C.O.
13122333 No: IREC
1909
REGE 17 APR 09,
Of produc Top-by
present industry and trade, which has been in existence for over 100 years. Such a monopoly covering ... of the total drug consumed, would be an effective agent in controlling and restricting consumption, in raising revenue, and in securing accurate statistics. It would not be a breach of treaty, and would not be objected to by the foreign merchants, who could still sell to whom they pleased, while the monopolists of the native drug would take good care to see that such persons dealt in foreign opium only.
The Chinese Government I would venture to suggest, should exercise a Government monopoly in respect of all opium produced by the cultivators in precisely the same way that the Indian Government holds a monopoly of all the opium produced in Bengal. Lord Brassey's Opium Commission recorded it as their well considered conclusion, that this was "the best system for regulating the production". † The Indian Government sells its opium at auction but for the reasons I have already given it is probable that it would be better that in China the monopoly of preparation and retail sale should, as in Hongkong, be in the hands of licensed monopolists. The Indian auction sales are solely for export,—the sales in China and sale would be solely for local consumption. The licensee would have the sole right to deal in both raw and prepared native opium, obtaining his supplies from Government while the sale of the progressively decreasing imports of foreign opium would remain unrestricted in accordance with treaty.
of prepare
-ly
Farmers.
The professed object of China is to reduce the sale of opium, and since the creation of a monopoly is stated to be "fundamentally prejudicial to trade",— competition being excluded, and licensees being gradually reduced,—it will assist the object in view.
The Chinese Government has long been alive to the advantages of the monopoly system for controlling, and possibly extinguishing the trade, but they have confined their efforts to endeavouring to create a monopoly in foreign opium at Nanking, Kiukiang, Szechuan, Hupei and Canton, notwithstanding that it was always in the power of the opium guilds to decline to buy foreign opium if they really desired to exclude it. In October 1907 an Imperial decree directed an enquiry with a view to a monopoly of sale, and the report of the Board of Finance a year later opposed it on the grounds that it would give umbrage to foreigners, would involve expense, would delay the extinction of the habit for the full period of 10 years, and would require a better organised police supervision than China possesses. The monopoly suggested apparently included foreign opium, and referred to sale only,—which was to be a Government monopoly and not in the hands of licensees. Nor was any monopoly of production included. It therefore differs radically from my own suggestion. So far from being expensive, a monopoly such as I suggest, should in the first year yield a Revenue—if the Hongkong farm may be taken as a basis of calculation of some £55,000,000 ‡ and would thus enlist the co-operation of the Provincial Authorities.
A Government monopoly of sale is, I concur, not feasible owing to the inadequacy of the Police and the venality of officials, and I therefore suggest the licensed monopolist. The Government monopoly of all produce involving a careful check of the area under cultivation, the licensing of growers, and a yearly decrease would I admit be difficult, but as the Board recommend this check as an alternative, it is clear that they consider it to be within the capacity of the Government machinery. The bargain with India is of course based on the pledge of total abolition in 10 years. If the monopoly system should substitute Regulation and Control for Abolition (which no doubt India would prefer), the terms of the compact would have to be reconsidered. The machinery for a system of Licensed Farmers, already exists in the opium guilds, who at Canton (and probably elsewhere) already pay a fixed sum to the Provincial Revenue, and license the retail shops. Recently indeed the Viceroy of Szechuan has urged that in order to effectively control the growth of the poppy and the sale of opium, it is necessary that the trade in the native drug should be an official monopoly, that all raw opium should be bought up, and it should be prepared, sold or exported by official hongs. §
Sir J. Lyall. Indian Opium Report Vol. VI. p. 121.
† Ibid Vol. VI, p. 96.
‡ Hongkong $4,115,200 on (say) 800 chests (local consumption only). Therefore China consuming about 22,588 chests (see p. 1) would at the same rate realise 50 millions sterling. Memorial in Official Gazette 21.1.1909.
Page 20
Page 20
Page 20
HONGKONG.
MEMORANDUM REGARDING THE RESTRICTION OF OPIUM
IN HONGKONG AND IN CHINA.
