2
Enclosure 2 in No. 1.
Mr. Pearce to Consul-General Sir E. Fraser.
My dear Sir Everard Fraser,
Shanghai, July 25, 1914. IN reply to your letter of the 17th July, I have only to say that the position of the Council as regards the retail sale of opium in the settlement was fully described in the chairman's letter to the senior consul of the 28th November, 1910, which is set out on p. 270 of the report for that year,
We feel that as long as China and the Powers allow opium to be brought into the settlement its retail sale must be supervised under license. To reduce the number of licences issued would have no effect upon the amount sold nor upon the amount consumed; the only result which I apprehend would be to confine the retail trade in
the hands of fewer favoured dealers.
The stocks of foreign opium in Hong Kong and Shanghai are timed to exhaust themselves in rather less than two years, the calculation being based on the average consumption during recent months. If success attends the Chinese Government's suppression measures during this period the question will settle itself; but you have only to turn to the Kiangsu section of the Minister's despatch of the 26th May, 1913, to see how improbable it is that this will be the case. Let me quote one or two sentences to illustrate what I mean :---
"The recrudescence of cultivation on a very considerable scale is indicated by nearly all the reports received from this province"; "Within a radius of 60 miles from Shanghai two districts were found to be full of poppy"; "In the unfrequented districts round Nanking many miles of poppy fields were to be seen, and in one prefecture the area under cultivation was estimated at 30 square miles."
With these reliable statements before us, and with the evidence of our own eyes that the poppy is being grown without check on the very borders of the settlement, we are justly sceptical as to any immediate prospect of abolition.
Critics of the Council's action should grasp the fact that the blame for the failure of the abolition movement rests with the utterly untrustworthy local Chinese officials, and with the Chinese Central Government, for its failure to enforce its own conventions and decrees.
Yours very truly,
E. C. PEARCE.
3
without, would be entirely at variance with the land regulations, and would likewise be repugnant to the tradition of fifty years.
My letter of the 4th January to the Consular Body, which is published on p 276 of the annual report for 1909, has perhaps provided the native authorities with an indication of the view which the Council would be disposed to take of any attempt in this direction. I trust you will again be good enough to make it clear to them.
Nevertheless, I believe that the native authorities are aware that the Council will never shrink from proceeding with anti-opium measures, in the manner so far followed, that is to say, gradual limitation and final entire removal of all opportunity of smoking in the settlement.
During the past three years, in addition to closing all opium divans, the licence fee for opium shops has been increased from 10 dollars as maximum and 150 dollars as minimum to 40 taels as maximum and 10 taels as minimum, at which latter rates there are at present 310 licensed shops. The Council is very willing to close these altogether, but so long as opium is imported into the settlement some cognisance must be taken of its retail sale, and it must receive its proper measure of supervision under municipal licence.
The question of importation is, I do not doubt, receiving the most skilled and careful attention which China and the foreign Governments concerned can provide, it is not a question for the Council's consideration. But I enclose a table of figures showing the net importations from 1995 to the end of the June quarter of this year, which is thought by the Council to be highly instructive, for it shows 1908 and 1909 as years of larger net importation than those preceding, while that during the December quarter of last year is the largest during five years.
In conclusion, I have the honour again to assure you of the Council's wish to take all reasonable and proper measures towards abolishing the use of opium in the settlement. To this end the Council is prepared to apply to opium shops the same procedure as was applied to divans, namely, annual reduction of the number of licences byla proportion to be agreed upon, and simultaneous increase in the licence fee to an almost prohibitive height, whereby in a definite number of years the sale of opium in the settlement may become extinct.
Any other suggestion which the Consular Body consider suitable will receive the Council's attention, and provided it is in accordance with the provisions and principles of the land regulations, and is made applicable also in the French settlement, the Consular Body may rest entirely confident of its ready adoption.
I have, &c.
DAVID LANDALE, Chairman.
Enclosure 3 in No. 1.
Sir,
Mr. Landale to Consul-General Sir P. Warren.
Shanghai, November 28, 1910.
I HAVE the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 15th November, transmitting a despatch from the Taotai on the subject of the application of anti-opium measures to individuals resident in the settlement.
In reply I have the honour to point out for the Taotai's information that, although the Council has recorded its intention to co-operate in the present laudable national efforts to eradicate opium smoking in China, the measures which the Council can adopt must of necessity be limited to such as are not in contravention of its principles as a foreign administration. The native procedure of personal coercion and restriction of individual freedom, involved by articles 2 and 3 of the code devised in compliance with the Imperial Edict of the 20th November, 1906, may perhaps be a practical method for the interior, and is perhaps intended to involve proper safeguard of individual rights from abuse; but I am led to the assumption that it is not, for the petition of chairman of the City Self-Government Office shows that in the city these articles have not really been enforced in their most essential point. Certain it is that the procedure indicated in these articles would prove impracticable in the foreign settlement, and, even under municipal auspices, might lead in native hands to irregularities of illimitable extent, and of a kind from which the settlement has fortunately hitherto been free.
Indeed, no powers at present exist for issue of a licence to an individual smoker in the settlement; for the Council is empowered only to licence those who " open a place for the sale of opium " or who "sell or vend" the drug; while the introduction of a Chinese Government agency within settlement limits, or a system of license from
(No. 78.) Sir,
Enclosure 4 in No. 1.
Sir J. Jordan to Consul-General Sir E. Fraser.
Peking, August 17, 1914. I HAVE received your despatch No. 94 of the 27th July, and I regret to observe that the chairman of the International Municipal Council does not at present see his way to assist the suggestion of a reduction of the number of opium-selling licences within the settlement.
I cannot fail to note that the increased facilities of public access to retailed opium, granted by the increase of the number of licences issued by the Municipal Council, appear to be in direct contradiction to the expressed desires and intentions of the Council itself. The Council's letter to the senior consul of the 28th November, 1910, stated clearly the Council's desire to co-operate in a policy by suppression, following a scheme of gradual limitation and annual reduction of licences, and intimated that the Council was prepared to apply to opium shops the same procedure as was applied to divans.
and annual reduc-
These protestations and intentions of "gradual limitation tion" have scarcely been justified by the Council's action, the monthly average of opium-selling licences granted by the Council within the settlement was, in 1910, 317; in 1911, 329; in 1912, 374; and in 1913, 465.
I do not think that the Chinese Government's measures of suppression, or the question of their effectiveness, on which there may be room for difference of opinion,
201
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.