[ { "id": 330007, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-224 - Foreign Office - 1885", "page_number": 330, "title": "CO129-224 - Foreign Office - 1885", "content_text": "# No. 54.\n## Mr. O'Conor to Earl Granville.—(Received May 19.)\n\n**C. O. 13437**\n**REC?**\n**REGO 30 JUL 85**\n\n**(No. 134. Secret and Confidential.)**\nMy Lord,\n\nPeking, March 29, 1885.\n\nWITH reference to my despatch No. 133 of yesterday's date, marked **Secret and Confidential**, I have the honour to inform your Lordship that the main difference now existing between France and China appears to be whether, as the Chinese contend, the status quo shall continue in Tonquin until the Definitive Treaty of Peace, or, as the French require, the whole of that country shall be given up to them as soon as the Preliminary Agreement or Protocol is signed.\n\nThe question of the stoppage of rice coming northwards is also, I believe, a much disputed point. The French argue that by allowing Peking and the northern provinces to re-victual, they not only lose all the advantages of the last six weeks, but afford China the means of continuing the war with greater ease should the present negotiations unhappily break down. The period intervening between the acceptance by both sides of the Protocol and the signature of the Definitive Treaty of Peace must be looked upon as a time of armistice, in which neither party should gain any advantage.\n\nI think it not improbable that the Chinese will give way on this point, as they attach great importance to the somewhat similar understanding respecting the Island of Formosa.\n\nOn the whole, the prospects of a speedy termination of the Franco-Chinese war seem very good at this moment.\n\nI cannot, however, wholly dismiss from my mind the fear that in the detailed negotiations France will seek some compensation for the lost indemnity in special commercial privileges likely to be injurious to England in proportion as they are exclusive and exceptional. There is reason to believe that after the Langson affair in August 1884 China was inclined to entertain proposals coming from the side of France by which the right of building railways throughout the country should be conceded exclusively to Frenchmen for a number of years, and that it was seriously offered and entertained as a basis of peace.\n\nWhat may be the nature of the special frontier commercial advantages claimed by France at the present moment I have failed to discover, though I gather from a Chinese source that, whatever they are, the Chinese Government has declared they must be limited by what they can afford to give to other nations who have the most-favoured-nation clause in their Treaties.\n\nI have also reason to think that certain definite commercial proposals of France are at this moment under the consideration of the Yamên, and I therefore thought it advisable in conversation with the Ministers this day to allude to the subject.\n\nI said that I had heard reports of negotiations for peace between France and China, and that I was sure Her Majesty's Government would hear with extreme satisfaction of the termination of a long and painful war, which they had viewed with so much concern. I then went on to observe that, while wishing every success to the pending negotiations for peace, I felt it my duty to express most earnestly the hope that, whatever might be the final terms, there would be found no commercial stipulations opposed to the rights or the legitimate interests of England.\n\nIt was, I understood, the duty of the British Representative to cement by every means in his power the growing friendship between the two countries, and I felt sure their Excellencies would agree with me in thinking that nothing should be done likely to check the further development of the good understanding now happily existing between them.\n\nIn reply, the Ministers of the Yamên assured me I might feel quite easy on this point, but that, nevertheless, they would not fail to communicate the observations I had confidentially made to them on this subject to the other Ministers of the Tsung-li Yamên.\n\nI have, &c.\n(Signed) **N. R. O'CONOR**.\n\nPage 330 \nPage 331", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-224 - Foreign Office - 1885.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 384369, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-310 - Acting Governor Major Gen Gascoigne - 1902 [1-4]", "page_number": 246, "title": "CO129-310 - Acting Governor Major Gen Gascoigne - 1902 [1-4]", "content_text": "Auso\n\noverfor.\n\n1902\n\nFeb 19\n\nst previous Paper.\n\n70\n\n9108\n\nNo. 1 1 72\n\n(Subject.)\n\nExport of Arms to China,\n\n242\n\nDESPATCH.\n\nC. O.\n\n11724\n\nRec'd 25 MAR 02\n\nCopy further letter for Agent Genl at Canton as to proposed relaxation of prohibition of : presumes that H.M's Govt will not be advised to take steps at present towards alteration in terms of Final Protocol\n\n(Minutes.)\n\nR$ 3, (78) ~~~ 50031–2)00-19-01\n\next subsequent Paper.\n\n13536\n\nThe matter\n\nof ly gras.\n\ndesprachl\n\nde\n\nto be disposed\n\nAck. I refer to\n\nthat paper.\n\n2613.\n\nлириди", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-310 - Acting Governor Major Gen Gascoigne - 1902 [1-4].txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 384370, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-310 - Acting Governor Major Gen Gascoigne - 1902 [1-4]", "page_number": 247, "title": "CO129-310 - Acting Governor Major Gen Gascoigne - 1902 [1-4]", "content_text": "No. 63. C. O.\n\nGovernment House:\n\n25 FEB 02\n\nHongkong, 19th February, 1902.\n\n243\n\nSir,\n\nWith reference to my Despatch No. 19 of the 16th ultimo, and in continuation thereof, I have the honour to transmit for your information the enclosed copy of a further letter from His Majesty's Acting Consul-General at Canton relative to the proposed partial relaxation of the prohibition of the export of arms into China.\n\n2. In view of the refusal, on the part of the foreign representatives in China, to allow such relaxation and the unfavourable attitude assumed with regard to the proposal by the Vice-Admiral Commanding-in-Chief, with whose views I am in agreement, I do not presume that you will be inclined to advise His Majesty to take any steps at present towards an alteration in the terms of the Final Protocol.\n\nI have the honour to be,\n\nSir,\n\nYour most obedient\n\nHumble servant,\n\nM.J. Gascoigne\n\nMajor-General,\n\nAdministering the Government.\n\nTHE RIGHT HONOURABLE\n\nJOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN, M.P.,", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-310 - Acting Governor Major Gen Gascoigne - 1902 [1-4].txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 384371, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-310 - Acting Governor Major Gen Gascoigne - 1902 [1-4]", "page_number": 248, "title": "CO129-310 - Acting Governor Major Gen Gascoigne - 1902 [1-4]", "content_text": "Enclosure to Despatch No. 63 of the\n\n244\n\n19th February, 1902.\n\nar 25 W 12\n\nH. M. Consulate-General, Canton, 17th January, 1903.\n\n7\n\nSir,\n\nI have the honour to acknowledge receipt of your despatch of 15th instant, Number 39, respecting the desire of the Canton Authorities to import a supply of fire-arms to be employed in suppressing piracy and robbery in Kuang Tung Province.