna does not think that a representative of the Home Office should preside over the proposed committee, but if it is desired to have assistance from this Department, he will be prepared to nominate a representative to sit on the committee.
[2032 q-1]
I am, &c.
EDWARD TROUP.
94
: