I would submit with the Opium Ordinance of 1891 before them and a knowledge of what the rights and privileges of the Opium Farmer and his licensees were, find now that they have been deceived and that in consequence their sales have been largely diminished, then not only would the Opium Farmer have a possible claim against the Government under his grant, which is a grant of the privileges under Ordinance 21 of 1891, but all his sub-licensees would have an equally good claim against him, and I am instructed to state on behalf of the Opium Farmer that in his opinion, and the view which he takes of this Bill, it simply amounts to this, that if this Bill passes in its present form he will consider not only that it is such a breach of his agreement as entitles him to claim compensation, but such a substantial alteration in the character of his contract as will entitle him to throw it up at once and leave the Government to take any measures they may think right under the circumstances. He considers this such a breach as will entitle him to declare the contract has been broken and set aside by the Government.
With reference to section 3 of the Bill, I would draw your Excellency's attention to this, that section as drawn seems to go far beyond the only mischief which it is professed to limit by the introduction of this Bill. It is conceivably reasonable a penalty should be inflicted and opium should be forfeited which is found on board a steamer and which is not on the manifest and may render the steamer liable to serious consequences, that is, if there is no other remedy, and therefore section 3 of this Ordinance, section 38 as it will be, may be justified. But what mischief is there to make it necessary to amend section 39 in the way it has been? Section 39 says: "Any opium detained under the preceding section may be disposed of as the Governor in Council directs." This is simply supplementary to section 38. But the amended section reads: "Any opium forfeited to the Crown may be sold, destroyed, or otherwise disposed of, as the Governor in Council may direct." That is, it not only deals with opium forfeited under section 39, but it will necessarily, if it remains as at present worded, deal with all opium under section 35, and as to which the right of the Opium Farmer is, I submit, abundantly clear. Section 39 goes far beyond any complaint of the Steamship Companies. We submit it alters entirely and completely the character of the Opium Ordinance.
There is, under that section as amended, a further question. Let us suppose for a moment that, as has happened before, several hundred taels weight of prepared opium are found on one of the steamers and seized and are declared forfeited by the Magistrate. Is the Government to be at liberty to sell that in opposition to the Opium Farmer? And this section gives the Government power not merely with reference to opium improperly on board a steamer, but all opium forfeited for any cause whatever; it gives power either to destroy it—there could not be so much mischief done in that way, though the Opium Farmer would be deprived of his right—but it gives the Government power to sell it, and the person to whom it is sold is protected against the Opium Farmer, and if it is a considerable quantity he may set up for the time being in opposition to the Farmer and his licensees.
I would further submit with reference to what fell from your Excellency at the last meeting of this honourable Council with reference to the fact that this Bill being introduced in accordance with directions received from the Secretary of State, that it is impossible that the Secretary of State could, when he gave those directions—and I understand from what I have heard myself and what is generally known in the colony that this draft Ordinance has not been sent out in its present form by the Secretary of State; that what has been received is simply a letter of instructions to pass a Bill for a particular purpose, and this Bill has been drafted here—I submit it is impossible the Secretary of State could have had before him the position in which the Opium Farmer will be placed if this Ordinance is passed, that no opportunity has been given to the Opium Farmer of laying his side of the case either before the Government here or the Secretary of State, and we pray your Excellency, if it is absolutely necessary in obedience to the instructions of the Secretary of State that this Bill should be passed in some shape, that your Excellency will submit it for the consideration of the Secretary of State and introduce a suspending clause, so that the Bill shall not come into force until the Opium Farmer has had the opportunity of laying his side of the case before him, for I venture to think I have probably opened the eyes of your Excellency and many members of the Council to the fact that the interests of the Opium Farmer are more seriously threatened than at first supposed.
The Opium Farmer takes a very serious view of the question, and I am instructed to state that if the Bill passes in anything like its present form and is brought into operation at once, he will think himself justified in throwing up the Farm and in considering that the contract into which he entered has been broken. It is not a matter which can be settled simply by compensation. I would, with your Excellency's permission, just incidentally call your attention to this fact, that a draft of the grant was in the first instance submitted to the Opium Farmer and his advisers, which reserved to the Government not exactly the power of modifying the law, but the power of abrogating the Opium Ordinance altogether and doing away with the privileges; it contained these words—"If these presents become at any time contrary to law," from which the Government would appear to have contemplated the possibility of some alteration being made in the law which would render the Farm contrary to law and to have endeavoured to reserve their rights and privileges under such circumstances; but the Opium Farmer and his advisers objected to enter into any contract having such a clause, and it was struck out, and no such clause exists in the grant at the present moment.