\n\nIn reply, I beg to point out that, since writing to you semi-officially, I have learned from authentic sources that the Canton High Officials have already been in communication with the Central Government in Peking, and have sounded, directly and indirectly, the Foreign Representatives with a view to obtaining a relaxation of the Article in the final Protocol prohibiting the importation of arms. The desire was to obtain special facilities as regards Kuang Tung Province; I am assured, however, that the application was refused.\n\nI further learn that His Excellency the Vice-Admiral has been approached on this matter, but that he was totally opposed to any facilities being granted so recently after the signing of the Protocol.\n\nThe Honourable\n\nJ. H. Stewart-Lockhart, C.M.G.\n\nColonial Secretary,\n\nHongkong.\n\nI have etc., (Sd.) James Scott,\n\nB.M. Acting Consul-General.", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-310 - Acting Governor Major Gen Gascoigne - 1902 [1-4].txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 386755, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-314 - Public Offices - 1902", "page_number": 210, "title": "CO129-314 - Public Offices - 1902", "content_text": "# FOREIGN OFFICE.\n\nMarch 4th, 1902\n\n**RES** 610208\n**TREEP** 5 MAR 021\n**Gov** 6719\n**Ji** 35380\n\nSir:-\n\nI laid before the Marquess of Lansdowne your letter of the 26th ultimo transmitting a despatch from the Officer administering the Government of Hongkong relative to the desire of the Viceroy of Canton to purchase arms in Hongkong.\n\nI am directed by His Lordship to refer you to the terms of my letter of the 30th of October 1900, the substance of which was telegraphed to Sir H. Blake by Mr. Secretary Chamberlain on the following day; and to suggest that Major General Gascoigne be informed that His Majesty's Government adhere to the view then expressed. Article 5 of the Final Protocol of September 7th last between China and the Powers is an additional reason for the inability of His Majesty's Government to comply with the Viceroy's request.\n\nThe Under Secretary of State,\nColonial Office.\n\nBy \n\nPage 210\nPage 211", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-314 - Public Offices - 1902.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 386758, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-314 - Public Offices - 1902", "page_number": 213, "title": "CO129-314 - Public Offices - 1902", "content_text": "## DOMESTIC\n211 \n**RECT 66 MA 02** \nreply \n\nI have to refer you to my cypher telegram of the 31st October, 1900, and to inform you that H.M. adheres to the views therein expressed. \n3. Article 5 of the Final Protocol of Sept. 7 last between China and the Powers constitutes an additional undertaking that China shall prohibit the importation of arms and ammunition into Chinese territory by Office or Individual. \n\nForeign \n1902 \n\n### Last previous Paper\n30845 \n\n### Next subsequent Paper\nNo. 9354 \n**Secret** \n(Subject.) \n**French Action in Hainan** \nCopy sent to Pitury. \n\n### (Minutes.)\n8/3. almi jug \n11484", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-314 - Public Offices - 1902.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 386986, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-314 - Public Offices - 1902", "page_number": 441, "title": "CO129-314 - Public Offices - 1902", "content_text": "It must be remembered that, whatever provision may be made, even if its terms are carried out in the letter, it will always be impossible to prevent the Central Government (knowing, as it will, the exact amount of the proceeds of the surtaxes from the books of the Imperial Maritime Customs) from demanding contributions from the provinces after the latter have received their quotas from the surtax.\n\nOwing to the fact that the Memorial requested the Throne to agree to an arrangement financially in favour of the provincial authorities, their Excellencies Liu and Chang wished to avoid taking part in a proceeding which is considered undignified in Chinese eyes, i.e., asking for money for oneself. They therefore delayed sending the Memorial on to its destination until seven days before the Treaty was to be signed.\n\nA Decree (translation of which is inclosed) having arrived on the 28th August authorizing the signature of the Treaty, it was decided that the signature should take place on the 30th August, and I was assured that the Edict as to the disposal of the surtaxes would certainly be ready by that date.\n\nWhen we met, however, no satisfactory Edict had been issued. I was shown instead an Edict abolishing li-kin stations all over China, on the ground that all the Powers had agreed to the imposition of the surtaxes on their goods, and in which nothing was said as to the disposal of the surtaxes except that the Board of Revenue was to communicate on the subject with the provinces.\n\nI have the honour to transmit a translation of this Edict.\n\nThe Commissioners appeared very distressed at the non-arrival of a proper Edict, and, of course, wanted me to sign without it, but I told them then that my instructions absolutely forbade me to do so. They then begged me to send an urgent telegram to His Majesty's Minister for pressure to be brought to bear at Pekin, which I did, and they themselves promised to spare no pains to obtain the issue of a proper Decree merely sanctioning the Memorial which had already been communicated to me, the advantage of this course being that no extraneous matter or modification could be introduced in the Decree.\n\nOn the 2nd September, the Commissioners communicated to me the Edict, in the form now in which it is now annexed to the Treaty, sanctioning all that had been asked for in the Memorial referred to.\n\nThe Memorial (as now annexed to the Treaty) had, I found, since it had been communicated to me, been slightly altered by the Viceroy's (two characters are added) to whom it had been forwarded by the Commissioners for transmission to the Throne. Some additional apparent discrepancies are to be found therein owing to the fact that the nature of the Chinese language is so very allusive that translations of the same thing by different persons always differ widely in wording; in this case the translation of the Memorial, as telegraphed to your Lordship on the 1st September, was furnished by one of Sheng Kung-pao's Secretaries, and that embodied in the Treaty is the work of Mr. J. W. Jamieson, Commercial Attaché to the Legation at Pekin.\n\nI understand that the Memorial appears to contemplate the following procedure:\n\nThe Board of Revenue having arranged with the provinces the proportions in which each province is to receive its share, each of these will be credited in the books of the Customs' Tuotais, or other Chinese officials entrusted with the distribution, with its full share of the whole of the surtaxes, but an amount equal to that now remitted to Peking will, with the consent of the provinces, be retained by these officials and written off from their credit balance and sent direct to, or held to the order of, Pekin.\n\nIt was stated in my Memorandum as telegraphed to your Lordship in my telegram No. 71 that the whole of the proceeds of surtaxes should go to the provinces, and this in a sense will be done; but just as the provincial authorities, after collecting li-kin, send their quota to the Throne, they now, after being credited with their full share of the surtaxes, will also have the amount of surplus funds automatically sent direct to Pekin from the Customs' Bank, or whatever institution receives the surtaxes. (The Imperial Maritime Customs do not handle any funds at all even now.)