CO129-510-8 Policy on sale of Opium 12-1-1928 - 24-7-1928 — Page 13

C. 52836/28 [No. 12].

No.

PROOF.

13

INTERDEPARTMENTAL OPIUM COMMITTEE.

MINUTES OF THE 6TH MEETING, HELD AT THE HOME OFFICE ON MONDAY,

9TH JULY, 1928.

Present:

SIR MALCOLM DELEVINGNE, Home Office, Chairman.

SIR GILBERT GRINDLE, Colonial Office.

MR. S. CAINE.

SIR C. CLEMENTI, Governor of Hong Kong.

MR. G. MOUNSEY, Foreign Office.

MR. M. D. PERRINS, Home Office, Secretary.

THE Committee met at the request of Sir Gilbert Grindle to meet Sir Cecil Clementi who wished to discuss the present opium situation in Hong Kong.

Sir C. Clementi recapitulated the views expressed in his despatches, emphasized the seriousness of the situation and asked what was Hong Kong to do. The situation in Hong Kong was dominated by the smuggler. It was the duty of the Colonial Government to maintain the Government Monopoly but it was impossible to continue to do so without a sufficient supply of opium which they were not permitted to obtain. The alternatives were either to permit the Monopoly to increase its supply of opium or to repeal or at least modify the existing opium legislation.

SIR M. DELEVINGNE said that he had not expected that the purpose of the meeting was to reopen a question already decided by the Cabinet. The Cabinet had decided to ask the Council of the League to send a Commission to the Far East to inquire into the opium smoking problem on the spot, and all the Committee could do was to con- sider how to further the policy of the Cabinet in this matter.

SIR G. GRINDLE said that it was quite clear that the question of the purchase of Persian opium by the Hong Kong Government to make good the reduction in the supply of Indian opium could be reopened at any moment.

SIR M. DELEVINGNE agreed that it was understood that the decrease in Indian opium supplied to the Government of Hong Kong as the result of the decision of the Indian Government could be made good by purchase elsewhere.

SIR C. CLEMENTI pointed out that the difficulty lay in the fact that he was per- mitted to supplement his restricted Indian supplies only to meet the normal demands. at present prices. As the present prices were within the reach only of the wealthy (the coolie could not be expected to pay more than 2 dollars a tael) the smuggler held the market. He complained that the position of the Hong Kong Government was not fully appreciated. It was required to maintain the Monopoly and to suppress smuggling, but was not permitted to adopt the only means of carrying out these two duties. He asked for the reasons for the Cabinet decision. He confessed that he could not understand why in this matter a distinction had been made between Hong Kong and the Straits Settlements, who were, he understood, permitted to purchase opium from Persia in unrestricted quantities. The present policy, in his view, was pure eyewash." The fact that the smugglers were selling opium in great quantities and cheaply was well known and this wholesale breach of the law was known through- out the Colony. People were quite prepared to buy Monopoly opium but they could not get it, and in consequence an artificial crime had been created, and to meet this grievance, which he considered justifiable, the Government would be driven to repeal the opium legislation.

SIR G. GRINDLE said that he foresaw that the question would be asked whether the smuggling of cheap opium might not be expected to continue even if the Monopoly did increase its supplies and lower its prices. From what Sir Cecil Clementi had said there was a great demand for opium at a price lower than that of the cheap brands the Monopoly had proposed to sell.

SIR C. CLEMENTI thought not, explaining that there was a price higher than the cheapest at which nevertheless the smuggler could not compete. because it would not pay the smugglers merely to smuggle cheap onium. It would not be worth their while unless they could smuggle the good as well as the inferior brands. It was the view of his officials that while the scheme was in operation (that is, while a $6 brand was on the market) there was no smuggling into Hong Kong, even of the cheapest sorts, mixtures of opium and dross, which sold at $2. (Sir M. Delevingne mentioned the experience at Formosa where smuggling is prevalent in spite of the low price.) He also looked at the matter from another point of view. Hong Kong had become a base for the illicit traffic, e.g., it was used by the traffickers as a port for their exports Opium.-Gp. 6. 166/2622. 12. 6/31. (9421) M. & S.