Laid before the Legislative Council by Command of His Excellency the Governor, March 11th, 1909,
On May 6th, 1908, Mr. W. Johnson moved a resolution in the House of Commons (seconded by Mr. T. Taylor) approving the action of His Majesty's Government in progressively decreasing the quantity of opium exported from India to China, and urging the abolition of licensed Opium Dens in the Far Eastern Crown Colonies.* Both mover and seconder informed the House that in Hong-kong "nothing had been attempted,—nothing done". These statements passed unchallenged, and have conveyed to the rest of the Empire an erroneous impression of the facts regarding this Colony, which has caused no little soreness in a very loyal portion of His Majesty's oversea dominions. The Under Secretary in his reply said that His Majesty's Government recognised that in dealing with the opium question in Hongkong it was essential that we should act up to the Standards set by China † and in a later debate on July 28th ‡ he added that it had not been possible to get a reasoned opinion from Hongkong,
I will endeavour in the following observations to remove the misunderstanding created by the remarks of Messrs. Johnson and Taylor, and at the same time to present a reasoned opinion as to the measures which may usefully and with justice be taken in order to give effect to the high object which His Majesty's Government have in view, viz., to restrict the opium habit in this Colony and to assist the Chinese Government in effecting a like restriction in China.
I write as one who has comparatively recently come to the Far East with no preconceived ideas and prejudices on the subject, but who has studied it closely for over a year. I claim moreover to have given practical proof in the past of a keen interest in matters affecting the welfare of Native Races,—e.g., the suppression of the Liquor Traffic, Slavery, etc., in Africa.
The Eastern Colonies, as a part of the British Empire, are animated by the same attitude of ideals as the United Kingdom and have a not less high standard of morality. If then the Rulers of the Empire at its centre, and the Home Parliament, with a full and accurate knowledge of the whole circumstances, arrive at the conclusion, that restriction in the matter of opium should be inaugurated in India and in the Eastern Crown Colonies, we may assume with confidence that the decision would meet with a loyal response, in spite of the fact (which Colonel Seely frankly pointed out) that it is their Revenue and their trade,—and not that of the United Kingdom,—which are affected.
The Colonies concerned are, however, naturally anxious that the Imperial decision shall be based upon an accurate presentment of the facts, and it is clear from a perusal of the speeches in the Legislative Councils and from the comments of the Colonial Press, that the communities concerned labour under an impression that public opinion in England has to some extent been misinformed as to the facts, and that in consequence the methods proposed are not in all cases such as are best adapted to the end in view, or consonant with a British sense of Justice. Willing co-operation can only be based upon a mutual conviction that the course of action adopted is one that has every prospect of being effective, and that the sacrifices made will not be futile.
* Hansard Vol. 188 (4th Series) p. 330 et seq. † Ibid p. 356.
‡ Vol. 193, p. 1260.
§ Ibid p. 355.
Page 21
Page 21
Page 21
20.
C.O.
13122333 No: IREC
1909
REGE 17 APR 09,
Of produc Top-by
present industry and trade, which has been in existence for over 100 years. Such a monopoly covering of the total drug consumed, would be an effective agent in controlling and restricting consumption, in raising revenue, and in securing accurate statistics. It would not be a breach of treaty, and would not be objected to by the foreign merchants, who could still sell to whom they pleased, while the monopolists of the native drug would take good care to see that such persons dealt in foreign opium only.
The Chinese Government I would venture to suggest, should exercise a Government, monopoly in respect of all opium produced by the cultivators in precisely the same way that the Indian Government holds a monopoly of all the opium produced in Bengal. Lord Brassey's Opium Commission recorded it as their well consider- ed conclusion, that this was "the best system for regulating the production". † The Indian Government sells its opium at auction but for the reasons I have already given it is probable that it would be better that in China the monopoly of preparation" and retail sale should, as in Hongkong, be in the hands of licensed monopolists. The Indian auction sales are solely for export,-the sales in China and sale would be solely for local consumption. The licensee would have the sole right to deal in both raw and prepared native opium, obtaining his supplies from Govern- ment while the sale of the progressively decreasing imports of foreign opium would remain unrestricted in accordance with treaty.
of prepare
-ly
Farmers.
The professed object of China is to reduce the sale of opium, and since the creation of a monopoly is stated to be "fundamentally prejudicial to trade",- competition being excluded, and licensees being gradually reduced,—it will assist the object in view.
The Chinese Government has long been alive to the advantages of the mono- poly system for controlling, and possibly extinguishing the trade,but they have confined their efforts to endeavouring to create a monopoly in foreign opium at Nanking, Kiukiang, Szechuan, Hupei and Canton, notwithstanding that it was always in the power of the opium guilds to decline to buy foreign opium if they really desired to exclude it. In October 1907 an Imperial decree directed an enquiry with a view to a monopoly of sale, and the report of the Board of Finance a year later opposed it on the grounds that it would give umbrage to foreigners, would involve expense, would delay the extinction of the habit for the full period of 10 years, and would require a better organised police supervision than China possesses. The monopoly suggested apparently included foreign opium, and referred to sale only,-which was to be a Government monopoly and not in the hands of licensees. Nor was any monopoly of production included. It therefore differs radically from my own suggestion. So far from being expensive, a monopoly such as I suggest, should in the first year yield a Revenue-if the Hongkong farm may be taken as a basis of calculation of some £55,000,000‡ and would thus enlist the co-operation of the Provincial Authorities.