\n\nTo make the matter clear, I addressed to the Commissioners the despatch, now annexed to the Treaty, defining the procedure which I understand would be adopted, and I have received a reply (also annexed) from their Excellencies assenting to my view.\n\nYour Lordship will perceive that it is definitely stated in the despatches that they are to form part and to be annexed to the Treaty; they will accordingly have full Treaty value.\n\nOn the 4th September I received your Lordship's telegram asking me to secure a stipulation that the surtaxes should not be given as security for the indemnity bonds.\n\nThis was a new point which had not been raised before, and I felt some doubt as to Sheng's being in a position to agree to the specific mention of these bonds. I pointed out to him, however, that the Memorial clearly laid down that the surtaxes were to go to the provinces in lieu of li-kin; that they were not to be pledged to any new loan, and were to be applied to no other purposes beyond the service of the 1898 Loan, to which li-kin is partly pledged; and that he might safely agree to the mention of indemnity bonds. The Chinese Commissioners, however, I found, would have had to refer the matter to Peking (which would have caused a long delay) if the bonds were actually specified in so many words, and I thought it would suffice if it was laid down that \"the surtaxes, in addition to not being pledged for any new foreign loan, are not to be pledged to, or held to be security for, liabilities already contracted by China, except in so far as li-kin revenue has already been pledged to an existing loan.\"\n\nSheng Kung-pao then consented to accept the suggestion without referring to Peking, but only on condition that I was able to assure him that if he agreed to its insertion in the notes, I would be prepared to sign the Treaty at once.\n\nHaving, meanwhile, just before the meeting began, by great good fortune, received your Lordship's telegram No. 78 of the 4th instant authorizing me to accept the Memorial as it stood, with the explanatory notes which I had agreed with Sheng, and not to press the mention of the indemnity bonds if it was likely to risk the Treaty, I was able to give him the desired assurance, whereupon the texts of the notes were finally agreed to in the form in which they are now in the Treaty.\n\nAt 9 P.M. we accordingly met at the offices which Sheng Kung-pao has set up for Treaty Revision meetings with the various Powers, and after the English text had been examined by Sheng Kung-pao's Secretaries and Messrs. Hippisley and Taylor, and the Chinese text by Mr. Jamieson, their Excellencies Lu and Sheng showed me the Imperial Decree on yellow paper authorizing them to sign, while I produced the full powers granted to me by His Majesty the King. Our respective authorities to sign having been found mutually satisfactory, the Chinese Commissioners and I duly affixed our signatures at 11 P.M. to the copies of the text, of which two were in English and two in Chinese. Each party retained one copy of the English text and one copy of the Chinese text. I am sending both original texts to your Lordship under a separate cover.\n\nI have, &c.\n\n(Signed) JAS. L. MACKAY\n\n### Inclosure 1 in No. 1\n\n**Treaty between Great Britain and China, signed at Shanghae, September 5, 1902**\n\nHIS Majesty the King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland and of the British Dominions beyond the Seas, Emperor of India, and His Majesty the Emperor of China, having resolved to enter into negotiations with a view to carrying out the provision contained in Article 11 of the Final Protocol signed at Peking on the 7th September, 1901, under which the Chinese Government agreed to negotiate the amendments deemed useful by the foreign Governments to the Treaties of Commerce and Navigation and other subjects concerning commercial relations, with the object of facilitating them, have for that purpose named as their Plenipotentiaries, that is to say:\n\nHis Majesty the King of Great Britain and Ireland, His Majesty's Special Commissioner, Sir James Lyle Mackay, Knight Commander of the Most Eminent Order of the Indian Empire, a member of the Council of the Secretary of State for India, &c.;\n\nAnd His Majesty the Emperor of China, the Imperial Commissioners Lu Hai-huan, President of the Board of Public Works, &c., and Shêng Hsuan-huai, Junior Guardian of the Heir-Apparent, Senior Vice-President of the Board of Public Works, &c.;\n\nWho, having communicated to each other their respective full powers, and found them to be in good and due form, have agreed upon and concluded the following Articles:\n\n## ARTICLE I\n\nDelay having occurred in the past in the issue of Drawback Certificates owing to the fact that those documents have to be dealt with by the Superintendent of Customs at a distance from the Customs Office, it is now agreed that Drawback Certificates shall hereafter in all cases be issued by the Imperial Maritime Customs within three weeks of the \n\nPage 436", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-314 - Public Offices - 1902.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 386987, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-314 - Public Offices - 1902", "page_number": 442, "title": "CO129-314 - Public Offices - 1902", "content_text": "437 \n\n6 \n\npresentation to the Customs of the papers entitling the applicant to receive such Drawback Certificates.\n\nThese Certificates shall be valid tender to the Customs authorities in payment of any duty upon goods imported or exported (transit dues excepted), or shall, in the case of Drawbacks on foreign goods re-exported abroad within three years from the date of importation, be payable in cash without deduction by the Customs Bank at the place where the import duty was paid.\n\nBut if, in connection with any application for a Drawback Certificate, the Customs Authorities discover an attempt to defraud the revenue, the applicant shall be liable to a fine not exceeding five times the amount of the duty whereof he attempted to defraud the Customs, or to a confiscation of the goods.\n\n## ARTICLE II\n\nChina agrees to take the necessary steps to provide for a uniform national coinage which shall be legal tender in payment of all duties, taxes, and other obligations throughout the Empire by British as well as Chinese subjects.\n\n## ARTICLE III\n\nChina agrees that the duties and li-kin combined levied on goods carried by junks from Hong Kong to the Treaty ports in the Canton Province, and vice versa, shall together not be less than the duties charged by the Imperial Maritime Customs on similar goods carried by steamer.\n\n## ARTICLE IV\n\nWhereas questions have arisen in the past concerning the right of Chinese subjects to invest money in non-Chinese enterprises and companies, and whereas it is a matter of common knowledge that large sums of Chinese capital are so invested, China hereby agrees to recognize the legality of all such investments, past, present, and future.