CO129-482 - Public Offices - 1923 — Page 104

12 ----

13 -

102

The SECRETARY answered in the affirmative.

The Committee adopted this procedure.

Dr. ANSELMINO (Germany) stated that the Chairman had sent him a list of seizures made in Great Britain. He had asked his Government's permission to reply to communications of the Chairman, Secretariat, members and Assessors of the Committee. This permission had been granted him.

He explained that the French police authorities had seized at Saint-Nazaire three cases, each containing 5 kilos of cocaine, and bearing the label of a Darmstadt factory. The boat on which the seizure had been made came from Mexico and touched at Santander, where the cocaine had been loaded. The German firm concerned said that the labels should be carefully examined, because they were often falsified. It was also discovered that a firm in Hongkong had ordered 1,500,000 falsified labels.

M. BOURGOIS (France) said that he had received information concerning this particularly interesting case. The French police authorities had seized cocaine in quantities which were sometimes so considerable that it wondered whether the trafficker had not obtained his stocks directly from the firm.

He asked Dr. Anselmino if the sale of cocaine was unrestricted in Germany.

Dr. ANSELMINO answered that it was controlled.

The CHAIRMAN said that the British authorities had also seized cocaine on ships that had touched at Santander.

Dr. ANSELMINO said that the authorities at Santander had seized cocaine that was marked as sent by the firm Scherin in Berlin. This firm had never exported to Spain, only to Portugal; from examination of the labels, the routes followed could be recognised from the letters and figures inscribed thereon. German manufacturers demanded that, in the case of the seizure of an entire bottle, or less, a label should be shown,

The CHAIRMAN asked Dr. Anselming if he could give this information to the Governments concerned,

Dr. ANSELMINO replied in the affirmative.

Sir John JORDAN pointed out that such falsifications were common in the Far East. English labels had also been falsified.

The CHAIRMAN asked the Committee if it would not be advisable for the Secretariat to communicate with the Spanish Government as to the seizures on ships from Santander.

The Committee agreed.

7. The Compilation of a Black List (Document Q.C. 64).

The CHAIRMAN said that he found that there had been a misunderstanding as to the meaning of this suggestion.

He read the relevant document and suggested that the Secretariat should communicate the particulars in the "black list" to the various competent authorities to which it would be useful.

Sir John JORDAN stated that it would be an excellent thing if the names of traders were published. In Northern China, such a procedure had an excellent result and diminished the traffic.

The CHAIRMAN said that it might not be advisable to let the illicit traders know that their names were known.

Mr. CAMPBELL (India) was of opinion that this would mean a heavy burden on the Secreta- riat. Chinamen and Laskars employed on ships plying between Europe and the East were largely concerned in the illicit trade, but it would be difficult to transcribe their names properly. In the case of Indians, a man's name alone would usually be insufficient to identify him. Names could also easily be changed.

He thought the local police authorities, in direct communication with the police of the second country, could perhaps best deal with such cases.

M. BOURGOIS (France) wished to know whether the list was to be confidential.

Sir John JORDANs did not think it necessary.

The CHAIRMAN said he had in view, not the Chinese and Laskar sailors who mostly smuggled in a small way, but the traders who practised the traffic on an international scale, for which a big capital was needed. As each one of these was discovered, it was desirable that the Govern- ments should be informed so that they could be on their guard.

Mr. CAMPBELL (India) said that if the list were limited in such a way, the system was worth trying.

Sir John JORDAN was of the opinion that publicity would do much good in the case stated in Document O.C. 64. There had been some years ago à Chinese syndicate in Liverpool that intro- duced large quantities of drugs without the police being able to discover the culprits. Publicity would have helped the police in that case. It had already stopped the traffic organised by large associations which could not have been stopped before.

The CHAIRMAN suggested that the Secretariat should be asked to prepare the black list without any formal resolution of the Committee. It should request the various Governments to communicate the relevant cases. The results should be examined at the next session of the Committee, which would then be in a position to judge the usefulness of the procedure.

Publicity might have served the fight against the traffic in China, but the situation was not the same in Europe.

In any case the Secretariat should communicate the list to the Governments concerned.

Sir John JORDAN asked by which channel this communication should be made, as the diplo- matic channel was slow.

The SECRETARY thought that, as there was no other channel, it should use the diplomatic channel to begin with.

M. CHAO-HSIN CHU (China) said that the smugglers were foreigners as well as Chinese, for nine out of ten traders condemned were not Chinese.

M. BOURGOIS (France) stated that the system of black lists appeared to him to involve certain dangers, as it caused suspicion to rest indefinitely upon traders who might only have offended once. The public list appeared to him to be inadmissible, contrary to custom and even to law. The Committee could perhaps recommend an exchange in certain cases of confidential communica- tions between the police authorities. The question was very interesting but extremely delicate, and required thorough consideration.

Mr. CAMPBELL was of opinion that it might be advisable to postpone this question to the next session in view of the divergence of opinion, as some of the members of the Committee might like to receive further instructions from their Governments.

The CHAIRMAN agreed.

Sir John JORDAN said that there should be more co-ordination in that matter between the various Governments.

On the CHAIRMAN's proposal, the Committee decided to ask the Secretary to draft a report on the basis of the discussion; this report would be considered at the next session.

8. Prepared Opium Can this at any time be considered legitimate ?

M. van WETTUM (Netherlands) explained that he wanted to know the exact meaning of the words "legitimate" and "illegitimate as given on page 51 (English text) of the minutes of the

last session.

He said that, according to page 51 of the Minutes of the Committee's second session (English text), the Chairman had said that the Second Assembly had deleted from Dr. Wellington Koo's resolution the reference to prepared opium, precisely on the grounds that prepared opium had been declared illegitimate by the Opium Convention and that that Convention had made provision for its gradual suppression.

tees.

The speaker referred to pages 506 and 507 of the Assembly Records-Meetings of Commit- There one saw, with regard to Dr. Wellington Koo's resolution (page 506), that the word "legitimate" was to be substituted for "medicinal and scientific" and that the reference to opium prepared for purposes of smoking was to be omitted, the complete suppression of which was provided for in Chapter II of the Convention.

In consequence of these alterations, the word "legitimate" in the amended resolution was only used with regard to raw opium and had the special meaning (see page 507) of medical in rather a broad and scientific sense.

He opposed, therefore, the use of the word "illegitimate" as the Chairman had done and declared that, so long as a country did not prohibit the use of prepared opium, that use was, under the restrictions of the local law, to be considered as legitimate.

: