5
Powers to ratify the convention as soon as possible if they have not already done so, and to put the convention in force from the 1st December, 1914. The precise date was subject to modification, to meet the case of States impeded by constitutional difficulties. The question was, could not forty-three civilised nations put in force common action, notwithstanding the abstention of two nations? He spoke at some length on the opium evil and the value of international co-operation, and urged ratifi- cation and enforcement of the convention as soon as possible on the part of such of the signatory Powers as were ready to unite in doing so.
M. van Deventer, who acted as first delegate for the Netherlands on the elevation of M. Cremer to the chair, and who again presided most indefatigably and tactfully over the Rédaction Committee, approved of the American proposition. An incon- testable success had attended the work of the two previous Conferences. Thirty-two of the thirty-four Powers enumerated in article 22 of the convention as non-signatory had vielded to the arguments of the twelve Powers who met at the first Conference. If Turkey and Servia declined to join, why should not the other Powers unite among them- selves to carry out the convention? Turkey and Servia would, it is true, remain free to cultivate the poppy and make morphine and cocaine as well as to sell the products, but only within their own territories. Elsewhere the sale would be under regulation. Such liberty would not long remain attractive or advantageous. Ratification by the Netherlands Government only awaited the action of the First Chamber of the States- General, and they were authorised to declare that in their opinion the convention could be put in force even though some Powers had not sigued. They had full power to act in this sense, and supported the American resolution, which they hoped would be carried unanimously.
M. Swétchine, the Minister and delegate for Russia, said that Russia, having been one of the twelve States which had participated in drawing up the convention, was prepared to ratify it, and put it into force so soon as its application could be sufficiently general as to be effective, and that he agreed with the Netherlands delegate that the Conference should seek for unanimous action by the signatories, notwithstanding the refusal of two Powers to accede to their invitation, if, in fact, these were the only Powers not ready to proceed to enforcement. But in reality Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Switzerland, for varying reasons, were unprepared to enforce the convention for a period, long or short, but undetermined. This put a different aspect on the state of affairs, and he inquired whether the Netherlands delegate had realised by what practical method unanimity on the part of the signatories was obtainable.
M. van Deventer replied that he only wished to show that, if all the signatory Powers wo-operated, the position would be very strong against the two abstaining countries. In view of the success aiready obtained, he hoped that impediments on the part of the signatory Powers in ratifying and enforcing the convention would be removed.
M. de Jongh, another Netherlands delegate, supplementing the statement of his colleague, observed that he did not regard the abstention of the two Powers as an insuperable difficulty, and cited the experience of the opium régie in the Netherlands Indies, of which he had been for years the chief, as indicating how effective measures could be exercise against the import and sale of contraband opium, &c. He therefore supported the American resolution.
Mr. Yen Hui Ching, the Chinese delegate, maintained that it was too late in the day to raise questions of monopoly and self-interest, as the convention from the first Besides, if only a small implied the sacrifice of vested interests for humanitarian ends. minority of the Powers were not parties to the convention, capitalists would hesitate to embark capital in what would become a hazardous undertaking.
Mr. Huneeus, the Chilean delegate, suggested that the fixed date should be eliminated from the American resolution, since countries in which ratification was a parliamentary act could not be bound by it. He considered it premature to discuss measures to counteract abstention by two Powers.
Mr. van Dyke said he was indifferent as to the fixed date.
M. de Veyga supported the amendment of the resolution in respect of the date, and considered that that was determined by articles 23 and 24 of the convention.
The President remarked that the situation had been altered by the decision of the second Conference; cur task now was to consider the possibility of putting the convention in force, even though two States refused co-operation,
Mr. van Dyke suggested two alternatives, either to fix a date in advance or to let the coming into force follow on ratification by a fixed number of the Powera.
The President observed that there were eleven Powers whose ratification was only a question of days.
Mr. Aimaro Sato, the Japanese Minister and delegate, said that his Government were ready both to ratify and put the convention in force.
In view of the situation which had been disclosed by the foregoing discussion, and having regard to the terms of our instructions, we thought it well to intervene in the discussion at this stage. We accordingly said that we had listened with great interest to the different communications which had been made, some of which had been received with surprise. Being unaware previously of some of these communications, it had not been possible to judge of the effect of the proposed resolution. It now appeared that certain signatory Powers were unable, solely on constitutional grounds, to proceed to ratification- that was a question of form which time would solve. But was it the case that certain signatory Powers were indisposed to ratify on other than constitutional grounds? Strictly speaking, neither the second nor this Conference, up till now, had definitively resolved that the convention might come into force despite its non-signature by certain invited Powers. Would it not be well to record the decision of the signatory Powers that such coming into force could take place even if all the invited Powers had not signed? The second Conference had actually implied such a procedure. Great Britain was ready to discuss the question of a fixed date, but we were not in a position, without fresh instructions, to decide at once what that date should be.
Mr. van Dyke expressed his willingness to meet us and other delegations in the matter of the date, but asked for a vote on the first part of his resolution.
Further discussion ensued which served to show the difficulty of the Conference "engaging" the several Powers represented to ratify the convention as the American resolution would have done,
At length on the suggestion of the President, supported by us, a resolution was carried unanimously as follows:-
"The Conference refers to the Comité de Rédaction the proposals which have been made, in order to bring up a formula which will enable the convention to be put into force between the signatory Powers."
The Comité de Rédaction immediately got to work under the pre-idency of M. van Deventer. We used our best endeavours to frame the report so as to lend up to a decision on the questions, firstly, of the possibility of the convention coming into force, notwithstanding the abstention of certain invite Powers, and, secondly, of the early ratification by the signatory Powers, so that the coming into force might proceed aut matically or as from some agreed date. We were cordially supported in our efforts by the President of the Committee and by Baron Fallon and Mr. Deuby, the other members.
At the third full session on Thursday, the 12th June, summoned to receive the report from the Comité de Rédaction, the Duc de Calvello, the Italian delegate, announced the deposit that morning of ratification by his Government, and M. Mirza Mahmoud Khan, the Persian delegate, also declared that his Government was ready to ratify.
M. van Deventer, as president of the Comité de Rédaction, then presented its report. It stated briefly that the Conference was invited to reply to two questions:-
1. Is it possible under actual circumstances to put the convention in force? And,
if the answer be in the affirmative, then
2. How is the coming into force among the signatory Powers to be regulated?
It drew attention to the important distinction contained in article 24 between the coming into force of the convention and the coming into force of the legislative measures conte uplated by the convention, reminding the Conference that ample time was allowed by article 24, subsequent to the coming into force of the convention for the preparation and enactment of legislation. The committee accordingly submitted two formulæ as a basis for discussion:-
1. The Conference is of opinion that it is possible to put in force the International Opium Convention of the 23rd January, 1912. notwithstanding the fact that some Powers invited to sign under paragraph 1 of article 23 have not yet signed the convention,
2. The coming into force of the convention between all the signatory Powers shall take place so soon as the Powers which have already signed, or which liave expressed their intention of adhering, shall have ratified it.
391
1
זי