\n\nIt being, moreover, of the utmost importance that all shareholders in a Joint-Stock Company should stand on a footing of perfect equality as far as mutual obligations are concerned, China further agrees that Chinese subjects who have or may become shareholders in any British Joint-Stock Company shall be held to have accepted, by the very act of becoming shareholders, the Charter of Incorporation or Memorandum and Articles of Association of such Company, and regulations framed thereunder as interpreted by British Courts, and that Chinese Courts shall enforce compliance therewith by such Chinese shareholders, if a suit to that effect be entered, provided always that their liability shall not be other or greater than that of British shareholders in the same Company.\n\nSimilarly the British Government agree that British subjects investing in Chinese Companies shall be under the same obligations as the Chinese shareholders in such Companies.\n\nThe foregoing shall not apply to cases which have already been before the Courts and been dismissed.\n\n## ARTICLE V\n\nThe Chinese Government undertake to remove within the next two years the artificial obstructions to navigation in the Canton River.\n\nThe Chinese Government also agree to improve the accommodation for shipping in the harbour of Canton, and to take the necessary steps to maintain that improvement, such work to be carried out by the Imperial Maritime Customs, and the cost thereof to be defrayed by a tax on goods landed and shipped by British and Chinese alike according to a scale to be arranged between the merchants and Customs.\n\nThe Chinese Government are aware of the desirability of improving the navigability by steamer of the waterway between Ichang and Chungking, but are also fully aware that such improvement might involve heavy expense, and would affect the interests of the population of the Provinces of Szechuen, Hunan, and Hupeh. It is, therefore, mutually agreed that until improvements can be carried out steamship owners shall be allowed, subject to approval by the Imperial Maritime Customs, to erect, at their own expense, appliances for hauling through the rapids. Such appliances shall be at the disposal of all vessels, both steamers and junks, subject to regulations to be drawn up by the Imperial Maritime Customs. These appliances shall not obstruct the waterway or interfere with the free passage of junks. Signal stations and channel marks where and when necessary shall be erected by the Imperial Maritime Customs. Should any practical scheme be presented for improving the waterway and assisting navigation without injury to the local population or cost to the Chinese Government, it shall be considered by the latter in a friendly spirit.\n\n## ARTICLE VI\n\nThe Chinese Government agree to make arrangements to give increased facilities at the open ports for bonding and for repacking merchandise in bond, and, on official representation being made by the British Authorities, to grant the privileges of a bonded warehouse to any warehouse which it is established to the satisfaction of the Customs Authorities affords the necessary security to the revenue.\n\nSuch warehouses will be subject to regulations, including a scale of fees according to commodities, distance from Custom-House, and hours of working, to be drawn up by the Customs Authorities, who will meet the convenience of merchants so far as is compatible with the protection of the revenue.\n\n## ARTICLE VII\n\nInasmuch as the British Government afford protection to Chinese trade marks against infringement, imitation, or colourable imitation by British subjects, the Chinese Government undertake to afford protection to British trade marks against infringement, imitation, or colourable imitation by Chinese subjects.\n\nThe Chinese Government further undertake that the Superintendents of Northern and of Southern trade shall establish offices within their respective jurisdictions under control of the Imperial Maritime Customs, where foreign trade marks may be registered on payment of a reasonable fee.\n\n## ARTICLE VIII\n\n### PREAMBLE\n\nThe Chinese Government, recognizing that the system of levying li-kin and other dues on goods at the place of production, in transit, and at destination, impedes the free circulation of commodities and injures the interests of trade, hereby undertake to discard completely those means of raising revenue with the limitation mentioned in Section 8.\n\nThe British Government, in return, consent to allow a surtax in excess of the Tariff rates for the time being in force to be imposed on foreign goods imported by British subjects and a surtax in addition to the export duty on Chinese produce destined for export abroad or coastwise.\n\nIt is clearly understood that, after li-kin barriers and other stations for taxing goods in transit have been removed, no attempt shall be made to revive them in any form or under any pretext whatsoever; that in no case shall the surtax on foreign imports exceed the equivalent of one and a-half times the import duty leviable in terms of the Final Protocol signed by China and the Powers on the 7th day of September, 1901; that payment of the import duty and surtax shall secure for foreign imports, whether in the hands of Chinese or non-Chinese subject, in original packages or otherwise, complete immunity from all other taxation, examination, or delay; that the total amount of taxation leviable on native produce for export abroad shall, under no circumstances, exceed 7 per cent. ad valorem.\n\nKeeping these fundamental principles steadily in view, the High Contracting Parties have agreed upon the following methods of procedure:\n\n### Section 1\n\nThe Chinese Government undertake that all barriers of whatsoever kind, collecting li-kin or such like dues or duties, shall be permanently abolished on all roads, railways, and waterways in the Eighteen Provinces of China and the Three Eastern Provinces. This provision does not apply to the Native Custom-Houses at present in existence on the seaboard or waterways, at Open Ports, on land routes, and on land frontiers of China.\n\n### Sec. 2\n\nThe British Government agree that foreign goods on importation, in addition to the effective 5 per cent. import duty as provided for in the Protocol of 1901, shall pay a special surtax equivalent to one and a-half times the said duty to compensate", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-314 - Public Offices - 1902.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 391060, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-321 - Public Offices & Others - 1903", "page_number": 21, "title": "CO129-321 - Public Offices & Others - 1903", "content_text": "This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.]\n\nCHINA\n\nCHINA TRADE.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL.\n\nNo. 1.\n\n18\n\n[December 6.]\n\nSECTION 3.\n\n(No. 306.) My Lord,\n\nSir E. Satow to the Marquess of Lansdowne.-(Received December 6.)\n\nPeking, October 22, 1902,\n\nI HAVE the honour to inclose copy of the Treaty signed by the Portuguese and Chinese Plenipotentiaries on the 15th instant, with which my colleague, Senhor Azevedo da Castello Branco, has been so good as to furnish me. This copy does not contain the Articles relating to the number of copies, the ratification and publication which were appended to the original.\n\nArticle I simply confirms the Treaty of 1887. By Article II, Portugal accepts the increase of the Import Tariff stipulated for by Article 6 of the Final Protocol of the 7th September, 1901, and annuls the Tariff Article of the Treaty of 1887.