CO129-367 - Acting Governor May - 1910 [6-7] — Page 168

(8)

166

This is contrary to Article 14 of the French Treaty of Tientsin

1858, which expressly lays down that no monopoly shall be created,

which may interfere with the freedom of trade. The Article in

question reads as follows:-

"Aucune société de commerce privilegies ne pourra

"désormais a'établir en Chine, et il ensera de même de

"toute coalition organiseé dans le but d'exercer une

"monopole sur le commerce. En cas de contravention au

"present Article, les autorités Chinoises, sur les re-

"presentations du consul ou de l'agent consulaire, avi-

"seront aux moyens de dissoudre de semblables association

"dont elles s'efforceront d'ailleurs de prévenir l'exis- "tence par des prohibitions préalables, afin d'écarter

"tout ce qui pourrait porter atteinte à la libre con-

"currence".

and secondly with regard to the Chefoo Agreement, dated 1885, which

runs as follows:-

Article 2 provides for the payment to the Imperial Maritime

of Import duty and lekin.

Customs)

Article 3

for the repacking of the drug and the issuing of

Article &

Article 7

a pass to protect the package from further taxation

while in transit to the interior.

states that no further tax is to be imposed on

foreign opium unless a similar tax is placed upon

native opium.

it was the intention of the two Contracting Powers clearly shows that t¡no additional tax was to be

placed upon the opium until it reached the place of

consumption.

The imposition of the above tax and the accompanying regula-

tions are not only a deliberate interference with the raw opium

trade but in addition amounts to increased taxation on opium before

it