CO129-396 - Public Offices - 1912 — Page 9

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

OPIUM.

CONFIDENTIAL.

[30497)

No. 1.

C. O

7

RECS 10 AUG 12

JJuly 18.j

SECTION 3.

Sir,

India Office to Foreign Office.-(Reccixed July 18.)

India Office, July 18, 1912. WITH reference to the correspondence ending with your letter of the 28th June on the subject of the import of opium into Macao, I am directed by the Secretary of State for India to forward, for Sir Edward Grey's information, and for any remarks which he may wish to make, a copy of a telegram to the Government of India and of their reply. The latter is to the effect that the restriction of direct opium shipments from India to Macao would be ineffective as a means of stopping the smuggling of opium into China from that colony.

Before he communicates the Government of India's reply to the Colonial Office, Lord Crewe would be glad to learn whether the Portuguese Government have replied to the representations made to them by His Majesty's Minister as to limiting the amount of opium to be imported into Macao.

I am, &c.

R. RITCHIE.

Enclosure 1 in No. 1.

The Marquess of Crewe to Government of India.

India Office, June 27, 1912.

(Telegraphic.) P.

MACAO'S illicit traffic in uncertificated opium. Please see Colonial Office letter of the 11th June, forwarded with my Revenue Secretary's letter of the 13th June.

Colonial Office urge that shipments to Macao should be limited to actual require- ments of Macao, which are estimated at 440 chests a year. Please state your views. It is alleged by Shanghai merchants (see despatch of British Minister at Peking, dated the 9th May) that their difficulties are enhanced by uncertificated opium entering China from Macao.

Enclosure 2 in No. 1.

Government of India to the Marquess of Crewe.

July 8, 1912. (Telegraphic.) P.

OPIUM. Your telegram dated the 27th ultimo. Please see India Office letter of the 21st May received with Revenue Secretary's letter of the 13th June. In the views expressed therein we completely agree.

Were direct exports to Macao restricted to fixed number of chests, opium would doubtless be consigned nominally elsewhere, and transhipped to Macao subsequently. Measure would therefore, we consider, be ineffective. Moreover, so long as prices in China rule high, no restriction short of absolute stoppage of nou-China trade will stop On this point, and also on smuggling. This we have pointed out on former occasions. the subject of Jordan's despatch of the 9th May, we propose to address you separately in a letter.

[2549 s-3]