\n\nArticles III to VI provide for the establishment at Macao of a branch of the Chinese Imperial Maritime Customs, which will treat vessels sailing from the Colony as if this branch was a Treaty port Custom-house, and for the establishment of appropriate Customs Regulations.\n\nSenhor Azevedo was so obliging as to inform me that he had signed at the same time an exchange of notes by which China undertakes to accord to Portugal a Concession for a railway between Macao and Canton (Samshui), the details of which are to be settled hereafter, and names Sir Robert Hart as the Chinese Plenipotentiary for drawing up the Agreement relative to the Customs Regulations of Macao, provided for in Article VI of the Treaty.\n\nMy Portuguese colleague expects that after the ratification of this Treaty the Portuguese Government will appoint a Plenipotentiary, possibly himself, to negotiate a new Commercial Treaty with China, which, it is understood, the Chinese Government desire to negotiate on the lines of Sir James Mackay's Treaty.\n\nIn saying good-bye to me before he quitted Peking on leave of absence, Senhor Azevedo expressed his warm thanks for the friendly assistance I had afforded to him during the progress of his negotiations with the Chinese Government, which have resulted in the present Treaty.\n\nI have, &c.\n\n(Signed)\n\nERNEST SATOW.\n\nInclosure in No. 1.\n\nTreaty between Portugal and China signed at Peking, October 15, 1902.\n\nARTICLE I.\n\nLE Traité d'Amitié et de Commerce signé entre le Portugal et la Chine le 1 Décembre, 1887, continue à être en vigueur avec les modifications et altérations provenantes du présent Traité.\n\nARTICLE II.\n\nLe Portugal accepte l'élévation des Tarifs d'Importation stipulé par l'Article 6 du Protocole de Pékin du 7 Septembre, 1901, et, à partir de la ratification du présent Traité, et tant que le Traité d'Amitié et de Commerce entre le Portugal et la Chine actuellement en vigueur n'aura pas été revisé, le Portugal jouira du traitement de la nation la plus favorisée, et en aucun cas il ne sera exigé des sujets Portugais de droits plus ou moins élevés que ceux qui seront exigés des sujets de n'importe quel autre nation.\n\nCet Article annulle l'Article XII du Traité de 1887.\n\n[2326 --3]", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-321 - Public Offices & Others - 1903.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 391076, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-321 - Public Offices & Others - 1903", "page_number": 37, "title": "CO129-321 - Public Offices & Others - 1903", "content_text": "CHINA TRADE.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL.\n\nNo. 1.\n\n[February 6.] 34\n\nC. O. SECTION 1,\n\n6432\n\n0\n\n4 MAR CO,\n\n(No. 31.) Sir,\n\nThe Marquess of Lansdowne to Mr. Townley.\n\nForeign Office, February 6, 1903.\n\nI TRANSMIT to you a copy of a letter from Sir J. Mackay, late His Majesty's Special Commissioner in China, containing his concluding observations on the Mission intrusted to him for the revision of the Treaty of Commerce, signed at Tien-tsin on the 26th June, 1858, and for the adoption of a Customs Tariff framed in accordance with Articles 6 and 11 of the Final Protocol of Peking of the 5th September, 1901.\n\nI have had much pleasure in noting Sir J. Mackay's acknowledgments of the assistance, information, and advice which he received from Sir Ernest Satow during the course of the negotiations.\n\nSir J. Mackay also acknowledges his indebtedness to Mr. J. W. Jamieson, Commercial Attaché to His Majesty's Legation, and states that his thanks are due to Sir P. Warren, His Majesty's Consul-General at Shanghae, to Mr. Fraser, His Majesty's Consul-General at Hankow, to Mr. J. Scott, His Majesty's Consul-General at Canton, to Mr. Sundius, His Majesty's Consul at Nanking, and to Mr. Wilkinson, Acting British Consul at Nanking.\n\nI request that you will inform these gentlemen that my attention has been called by Sir J. Mackay to their services, and that you will convey to them the expression of my approval.\n\nSir J. Mackay has further brought to my notice the valuable assistance which he received from Mr. Bland, \"Times\" correspondent at Shanghae, and from Mr. G. Jamieson and Mr. A. F. Currie of the Peking Syndicate.\n\nYou should convey to these gentlemen my warm appreciation of their friendly co-operation and my thanks for their services.\n\nI am, &c.\n\n(Signed)\n\nLANSDOWNE.\n\nNo. 2.\n\nSir,\n\nThe Marquess of Lansdowne to Sir J. Mackay.\n\nForeign Office, February 6, 1903.\n\nI HAVE received your communication of the 16th ultimo, containing a final Report on the negotiations intrusted to you as His Majesty's Special Commissioner, for the revision of the Treaty of Commerce, signed at Tien-tsin on the 26th June, 1858, and for the adoption of a Customs Tariff, framed in accordance with Articles 6 and 11 of the Final Protocol of Peking of the 5th September, 1901.\n\nI have to convey to you the thanks of His Majesty's Government for your conduct of the difficult and protracted negotiations which have resulted in the conclusion of a Treaty favourable to British interests, as well as advantageous to China.\n\nHis Majesty's Government fully realize the numerous obstacles against which you had to contend in reconciling conflicting interests before any Agreement could be arrived at, and they highly appreciate the ability, tact, and perseverance shown by you throughout the discussions.\n\nI have had pleasure in communicating your Report to Mr. H. Cockburn, C.B., and Mr. C. J. Dudgeon, with an expression of my appreciation of the assistance which they rendered to you.\n\nCopies of my letters to Mr. Cockburn and Mr. Dudgeon are inclosed for your information.\n\nI request that you will convey to Mr. C. Somers Cocks, and to Mr. W. H. Clark, my entire approval of the manner in which they have performed their duties as Secretaries to the Commission.\n\n[1810-1]", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-321 - Public Offices & Others - 1903.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 391077, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-321 - Public Offices & Others - 1903", "page_number": 38, "title": "CO129-321 - Public Offices & Others - 1903", "content_text": "2\n\n3\n\n35\n\nI will request His Majesty's Chargé d'Affaires at Peking to express to Mr. J. W. Jamieson, Commercial Attaché to His Majesty's Legation in China, to Mr. J. O. P. Bland, and to the other gentlemen mentioned in your Report, my warm appreciation of the assistance rendered by them during the negotiations.\n\nSir,\n\nNo. 3.\n\nI am, &c.\n\n(Signed)\n\nLANSDOWNE.\n\nThe Marquess of Lansdowne to Mr. H. Cockburn.\n\nForeign Office, February 6, 1903.\n\nI TRANSMIT to you a copy of a letter from Sir J. Mackay, late His Majesty's Special Commissioner in China, containing his concluding observations on the Mission intrusted to him for the revision of the Treaty of Commerce, signed at Tien-tsin on the 26th June, 1858, and for the adoption of a Customs Tariff framed in accordance with Articles 6 and 11 of the Final Protocol of Peking of the 5th September, 1901.\n\nI have to express to you my full approval of the part which you took in the negotiations, both at Shanghae and subsequently at Peking, and my appreciation of the assistance which your great experience of Chinese official usage enabled you to render to His Majesty's Special Commissioner.