I therefore submit to your Excellency and the Council, first, that there is no grievance existing and requiring a remedy so far as steamers trading between this place and Canton are concerned, and that if there is, they have a better and more effective remedy than any this Council can give them, through the action of the Customs at Canton. They have the power to put the opium on the manifest and to hold it for freight if it is worthwhile and to give it up if the owner claims it, and their officers who find it will in that case be entitled to a reward.
In the second place, the proposed remedy goes far beyond the disease. The complaint is that opium which ought to be put on the manifest and pay freight as cargo and which is in such quantity as will render the steamer liable to forfeiture or fine is exposed to no penalty; but the fact of it is that opium brought on board by a passenger for his own personal use in small quantities is not liable to forfeiture at all in Canton and will not expose the steamer to either fine or forfeiture; that there is no possibility of applying the section to anything outside the river steamers and perhaps the better class of other European shipping, and that to attempt to apply it to every junk, sampan, and boat which leaves here for Canton would be simply impossible; and, lastly, I call your Excellency's attention to this, that in whatever form the Bill passes, unless indeed the limit of quantity was placed at a very high figure, it must interfere with the Opium Farmer's privileges and so diminish his profits and that for which he is paying the colony such a considerable sum of money. And it will not merely diminish his sales, but it deprives him of his right and privilege to have handed over to him all opium forfeited to the Crown because of any breach of the Opium Ordinance. And that rule was passed and that penalty is inflicted for what purpose? For the purpose of protecting him in his rights and privileges and enabling him to earn the money he has to pay to the Government.
I submit to your Excellency and the Council that the Bill in its present shape ought not to be allowed to pass, and that without considerable modification it ought not to be allowed to pass at all, and that if it has to be passed in any form it ought to be reserved for the consideration of the Secretary of State and an opportunity given to the Opium Farmer of laying his views before the Secretary of State.
HIS EXCELLENCY—I may say that we are much obliged to you, sir, and I am sure that I am only expressing the sentiments of my colleagues in saying so.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL—Sir, I beg to move the second reading of a Bill entitled an Ordinance to amend the Prepared Opium Ordinance, 1891. When we reach the Committee stage of...
Page 26
3
ask that
with the Opinm Ordinance of 1891 before them and a knowledge of what the rights and privilegas of the Opium Farmer and his licenseos were, find now that they have been deceived and that in consequence their sales have been largely diminished, then not only would the Opium Farmer have a possible claim against the Go- vernment under his grant. which is a grant of the privileges under Ordinance 21 of 1891, but all his sab-licensees would have an equally good claim against him, and I am instructed to state on behalf of the Opium Farmer that in his opinion, and the view which he takes of this Bill, it simply amonuts to this, that if this Bill passes in its present form he will consider not only that it is such a breach of his agreement as eu- titles him to claim compensation, but suck a sub- stantial alteration in the character of his contract as will entitle him to throw it up at once and loave the Government to take any measures they may think right under the circumstances. He con- siders this such a breach us will entitle him to declare the contract has been broken and sat aside by the Gorerument. With reference to section 3 of the But I would your Excellency's attention to this, that section as drawn seems to go far beyond the only mischief which it is professed to limit by the introduction of this Bill. It is con- ceivably reasonable a penalty should be inflicted and opium should be forfeited which is found on board a steamer and which is not on the manifest and may render the steamer liable to serious cou- sequences, that is, if there is no other remedy, and therefore section 3 of this Ordinance, section 38 as it will be, may be jastified. But what mischief is there to make it necessary amend section 39 in the way it has been ? Section 39
forfeited says: Any opium and detained under the preceding section may be disposed of as the Governor in Council directs." This is simply supplemontary to section 38. But the amended section reads : -- Any opium forfeited to the Crown may be sold. destroyed, or otherwise disposed of, as the Governor in Council may direct." That is, it not only deals with opium forfeited under sectiou 39, but it will necessarily, if it remains as at present worded, deal with all opium under vuotion 35, and as to which the right of the Opium Farmer is, I submit, abundantly clear. Section 39 goes far beyond any complaint of the Steamship Companies. We submit it alters entirely and completely the character of the Opium Ordinance. There is, under that section as amended, a further question. Let us suppose for a moment that, as has happened before, several hundred taels weight of prepared opium are found on one of the steamers and seized and are declared forfeited by the Magistrate. Is the Government to be at liberty to sell that in op- position to the Opium Farmer? And this section gives the Government power not merely with ro- ference to opium improperly on board a steamer, bat all opium forfeited for any cause whatever; it! gives power either to destroy it-there could not be so much mischief done in that way, thongh the Opium Farmer would be deprived of his right but it gives the Government power to sell it, and the person to whom it is sold is pro- tested against the Opium Farmer, and if it is a considerable quantity ho may set up for the time being in opposition to the Farmer and his heen- 8898.
