603
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
Reference :--
C.O.882/11
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC-
COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
54
have to be inquired into very carefully by experts, but the sort of provision I have in mind is the gradual building up of a fund the income from which in addition to such alternative sources of revenue as can be devised will as the revenue from opium decreases be available to meet the expenses of the preventive services which may be expected to increase pari passu with the suppression of the use of opium, as well as for the maintenance of valuable social services which, but for the existence of opium revenue in the past, could never have been undertaken on anything like the extensive scale which they have been.
11. Some such provision, I think, the Malayan Governments should make, and while the High Commissioner assures us that they would bitterly resent doing so merely for the sake of making political capital, I have no doubt that they will under- take the task willingly for the good of their country. Unfortunately, there is no considerable source of revenue which can be raised to replace opium revenue except an income-tax which as opium revenue diminishes to disappearing point must be on a very high scale, and must be a great handicap on the trade and development of a young country.
42. As I have already indicated, Hong Kong is in a very different position financially, and would have no difficulty in replacing her opium revenue by additional taxation, however unpalatable an addition of 25 per cent. to the ordinary taxation of the Colony, would be to the inhabitants. But assuming that the British Delegates will not be authorised to make any pronouncement of the nature indicated, in the case of Malaya, it would, in my opinion, be most unwise to do so in the case of Hong Kony, as this would be bound to focus attention on Malaya. Moreover, as I have already suggested, this question is not really relevant to the matter under consideration. I urge, therefore, that the British Delegates should not be authorised to raise this question at Geneva, and if it is raised by the delegates of any other country, they should deal with it on the lines indicated in paragraphs 37 and 39 of this Memorandum, pointing out also the fact that if the sale of opium were not in the hands of the Colonial Governments, the profits, which are at present expended for the good of the countries concerned, would go into the pockets of private individuals.
43. In conclusion, I submit that the line which the British Delegates should be authorised to take at Geneva is as follows:-
The object of His Majesty's Government is to bring the practice of opium smoking When to an end as soon as possible in accordance with the Opium Convention.' that Convention was agreed to it was not foreseen that after a period of some years of improvement China would relapse into opium smoking and opium growing on an immense scale. It is clear that opium smoking cannot be brought to an end until there is a stable Government in China which is willing and able first to reduce and then to suppress opium growing.
In the meantime, in our Possessions outside China in which there are large Chinese populations, it is the strong opinion of our Governor, and of practically all our high officials, that far more evil than good would result from trying to prohibit and penalise the practice amongst Chinese. The question therefore is how far an advance may be marle upon the present regulations for restriction. These regulations should be enforced simultaneously, and so far as possible uniformly in the Far Eastern Depen; dencies of Western Powers, and by Japan and Siam.
The policy of His Majesty's Government is not to pose as specially righteous by drastic action in our own Colonies only, nor is there any occasion for this country to show itself as specially sensitive to adverse criticism, or to court the approval of enthusiasts either in this country or in the United States of America. What we want is to get other countries to go as far as we have gone and are prepared to go. The case of our Colonies is that they cannot go further at present than they have shown their willingness to go. We are prepared to have this case examined by a delegation sent by the League of Nations to study the question of the Far East for (say) a year, visiting each country concerned. We are prepared to accept delegates of other nation- alities (say) one of French and one of American nationality, and our only stipulation is that the delegates selected should be entirely unbiased and have taken no side on this question. If other countries do not wish to contribute to the expense we are prepared to defray it from Hong Kong and Malayan revenues. When the delegates have reported to the League of Nations we are prepared to carry out, so far as possible, recommenda- tions made by the League of Nations thereon, provided that other countries concernėd will also carry them out.
This offers the best chance of a real and general improvement, and is, I submit, in strict accordance with "a me hundred per cent. League of Nations policy."
31518/24.
55
No. 33.
SIR M. DELEVINGNE (HOME Office) to SIR G. GRINDLE (Colonial, Office). DEAR GRINDLE,
Home Office, Whitehall, S.W.I, 25th July, 1924.
There
I HAVE your note of the 21st,* enclosing your draft Memorandum. are several modifications which I think ought to be made and which I submit for your consideration.
Paragraph 6. Are all the measures you prescribe in force in all the Colonies? 1 fancy not. If not, this might be made clear.
Paragraph 10. There is no system of registration and rationing in force, of course, in the Philippines.
The opinion of the Governor of the Straits Settlements appears to be rather tash if, as I presume, it is based on the passage on pages 47 and 48 of the Committee's Report, as the Committee themselves say that their information was somewhat meagre, and I do not think you would find the responsible authorities of the other countries quite taking the same view. It might be well to tone this down. People will not be inclined to take the Governor of the Straits Settlements as much of an authority for Formosa or the Netherlands East Indies or the Philippines.
Paragraph 12. You are aware of course that the Committee's description of opium smoking as an "habitual practice "of the Chinese nation is their private opinion only and would be vigorously challenged. I suggest that you should make it clear that it is their own opinion which a good many other people, including our Consul-General at Canton, do not agree with.
Paragraph 13. Is it quite correct to say at the end that the Colony could not afford to maintain the present scale? I know this is alleged in the Governor's telegram. but considering the prosperous condition of the Colony it seems a little too much to ask the British Government to accept the statement.
Paragraph 15. Whose authority have you for the statement that the methods of search at Hong Kong are far more drastic than any used in this country?
Paragraph 16. If the opening sentence is a reference to any suggestion of mine,
I do not think I have ever put the point quite in that way.
Would not it be well to modify the last sentence of this paragraph? The first part of it seems to me to be very uncomplimentary to the efficiency of the Hong Kong Government, its Courts and its Police, while the last part is mere assumption.
Paragraph 17. The fourth sentence beginning" When the Convention was signed" appears to me to be based on a misapprehension of the position in 1912. China did not cease growing or using opium at this date. The Convention between this country and China was only signed in 1911, and it was quite uncertain in 1912 what the final results would be (see pages 23 and 24 of the Indian Office pamphlet The Truth about Indian Opium). I do not think it would be wise to rely on the argument that the Convention of 1912 was signed in the expectation that the cultivation and use of opium in China were going to stop.
Is not the language of the last part of this paragraph rather strong, particularly in view of the fact that what is suggested is certainly not what the Convention provides? Paragraph 23. I should like to point out that the Governor's telegram of the 9th July, expressing the belief that "our policy promises a large measure of success is much more sanguine than his despatch of the 18th March,‡ and more sanguine indeed than the Report of the Committee itself.
11
Paragraph 28. The British North Borneo Company accepted the rationing system in some form.
Paragraph 37. It seems to me that in this paragraph you ought to explain to the Cabinet what taxation there is in the Straits Settlements and the rest of Malaya. If I remember rightly it was stated at the Conference in my room that the taxation is anything but heavy.
Paragraph 43 is open to the same criticism as paragraph 17. As China had not emerged from opium smoking and opium growing at that date, it seems decidedly misleading to say that it was not foreseen that she would relapse.
Further on, the sentence beginning "In the meantime in countries
"+
seems to
me to say far more than there is any justification or evidence for. Why should evil result from trying to prohibit and penalise the practice amongst Chinese in countries outside China, when at least in one Chinese province the practice has been successfully suppressed with the best results by an honest and capable Governor?
* No. 32
+ No. 30.
↑ No. 19.