-22-
199
would perhaps not adhere to the Convention, being unwilling to concede a permanent monopoly to the states which already
manfacture.
As to the contention that the powers reserved to a non-producing country to manufacture for home consumption were illusory, because the carrying on of the drug industry is not possible without the power to market part of the produce abroad and because such a comtry would be authorised to export only after an agreement with the existing manufacturing States, Sir Malcolm Delevingne pointed out that the objection was based on a misreading of his scheme. It did not require that an agreement must be reached before the new country could start, That would place such a country at the mercy of the existing manufacturing countries. All that would be required was that it should first enter into negotiations, bonafide negotiatione of course, with a view to en agreement. Ho asoumed that the parties would be reasonable. All of them would be parties to the same Convention. But even in the event of the impossibility to come to an agreement, nothing would prevent the new country starting manufacture. As to the objection that it would create for the benefit of signatory countries & monopoly in regart to the production and sale of raw material, Sir Malcolm Delevingne pointed cut that the scheme had been drawn up on the assumption that the great majority of the producing countries would participate in it. If a large proportion of the producing countries did not com into the agreement, the clausos relating to the control of production would simply be omitted and that part of the scheme which dealt with the limitation of manufacture would not be affected. There was no intention of granting any