CO129-344 - Public Offices & Foreign Office - 1907 — Page 352

23070

[This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.]`

C

CHINA TRADE.

{

CONFIDENTIAL.

[17532]

No. 1.

350

[June 14.]

SECTION 1.

Sir Edward Grey to Sir J. Jordan.

(No. 231.) Sir,

Foreign Office, June 14, 1907. WITH reference to my telegram No. 51 of the 13th ultimo, I transmit to you herewith a copy of a letter which has been received from the India Office with regard to the proposals of the Chinese Government for carrying out the Imperial Decree for the abolition of opium-smoking.*

You should communicate with the Chinese Government in the sense of this letter, which covers the first three proposals put forward by the Chinese Government, as reported in your telegram No. 232 of the 30th November last.

You will observe that the reply of the India Office on these three points is to the following effect :---

In regard to 1, His Majesty's Government make a counter-proposal. Instead of the amount of opium imported into China being restricted, they offer to limit the amount exported from India to countries beyond the seas to

*

61.900 chests in 1908. 66 800 51,700

15

1909.

* 1910,

The average total annual export for 1901-1905 was 67,000 chests, of which China took 51,000.

The progressive annual diminution for the three years would therefore be one- tenth of the amount annually taken by China on an average during that period.

You are also authorized to give an assurance that the progressive diminu- tion would continue in the same proportion after the three years if the Chinese Government had within that period observed their share of the mutual undertaking i.e., that the production and consumption of opium in China had been proportionally diminished.

The restrictions of the import of Turkish, Persian, and other opium would have to be separately arranged and carried out simultaneously.

In regard to 2, there is no objection to the presence of the Chinese official at Calcutta, provided it is understood that he has no power of interference.

In regard to 3, you should state that you are prepared to discuss the proposal to double the present consolidated duty and likin from the point of view that foreign opium should be subject to as heavy taxation as native; but His Majesty's Government consider that before any conclusion can be arrived at as to the reasonableness of the proposal to double the present impost on foreign opium, reliable information is necessary on three points:-

(a.) Is the new taxation in China effectively levied on all native opium ? (b.) Has it doubled or largely increased the taxation hitherto levied ?

(c.) What is the relative value of Indian and native opium ?

With regard to point 4 of the Chinese proposals, which was to the effect that the Government of Hong Kong should strictly prohibit the boiling of opium for export to China, and that the Chinese Government should be free to impose a prohibitive duty upon

such opium, you were requested in my telegram No. 216 of the 14th December last to consult with the Governor of Hong Kong direct, and I should be glad to learn the result of your communications with his Excellency on the subject.

With regard to point 5, you were informed in my telegram No. 44 of the 27th April last that His Majesty's Government concur in the view expressed in your despatch No. 73 of the 6th February last that if effective measures have previously been taken to close any opium shops and dens which may exist outside the limits of the various foreign Settlements and Concessions, the Municipal Councils of these localities should be

[2542 o-1]

* India Office, May 29, 1907.