\n\nSir,\n\nNo. 4.\n\nI am, &c.\n\n(Signed)\n\nLANSDOWNE.\n\nThe Marquess of Lansdowne to Mr. C. J. Dudgeon.\n\nForeign Office, February 6, 1903.\n\nI TRANSMIT to you a copy of a letter from Sir J. Mackay, late His Majesty's Special Commissioner in China, containing his concluding observations on the Mission intrusted to him for the revision of the Treaty of Commerce, signed at Tien-tsin on the 26th June, 1858, and for the adoption of a Customs ad valorem Tariff framed in accordance with Articles 6 and 11 of the Final Protocol of Peking of the 5th September, 1901.\n\nI have pleasure in conveying to you the warm thanks of His Majesty's Government for the valuable assistance rendered by you to Sir J. Mackay. They appreciate highly the disinterested manner in which you devoted your time and attention to the work of the Commission, and they fully realize the important services which your remarkable knowledge of commercial questions and usages in China enabled you to render in connection with the drawing up of the New Specific Import Tariff.\n\nI am, &c.\n\n(Signed)\n\nLANSDOWNE.\n\nmanner prescribed by Article 6 of the Final Protocol, signed at Peking on the 7th September, 1901. In consequence, however, of the recent fall in the value of silver, the specific duties do, in fact, represent in most cases less than 5 per cent. ad valorem.\n\nForeign goods proceeding into the interior of China are liable at present to pay, in addition, transit charges, such as li-kin, &c., unless these charges are commuted by an additional payment of half the amount of the original duty, in return for which transit passes are obtained purporting to exempt the goods from further exactions en route. It must, however, be borne in mind that the Chinese authorities claim, and often exercise, under the terms of Article XXVIII of the Treaty of Tien-tsin, the right to levy further taxation as soon as the exempted goods have reached their place of destination; moreover, as matters stand at present, foreign goods cease to obtain effectual protection as soon as they have passed into the hands of Chinese subjects, who are only able to avoid undue delay at the barriers by the payment of \"squeezes\" to the officials. They do not dare to complain if the passes attached to goods owned by them are not respected by the Chinese authorities, and they, therefore, generally prefer not to avail themselves of transit passes.\n\nWhenever Article VIII of the new Treaty, which deals with internal charges on trade and the Customs Tariff, comes into force, foreign goods will pay, in addition to the present import duty, an additional surtax amounting to one and a-half times that duty. The combined import duty and surtax will free foreign goods from every description of internal taxation, including the present tax at the place of destination, and as all the li-kin, &c., barriers, will be abolished, the delay which now occurs will be avoided, and it will not be possible for li-kin to be exacted on foreign goods, even when in the hands of Chinese subjects.\n\nIn regard to the third point which you raise in your letter, I am to state that His Majesty's Government certainly expect that the provisions for the abolition of li-kin, &c., contained in Article VIII of the Treaty will be carried out by the Chinese authorities as soon as the Article itself comes into force. If any li-kin stations should be retained after the date fixed for abolition, or re-established, reports of such an occurrence would certainly not fail to reach His Majesty's Representative at Peking, or one of His Majesty's Consuls in China, who would at once make representations to the Chinese authorities for their removal, and would subsequently satisfy himself (if necessary by personal inspection on the spot) that his representations had been effectual.\n\nI am also to point out that it would evidently be useless for His Majesty's Government to negotiate any Treaty with China, were it to be assumed as a matter of course that the Chinese Government will not observe its stipulations, and that His Majesty's Government are unable to hold them to their obligations.\n\nI am, &c.\n\n(Signed)\n\nF. A. CAMPBELL.\n\nNo. 5.\n\nSir,\n\nForeign Office to Walsall Chamber of Commerce.\n\nForeign Office, February 6, 1903.\n\nI LAID before the Marquess of Lansdowne your letter to the Board of Trade of the 20th ultimo, making certain inquiries as to the Commercial Treaty recently concluded between Great Britain and China.\n\nIn regard to your first question, I am directed by his Lordship to state that the Treaty has not yet been ratified, but that by Article XVI provision is made for its ratification within a year from the 5th September, 1902, the date on which the Treaty was signed.\n\nIn reply to your inquiry as to the amount of duties provided for under the new Treaty as compared with those now levied, I am to inform you that the present Tariff of import duties was framed on a basis of 5 per cent. ad valorem, calculated in the", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-321 - Public Offices & Others - 1903.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 391116, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-321 - Public Offices & Others - 1903", "page_number": 77, "title": "CO129-321 - Public Offices & Others - 1903", "content_text": "of one and a-half times the import duty leviable in terms of the Final Protocol of the 7th September, 1901.\n\nLast year the French successfully resisted the application of the Protocol effective 5 per cent. to the Mengtse route, on the grounds that their own special Treaties were concerned, and that the Imperial \"Maritime\" Customs, strictly speaking, could not be held to include the land frontier customs. Duty is now levied under the old pre-Protocol Tariff, with the special local privilege of deducting three-tenths the duty for imports, and four-tenths for exports. I claimed and obtained the same terms for Tengyueh when it was opened last May.\n\nIf, then, the Final Protocol is held not to apply to Yunnan, what duties are to be levied there under the new Treaty?\n\nOrders have now been received at Mengtse to enforce specific duties of the new Tariff, but the French authorities, as I am informed, will resist any increase of duties or, at least, try to maintain the three-tenths and four-tenths privilege, without which they might either have to give up their transit dues, or see a share of the trade go to the West River, if that waterway were to be cleared of pirates.\n\nFurther, on the route from Burmah to Yünnan-fü unlawful imposts have been almost wholly suppressed, though they are rampant in other parts of Yunnan. The actual duties paid by our Tengyueh trade (including transit passes fee) do not amount to 5 per cent. in all.\n\nWhile the trade is still in its infancy, it seems a doubtful policy to apply to it the full 12 per cent. Tariff contemplated by the new Treaty. I would suggest that, if possible, with the co-operation of the French, it should be agreed to apply the surtax in Yunnan to the new Tariff duties reduced by four-tenths and three-tenths for exports and imports respectively.\n\n2. \"Fu Shui,\" or Prefect's tax, does not appear to be specifically mentioned, but it is quite as troublesome as li-kin in Yünnan, and I presume it will be abolished under Article VIII, Preamble.