!
!
26
done so and so". You know that when such motions are voted upon, the Ministry does not remain in power. There is always blame implied in a regret thus expressed.
I am sure that all here agree with me that such is not the spirit that actuates the Conference when it expresses the regret embodied in cocu No. 2. We should therefore endeavor not to risk such an interpretation. For the reasons mentioned I propose that this voru be worded thus:
"The Conference, learning that certain Governments have as yet declined or omitted to sign the Convention, considers that the abstention of these Powers jeopardizes the humanitarian aim of the Conference in the most serious manner, etc., etc.".
In article No. 3. I read "expresses the wish etc. (see the resolution?". It seems to me that when someone says to someone else "I beg to inform you that you are wrong", a compliment has not been paid nor has an extremely agreeable thing been said. If the Conference does not deem it unwise, I believe that this phrase should be changed and replaced by this "expresses the hope that the Government of the Netherlands may be pleased again to represent to the Swiss Government the value that is attached to its cooperation. It etc., etc.".
As you see, Gentlemen, these slight modifications of form in no way change the principle of our resolution. But I think that they will facilitate the task of the Government of the Netherlands who must rely upon the text that we will leave with it for the new steps that it is about to take in order thus to gua rantee, if I am not mistaken, the success of a plan the achievement of which constitutes the desideratum of international public opinion. This desire is, that all nations shall participate and respond to the appeal when Conventions are elaborated which, like that of opium, concern the future of the human race or, generally speaking, when noble efforts are to be made which cause more love, more justice and greater well being among nations.
The President said that the modifications that the Delegate of Haïti had just suggested, referred to the proposed Protocol of Cloture, presented by the Editing Committee, the discussion of which had not yet been opened. Furthermore he observed that the modifications had a tendency to change the resolutions already adopted by the Conference.
The President in opening the discussion of the proposed Protocol of Cloture presented by the Editing Committee, inserted in the order of the day a proposition of the Chinese Delegation as follows:
Preamble.
The International Opium Convention was originally signed by 12 Powers. By the invitation of the Government of the Netherlands 22 Powers have signed the "Protocol of signature of the Powers not represented at the First Conference”, making the total number of signatories 34. A resolution has been unanimously adopted by this the 2nd Conference inviting the 12 Powers, who for various reasons have not signed the so-called "Protocol of Signatures", to do so. A number of new signatures will undoubtedly be thus secured.
The President of the Conference has expressed the opinion that it was not necessary for those nations which were willing to deposit their ratifications to wait before doing so until others had decided. That his excellent suggestion may be availed of by the Delegates in a more formal manner, the following amendment is proposed:
That the Delegates to the Second International Opium Conference sulvise their figcernments to deposit forthwith their ratifications.
27
His Exc. Mr. Yen: Regarding the amendment that we have proposed, the idea was that the decision would strengthen the position of this Conference ris aris the nations that have not even signed the Convention, and are being invited in an earnest manner so to do. Since we have learned that it would be difficult for some of the Delegations to accept our amendment, we beg to withdraw it. In its place we beg to move that the sentence forming line 8 of page 4 of the Protocole of Cloture, which our President announced, be adopted by this Conference.
The President stated that as the proposition of the Chinese Delegation had been withdrawn, the Conference should decide as to inserting at the end of the first paragraph of the Protocol of Cloture the words "decided that the deposit of rati fications now take place".
This insertion was submitted to vote and unanimously accepted. His Exc. Mr. Lamarche, voting in the affirmative, stated that ratification by his Government was not possible before parliamentary approval.
His Exc. Mr. Ferreira, voting in the affirmative, repeated that as he had already said in the second meeting ratification by his Government would also not be possible before parliamentary approval.
His Exc. Mr. Swétchine also said that as regards ratification by his Govern- ment, he could only repeat what he had said at the second meeting; it concerned only the power of depositing the ratifications.
The President then called for discussion of the proposed Protocol of Cloture presented by the Editing Committee, as follows:
Protocol of Cloture
The Second International Opium Conference, called by the Government of the Netherlands in accordance with Article 23 of the International Opium Con- vention, met at the Hague, in the Hall of the Knights, on July 1, 1913.
The Governments enumerated below participated in the Conference, to which they accredited the following Delegates:
GERMANY:
His Exe. Mr. FÉLIX VON MÜLLER, Privy Counsellor, E. E. & M. P. at the Hague, Delegate.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
Dr. HAMILTON WRIGHT, Special Commissioner of the United States of America, Delegate.
His Exe. LLOYD BRYCE, E. E. & M. P. at the Hague, Delegate.
Mr. GERRIT JOHN KOLLEN, President Emeritus of Hope College, Professor of Mathematics, Delegate.
ARGENTINE REPUBLIC:
Dr. FRANÇOIS DE VEYGA, Delegate.
BELGIUM:
His Exc. Baron ALBÉRIC FALLON, E. E. & M. P. at the Hague. Delegate.
BRAZIL:
His Exc. J. Graça ARANHA, E. E. & M. P. at the Hague, Delegate.
288
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.