39
of the ship (including the hold, the bunkers and the
quarters of the passengers and crew) had been thoroughly
searched, so far as was reasonably practicable, be fore the ship had entered a Straits Settlements port).
3. I have care fully considered these sugestions,
but, while I have every sympathy with the end in view,
I consider that it wouldnot be reasonable to impose
on Shipowners and usters obligations of the nature
contemplated under (A) (4) and B. In my opinion as I have informed you in my despatch No. 576
a section
on the lines of the draft clause enclosed with that
de spatch together with a section on the lines of
Section 21 of Ordinance No.117 (Chandu Revenue) would
be sufficient to meet all reasonable requirements.
4. Similar provisions, which are open to the
same objections as Section 12 of the eleterious Drugs
Ordinance occur in Section 22 of Ordinance No.117
(Chandu Revenue) in Section 6 of Ordinance No.136
(Arms and Explosives) and in Section 23 of Federated
Malay States enactment No.13 of 1915. I consider
that early opportunities should be taken to amend
these Ordinances on the lines indicated in my despatch No. 516
As regards the Chandu Revenue Ordinance
however, you are aware from telegraphic correspondence
arising out of the amending Bill forwarded with your
de apatch No.79 of the 5th of February that the question
whether under the terms of the Geneva Opium Agreement
the carriage of any Chandu on vessels calling at Straits | Settlements ports is permissible, is at present under
consideration. The amendment of Section 22 of the
Chandu Revenue Ordinance should be deferred until this
question is settled. I hope to be in a position to give
you