A Government monopoly of sale is, I concur, not feasible owing to the inadequacy of the Police and the venality of officials, and I therefore suggest the licensed monopolist. The Government monopoly of all produce involving a careful check of the area under cultivation, the licensing of growers, and a yearly decrease would I admit be difficult, but as the Board recommend this check as an alternative, it is clear that they consider it to be within the capacity of the Government machinery. The bargain with India is of course based on the pledge of total abolition in 10 years. If the monopoly system should substitute Re- gulation and Control for Abolition (which no doubt India would prefer), the terms of the compact would have to be reconsidered. The machinery for a system of Licensed Farmers, already exists in the opium guilds, who at Canton (and probaby elsewhere) already pay a fixed sum to the Provincial Revenue, and license the retail shops. Recently indeed the Viceroy of Szechuan has urged that in order to effectively control the growth of the poppy and the sale of opium, it is necessary that the trade in the native drug should be an official monopoly, that all raw opium should be bought up, and it should be prepared, sold or exported by official hongs. §
Sir J. Lyall. Indian Opium Report Vol. VI. p. 121.
† Jhid Vol. VI, p. 96.
‡ Hongkong 4115,200 on (say) 800 riusts (luent consumption only). Therefore China cousuming
about 22,588 Cons (see p. 1) would at the same rate realise 50 millious sterling. Memorial in Oilicial Gazette 21,1.1909.
HONGKONG.
MEMORANDUM REGARDING THE RESTRICTION OF OPIUM
IN HONGKONG AND IN CHINA.
Laid before the Degislative Council by Command of His Excellency the Governor, March 11th, 1909,
On May 6th, 1908, Mr. W. Johnson moved a resolution in the House of The charge Commons (seconded by Mr. T. Taylor) approving the action of His Majesty's rainstor Government in progressively decreasing the quantity of opium exported from India Hongkong. to China, and urging the abolition of licensed Opium Dens in the Far Eastern Crown Colonies.* Both mover and seconder informed the House that in Hong- kong "nothing bad been attempted,-nothing done". These statements passed unchallenged, and have conveyed to the rest of the Empire an erroneous impression of the facts regarding this Colony, which has caused no little soreness in a very loyal portion of His Majesty's oversea dominions. The Under Secretary in his reply said that His Majesty's Government recognised that in dealing with the opium question in Hongkong it was essential that we should act up to the Standards set by China † and in a later debate on July 28th ‡ he added that it had not been possible to get a reasoned opinion from Hongkong,
I will endeavour in the following observations to remove the misunderstand- ing created by the remarks of Messrs. Johnson and Taylor, and at the same time to present a reasoned opinion as to the measures which may usefully and with justice be taken in order to give effect to the high object which His Majesty's Government have in view, viz., to restrict the opium habit in this Colony and to assist the Chinese Government in effecting a like restriction in China.
I write as one who has comparatively recently come to the Far East with no preconceived ideas and prejudices on the subject, but who has studied it closely for over a year. I claim moreover to have given practical proof in the past of a keen interest in matters affecting the welfare of Native Races,-e.g., the suppression of the Liquor Traffic, Slavery, etc., in Africa.
The Eastern Colonies, as a part of the British Empire, are animated by the same attitude of ideals as the United Kingdom and have a not less high standard of morality. If then the Eastern the Rulers of the Empire at its centre, and the Home Parliament, with a full and Colonies. accurate knowledge of the whole circumstances, arrive at the conclusion, that restriction in the matter of opium should be inaugurated in India and in the Eastern Crown Colonies, we may assume with confidence that the decision would meet with a loyal response, in spite of the fact (which Colonel Seely frankly pointed out that it is their Revenue and their trade,-and not that of the United Kingdom,-which are affected.
The Colonies concerned are, however, naturally anxious that the Imperial decision shall be based upon an accurate presentment of the facts, and it is clear from a perusal of the speeches in the Legislative Councils and from the comments of the Colonial Press, that the communities concerned labour under an impression that public opinion in England has to some extent been misinformed as to the facts, and that in consequence the methods proposed are not in all cases such as are best adapted to the end in view, or consonant with a British sense of Justice. Willing co-operation can only be based upon a mutual conviction that the course of action adopted is one that has every prospect of being effective, and that the sacrifices made will not be futile.
* Hansard Vol. 188 (4th Series) p. 330 et seq. † Ibid p. 356.
Vol. 193, p. 1260.
Thid p. 355.
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.