\n\n3. \"Sheng Shui,\" or a tax (usually 8 per cent. on the price) on beasts, obtains in Yünnan, and is a source of much peculation and irritation. The proceeds are supposed to be pocketed by the Magistrates, and there are offices in most cities. Are these included in the general prohibition against inland barriers?\n\n4. Is the consumption tax to be leviable on cotton cloth woven in Yünnan from Bombay yarns?\n\nIf such cloth is not to be considered (Article VIII, section 8) an article of Chinese origin, the tax will not be leviable. This is a point of great importance, on which I would ask for an authoritative decision.\n\n5. Article VIII, section 3.-Junks, boats, and carts shall not be taxed. It is to be regretted that mules and ponies were not also mentioned. In the French Convention of Tien-tsin, 1886, Article VII, section 8, beasts are freed from \"peage\" but when I reached Tengyueh last spring, I found that squeezes on transport mules were one of the principal evils from which the trade was suffering. To remedy this and to obtain a fund, otherwise not to be procured, which the local officials could use to pacify the frontier, it was agreed and provisionally approved by you that a small toll should be levied on mules using the Tengyueh-Burmah trade route. This toll is: 75 tael on mules coming in from Burmah, and 25 tael on mules going out to Burmah, and it is collected by the Imperial Maritime Customs.\n\nIn return for this toll, a written guarantee was given by the local authorities that no other secret imposts should be levied on mules, and a Proclamation by the Provincial Judge, Tsuan, was issued at my instance prohibiting all such exactions. In view of the very low Tariff now obtaining at Mengtse and Tengyueh, this mule toll seems fair and reasonable. But the case will be altered if the duties are to be largely increased.\n\nOn the other hand, if the toll were to be suppressed altogether, the old irregular imposts on mules and the abuses connected therewith might revive, and it is doubtful, as the mules are owned by Chinese in China, whether we should have any right to protest.\n\nWhen, therefore, the surtax is applied to Tengyueh, I would suggest not that the toll be abolished altogether, but that it be, if possible, reduced to one-third of its present amount.\n\n6. I have found that exactions by the gentry on foreign trade are common in every part of Yunnan. These imposts go under various names: \"pao shang\" (trade protection), \"kung fang\" (public guild), \"tuan fei\" (train bands), &c., but they are all, in fact, squeezes for the benefit of the \"Tu-shu-jen,\" the literati.\n\nI trust that these exactions will be considered as within the scope of the Treaty, and this, I submit, should be specially stated in the Proclamations which are to be issued previously to the abolition of the barriers.\n\nI have, &c. (Signed)\n\nInclosure 2 in No. 1.\n\nMemorandum.\n\nG. LITTON,\n\n73\n\nMR. LITTON reported in May 1901 that M. François, French Consul-General in Yunnan, had successfully resisted an attempt of the Mengtse Customs to raise the import duties to an effective 5 per cent. \"on the ground that Mengtse was not 'Douanes Maritimes,' and that the procedure should be regulated by the local Treaty between France and China.”\n\nIn a later despatch he reported that, under instructions from Sir Robert Hart, the Customs authorities had reverted to the old rate.\n\nI reply, Sir E. Satow instructed Mr. Litton that the terms of the Protocol refer to sea-borne commerce only, and that the French were entitled by their Treaties to an abatement on the General Tariff of three-tenths on imports and four-tenths on exports.\n\nHe further explained the grounds on which His Majesty's Government had reserved their rights in case it should at any time appear that the special rates for overland frontier trade operated in such a manner as to give general, as distinguished from local, produce an advantage over sea-borne goods.", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-321 - Public Offices & Others - 1903.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 391119, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-321 - Public Offices & Others - 1903", "page_number": 80, "title": "CO129-321 - Public Offices & Others - 1903", "content_text": "[This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.]\n\nCHINA TRADE.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL.\n\nNo. 1.\n\n76\n\n[April 13.]\n\nSECTION 1.\n\nMr. Townley to the Marquess of Lansdowne.-(Received April 13.) (No. 61.) My Lord,\n\nPeking, February 16, 1903. WITH reference to Sir E. Satow's despatch No. 254 of the 5th September, 1902, upon the subject of the Whangpoo Conservancy Board, the constitution of which has not yet been completed by the appointment of a Chinese Delegate, I have the honour to transmit to your Lordship herewith copy of a letter which has been addressed to Mr. Conger, as Senior Minister, by the General Chamber of Commerce of Shanghae.\n\nIn this letter the Chairman, Mr. Inglis, points out that the outer bar at Woosung has so much deteriorated of late that foreign shipping is seriously affected, and additional expense is incurred by ship-owners; and that there is even a danger that foreign steamers bound for Shanghae will not be able to enter the river at all.\n\nAt a meeting of the Diplomatic Body subsequently held at the United States' Legation to discuss this and other questions, it was decided that a joint note, copy of which I have the honour to inclose, should be addressed to Prince Ching for the purpose of representing the state of the bar at Woosung to His Highness' attention, and of requesting him to lose no time in moving the Imperial Government to instruct the Viceroy of Nanking to nominate without delay a Delegate to represent China on the Commission.\n\nI have also the honour to transmit to your Lordship herewith copy of a letter addressed to the United States' Minister by the Senior Consul at Shanghae, notifying him that the Consul-General for Sweden and Norway has claimed that his country is entitled to a seat on the Whangpoo Conservancy Board, under paragraph (h) of section 4 of the Final Protocol.\n\nMr. Goodnow at the same time points out that the condition of the river grows daily worse, and that the Board is still unorganized, although sixteen months have elapsed since the signing of the Protocol.\n\nI have, &c. (Signed)\n\nWALTER TOWNLEY.\n\nSir,\n\nInclosure 1 in No. 1.\n\nShanghae General Chamber of Commerce to Mr. Conger.\n\nShanghae, January 9, 1903. ON the 22nd July I had the honour to address your Excellency concerning the delay caused to conservancy work on the Whangpoo, because the Viceroy at Nanking had failed to appoint a Representative on the Conservancy Board, and the assistance of the Diplomatic Corps was sought by this Chamber to have this remedied.\n\nI have no desire to unnecessarily trouble your Excellency about this matter, but it is my duty to point out to you that the outer bar has of late so much deteriorated that foreign shipping is seriously affected owing to the difficulties and delays in discharging cargo outside Woosung, while the additional expense thereby entailed to ship-owners is a great burden.