CO129-396 - Public Offices - 1912 — Page 272

269

16

might withdraw or modify them. The French contention as to the equivalence, in certain circumstances, of administrative enactments and laws, was one which we were bound to accept.

66.-(i.) M. Delbrück, the German delegate on the Committee, had submitted a new scheme, the main lines of which were as follows:-

(a.) Immediately after the signature of the convention by the conference delegates, all the outside Powers of Europe and America were to be invited to adhere.

(b.) When all these Powers had thus adhered to the convention, the process of ratification by all the Powers now concerned would commence, and would be carried into effect as soon as possible.

(c.) Adherence and ratification should be not merely for the home territories of any Power, but for its colonies and other outside possessions and protectorates also.

(d.) The convention would come into force a year after the completion of ratification by all the Fowers concerned.

(c.) If, however, matters had not advanced to the ratification stage two years after the date of the signing of the convention by the delegates, a fresh conference should be held to consider conditions under which the convention might nevertheless be brought into force, wholly or in part.

This project, which we shall refer to hereafter as the German scheme, involved an entirely new principle, viz., the subordination of ratification to adhesion; but M. Asser did not think there was any objection in principle to this, although his own preference was for the usual method.

67. The reasons brought forward by M. Delbrück in support of his proposal were that the circumstances were unprecedented, since some of the matters dealt with by the conference were of world-wide interest, and could not be adequately carried out by the small number of Powers represented at the conference, especially in view of the fact that some of the non-represented Powers occupied a very important position in regard to the questions under discussion, as, for instance, Turkey in regard to raw opium, and Bolivia and Peru (where the coca plant is principally produced) in regard to cocaine. M. Delbrück argued further that, as regards Germany, the convention would require the ratification of the Reichstag, and that it would be difficult to obtain such ratification while the attitude of outside Powers was unknown.

On the other hand, Sir William Collins had pointed out that this scheme as it stood, making ratification dependent on the adherence of all outside Powers of Europe and America, was likely to lead to indefinite delay in regard to the practical enforce- ment of the measures on which the conference had agreed.

68. The Drafting Committee also reported difficulties which had arisen as to the exact significance of the words "importation" and "exportation," as used in article 5 of the convention, on the subject of raw opium, and also in articles 7 and 8, and in some of the articles in chapter 3, in regard to prepared opium, morphine, cocaine, &c. 69. The remaining portions of the committee's report dealt mainly with-- (a.) The wording of a number of the articles already agreed on, in regard to which the suggestions of the committee were subsequently in large measure accepted.

(b) A proposal for bringing the special Chinese articles into the main convention. (c.) The submission of a fresh draft final protocol.

70. Apart from the important questions which had been thus raised by the report of the Drafting Committee, we were also faced with a serious difficulty in regard to the morphine and cocaine articles, into which the German delegation, as a result of the conferences they had had with their Government in Berlin, were now desirous of intro- ducing important modifications. We had thus, as will be seen, to face fresh problems of a serious character, which involved not merely private conference with other delegations, but in some cases references to His Majesty's Government. Unfortunately we were deprived at this juncture of the guidance of Sir Cecil Clementi Smith, whose health had not permitted him to return to The Hague after the Christmas recess.

71. The sixteenth session (10th January) dealt mainly with matters which have already been reported on, such as the transfer of the special Chinese articles to the main

convention.

72. At the seventeenth session (11th January) the report of the Drafting Committee on the various "effectuating" proposals came up for discussion.

M. Delbrück gave a clear exposition of the circumstances which had led to the propounding of the German scheme, in the course of which he laid stress on the fact that ratification of the conven-

17

tion by the Reichstag would make it an integral part of the German corpus juris, while in the United States, for example, even if the convention were ratified by the Senate, its provisions would remain ineffective until applied by internal legislation.

73. The course of the discussion, in which various delegations took part, had con- vinced us that the British amendment to the primary scheme had been superseded by the new proposals now put forward. As we more than once indicated to the conference, our object throughout was to insist on the practical and expeditious enforcement of the measures that had already been agreed to, rather than on questions of form; and as between the primary and the German schemes, the latter had the advantage that the agreement of outside Powers was to be sought immediately after the signing of the convention, while under the former that process would not be commenced till six at least of the conference Powers had ratified. We accordingly requested instructions as to whether we should negotiate on the basis of the German scheme, while endeavouring to shorten the periods before the convention should come into force, and to substitute "substantial" for "unanimous" adhesion of outside Powers.

74. At the eighteenth session (12th January) the adjourned debate on the subject of the "effectuation" procedure was opened by M. Brenier (France), who pointed out that the divergent schemes before the conference arose from a conflict of ideas. The German delegation, looking to the great difficulties of cinbarking on the measures approved by the conference without adhesion of outside Powers, held that the obtainment of such adhesion was the first object to be aimed at; other delegatious, concerned chiefly with getting the convention into force as soon as possible, objected to the delay which the German method would involve. In order to bridge the differences between these divergent ideas, M. Brenier suggested a compromise scheme and proposed that the Drafting Committee should present a definite proposal in regard to ratification, adhesion, and the coming into force of the convention.

The American delegation proposed an amendment, which was carried, directing the committee to have regard to all the proposals which had been made, but not to express approval of any one of them.

75. The Drafting Committee, which had been materially aided in its fresh deliberations by the kind assistance of M. van Swinderen as well as of M. Asser, theu put forward a scheme following in some respects the lines of the German proposal. The main lines of the scheme as it was thus to be altered are shown below, the clauses italicised being those which we considered necessary in order to make the scheme a satisfactory one from our point of view -

(1.) As soon as the convention had been signed, the outside Powers of Europe and America were to be invited to sign it also. No reference was now made to the word" adhesion as being an unsuitable term to use in the circumstances proposed.

(2.) As soon as these supplementary signatures had been obtained, ratification would be proceeded with.

(3.) If, however, all the outside Powers had not signed by the 31st December, 1912, the Powers that had signed, whether originally or by way of supplementary signature, should send representatives to The Hague to consider whether ratification might not nevertheless be proceeded with. Our object here was to cut short the delay which might be caused by refusal to sign, or procrastination in agreeing to sign, on the part of some of the outside Powers.

(4.) The convention was to come into force two months after the completion of the ratification process. (The Drafting Committee's original scheme said six months.)

(5.) Laws, &c., necessary to give effect to the provisions of the convention should be 'drawn up and presented to the Parliaments concerned within six months of the convention coming into force.

(6.) The date on which such legislation should come into force would, however, be the subject of agreement between the signatory Powers.

We thus met the point which had been raised by the Board of Trade that restrictions should not be enforced until each State had had an opportunity of considering the extent to which other Powers were prepared to move in the game direction.

(7.) In the event of grave difficulties arising in regard to the putting into forec of the convention as a whole, or of the laws, dc., specifically contemplated thereby, a fresh conference should be summoned to obtain agreement on these matters.

76. We indicated, in addressing you on the subject of these amendments, that we thought the procedure proposel would present material advantages in coping with the

[660]

D 2