尘
[This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.]
REC? ¡REP 16 JUN 11
(
OPIUM.
[May 10.]
CONFIDENTIAL.
SECTION 1.
[17704]
(No. 117.)
No. 1.
Sir J. Jordan to Sir Edward Grey.-(Received May 10.)
(Telegraphic.) R.
Peking, May 10, 1911.
MY telegram No. 115 of 8th May: Opium Agreement. An unusually long and important decree was issued last night [to] give effect to new Opium Agreement.
After stating that a period of ten years was originally fixed for removal of such a long-standing and deep-seated evil, it points out that by new arrangement import of foreign opium will cease at any time within unexpired period of seven years in the event of complete extinction of cultivation in China and in order that every effort should be made to bring about abolition as soon as possible.
Arrangement is pronounced to be "entirely satisfactory."
Decree explicitly orders that all restrictions and taxation imposed by provinces shall be immediately withdrawn.
New rates of increased taxation are explained to be merely temporary expedient
to meet present financial exigencies, and Throne expressly disclaims any intention of relying on such a source of revenue.
Decree concludes with an acknowledgment of the "assistance of a friendly Power.'
(Sent to India.)
No. 2.
Sir J. Jordan to Sir Edward Grey.-(Received May 10.)
[17631]
(No. 118.)
(Telegraphic.) R.
MY telegram No. 114 of May 5: Opium,
Peking, May 10, 1911.
Imperial rescript was issued last night fixing tax on native opium at 230 taels per 100 catties. This was in accordance with arrangement made between Wai-wu Pu and myself.
(17713]
No. 3.
(No. 82.)
Sir Edward Grey to Sir J. Jordan.
(Telegraphic.) R.
Foreign Office, May 10, 1911. OPIUM Agreement. Sassoons represent that, in view of the fact that stocks in Hong Kong are financed for the Chinese by the banks or by the importers, it is difficult to understand how the money is to be found in a few days sufficient to repay the banks and importers before shipment, to say nothing of the further very large amount required in cash for duty purposes. As to unsold opium, they state that Hong Kong merchants have no godowns or representatives in Canton. They ask to whom this opium is to be entrusted.
Do the above points constitute a genuine grievance, and, if so, how can they be met?
(Sent to India.)
[2011 k-1]
549
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.