WAS
to
I would farther submit with reference to what fell from your Excellency at the last moeting of this honourable Council with ro- ference to the fact that this Bill being introduced in accordance with directions! received from the Secretary of State, that it is impossible that the Secretary of State could when he gave those directions—and I understand from what I have heard myself und what is generally known in the colony that this draft Ordinanc has not ben sent ont in its present form by the Secretary of State; that what has been received is simply a letter of instructions to pass a Bill for a particular par pose, and this Bill has beu drafted here -! submit it is impossible the Secretary of State, could have bad before him the position in which the Opium Farmer will be placed if this Ordin- anca is passed, that no opportunity has be given to the Opium Farmer of laying his side of the cas
either before the Government bere or the Secretary of State, and we pray your Excellonay, if it is absolutely necessary in obedience to the instructions of the Soc. retary of State that this Bill should be passad in some shape, that your Excellency will sab
Was
are now
Or
mit it for the consideration of the Secrotary of State and introduce a suspauding clause, sO that the Bill shall not come into force until the Opium Farmer has had the opportunity of laz ing his side of the case before him, for 1 venture i to think I have probably opened the eyes of your Excellency and many members of the Council to the fact that the interests of thei Opium Farmer are more seriously threatened than
at first supposed. The Opium Farmer takes a very serious view of the question, and I am instructed to state that if the Bill passes in anything like its present form and is brought into operation at once, he will think himself justified in throwing up the Farm and in considering that the conienet into which he entered has been broken. It is not a matter which can be settled simply by compensation. I would with your Excellency's permission just inci- dontally call your attention to this tact, that a draft of the grant was in the first instance sub-, mittedto the Opium Farmor and his advisers. which reserved to the government not exactly the power of modifying the law, but the power of abrogating the Opiam Ordinance altogether and doing away with the privileges; it contained these words-"If these pressuts
s all at
become any time contrary to law," from which the Goveru- mout would appear to have contemplated the possibility of some alteration being made in the law which would ronder the Farm contrary to law and to have endeavoured to reserve their rights and privileges nader such circumstances; but the Opiam Farmer and his advisors objected to enter into any coutract having such a clause, and it was struck out, and no such olause exists [ in the grant at the present moment. therefore submit to your Excellency and the Council, first, that there is no grievance existing and requiring a remedy so far as steamers trading between this place and Canton are concerned, and that if there is, they have a better and more effective remedy than any this Council can givo them, through the action of the Customs at Canton. They have the power to put the opium on the manifest and to bold it for freight if it is worth while and to give it
if
claims it, and thoir up officers who find it will in that case be entitled to a reward. In the second place, the proposed remedy goes far beyond the disease. The com. plaint is that opinn which ought to be put on the manifest and pay freight as cargo and which is in such quantity as will render the steamer liable to forfeiture or fine is exposed to no penalty; but the fact of it is that opium brought on board by a passenger for his own personal use in small quantities is not liable to forfeiture at all in Canton and will not ex- pose the steamer to Ask either of fine or for- foiture; that there is no possibility of apply- ing the section to anything outside the river steamers and perhaps the better class of other European shipping, and that to at- tempt to apply it to every junk, sampan, and bout which loaves here for Canton would be simply impossible; and, lastly, I call your Excel- lency's attention to this, that is whatever form the Bill passes, unless indeed the limit of quantity was placed at a very high figure, it must inter- fere with the Opium Farmer's privileges and so diminish his profits and that for which he is paying the colony such a considerable sum of money. And it will not merely diminish bis sales, bat it deprives him of his right and privilege to have handed over to him all opium forfeited to the Crown because of any breach of the Opium Ordinance. And that rule was passed and that penalty is inflicted for what parpos P For the purpose of protecting him in bus rights and privileges and enabling him to earu the money he has to pay to the Government. submit to your Excellency and the Council that the Bill in its present shape anght not to be allowed to pass, and that without considerablə modification it ought not to be allowed to pass at all, and that if it has to be passed in any form it ought to be reserved for the considera- tion of the Secretary of State and an oppor tunity given to the Opium Farmer of laying his views before the Secretary of State
BO
One
His EXCELLENCY-I bay say that Cam manch obliged to you, sir, and I am sure that I am only expressing the sentiments of my colleagues in į saying so.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL-Sir, I beg to more -the second reading of a Bill entitled an Ordiu. ance to amend the prepared Opiara OrdinanES 1891. When we reach the Committee stage of
I
26 3
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.