\n\nThere is even a danger that steamers bound for this port will be unable to enter the river at all, owing to the present state of the waterway, and, therefore, in the interest of foreign trade, the Committee of this Chamber earnestly beg the assistance of your Excellency and your colleagues in urging the Chinese authorities to carry out the terms of Annex 17 of the Protocol without delay.\n\nI have, &c. (Signed) R. INGLIS, Chairman.\n\n(1934-1)", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-321 - Public Offices & Others - 1903.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 391120, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-321 - Public Offices & Others - 1903", "page_number": 81, "title": "CO129-321 - Public Offices & Others - 1903", "content_text": "This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government)\n\n2\n\nInclosure 2 in No. 1\n\nJoint Note addressed by the Diplomatic Body to Prince Ching.\n\nMonseigneur,\n\nPékin, le 9 Février, 1903. LA Chambre de Commerce de Shanghai a récemment attiré l'attention du Corps Diplomatique sur l'état dans lequel se trouve actuellement la barre extérieure du Wang Pu.\n\nL'ensablement oblige les navires de forme étrangère à effectuer leurs opérations de chargement et de déchargement en dehors de Woosung: il en résulte des difficultés et des délais considérables, ainsi que des dépenses additionnelles très lourdes pour les armateurs et affréteurs. La situation présente du chenal est même si mauvaise qu'on peut craindre qu'il devienne absolument impossible aux navires à destination de Shanghaï d'entrer en rivière.\n\nDans ces conditions, nous croyons devoir attirer à nouveau la sérieuse attention de votre Altesse sur les conséquences que pourraient entraîner de plus longs retards mis à la constitution de la Commission du Wang Pu, telle qu'elle est prévue par l'Annexe 17 du Protocole Final du 7 Septembre, 1901.\n\nNous avons l'honneur, en conséquence, de la prier très instamment d'intervenir auprès du Gouvernement Impérial pour que le Vice-Roi de Nankin reçoive pour instructions de désigner sans désemparer le fonctionnaire qui devra représenter la Chine dans la Commission du Wang Pu.\n\nVu et approuvé.\n\nVeuillez, &c.\n\n(Signé)\n\nWALTER TOWNLEY. JOOSTENS.\n\nE. H. CONGER.\n\nW. J. OUDENDYK.\n\nP. ROUDANOVSKY.\n\nCARCER.\n\nK. MATSUI.\n\nVON DER GOLTZ.\n\nG. DUBAIL.\n\nv. ROSTHORN.\n\nG. GALLINA.\n\nInclosure 3 in No. 1.\n\nSOUTH-WEST CHINA.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL.\n\nNo. 1.\n\n77\n\n[March 30.]\n\nSECTION 1.\n\nConsul Little to the Marquess of Lansdowne.-(Received March 30.) (No. 4.) My Lord,\n\nPakhoi, February 23, 1903, IN accordance with the request of His Majesty's Consul-General at Canton, I have the honour to forward herewith copy of two Reports which I recently sent to His Majesty's Minister at Peking.\n\nI have, &c.\n\nPolitical\n\n(Signed) H. A. LITTLE.\n\nInclosure 1 in No. 1.\n\nIntelligence Report for December Quarter, 1902.\n\nState of the country Smuggling of arms.. Missionaries\n\nActivity of French Chinese Postal Service Commercial-\n\nOpium tax..\n\nDecrease of trade\n\nArmy and Navy\n\nMovements of officials..\n\nINDEX.\n\nSir,\n\nMr. Goodnow to Mr. Conger.\n\nShanghae, January 26, 1903.\n\nI AM instructed by my colleagues to notify you that the Acting Consul-General for Sweden and Norway has notified us that his nation is entitled to a seat on the Whangpoo Conservancy Board under paragraph (h) of section 4 of the Peace Protocol.\n\nIn this matter I am further instructed to say that the Board is still unorganized, although sixteen months have elapsed since the signing of the Protocol. This is due to the fact that the Representative of the Chinese Government has not been appointed. As the Whangpoo River is constantly silting up, and the work of harbour improvement becomes greater and more expensive the longer it is delayed, we venture to hope that the Diplomatic Body will do all that seems to it fit towards inducing the Chinese Government to make its appointment without further delay.\n\nI have, &c.\n\n(Signed)\n\nJ. GOODNOW.\n\nThere has of late been some increase of lawlessness in the surrounding country, but Political.\n\nit does not appear to be of a serious character, and is probably nothing more than what State of the usually happens on the approach of the China new year, which is, so to speak, the country.\n\nseason \" for robbers and thieves. Beyond a few cases of gang robbery here and at Lienchow, and an unsuccessful attempt by a band of pirates (who were subsequently captured) to seize a junk in the harbour, which they intended to use for piratical purposes, nothing has occurred to disturb the peace of the district. The neighbouring district of Lingshan, however, is reported to be in an unquiet state, and there has also been a recrudescence of trouble around Nanning. Information has just reached me that a Commandant (ying-kuan) and another officer have been killed in an engagement in that neighbourhood, and that the bandits there are displaying great activity. A short time ago a body of troops from Chinchou numbering about 200 men was worsted in a fight with brigands on the Kuanghsi border, and now General Pan has been ordered to proceed into that province with the whole of his command, consisting of four ying (nominally 2,000 men, but in reality only half that number). In his absence Li Chia Cho, who was recently on special duty in connection with the suppression of piracy in the Canton district, will have charge of military affairs in the Chinchou district, and will also be Acting Magistrate. The force under his command will be of about the same strength as that which General P'an is taking into Kuanghsi, and the greater part of it has already passed through this port on the way to Chinchou, 700 men having arrived with him a few days ago, and 500 having been brought shortly before in a steamer specially chartered for the purpose. They are armed with repeating rifles, mostly Mausers, and have also several quick-firing guns. This force will be further strengthened by a few hundred men raised locally,", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-321 - Public Offices & Others - 1903.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 391138, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-321 - Public Offices & Others - 1903", "page_number": 99, "title": "CO129-321 - Public Offices & Others - 1903", "content_text": "95\n\n2\n\nOutward transit passes have up to the present been well above the average. The robbers evidently find foreign goods more profitable plunder.\n\nAbout a fortnight ago the late Sub-Prefect of Hengchow, with his son, was murdered on the river between that place and Kueihsien.\n\nThe Governor remains at Hsunchow, and it is not likely that he will return to Wuchow for the present.\n\nThe rumours appearing in the Shanghae newspapers regarding the capture of Liuchow and Kueilin by the rebels are without foundation.\n\nExecution of Roman Catholic Converts at Kueihsien.\n\nThe Kueihsien Magistrate, Chen Ching-hua, who is earning for himself a reputation for indiscriminate severity, recently decapitated without trial a batch of country people, among whom were six or more French converts. The local missionary vigorously took up the case, and the Magistrate was glad to settle the matter by a payment of 2,500 dollars. It is now reported that the French Consul at Lungchow has reopened the case, and telegraphed to the Governor demanding the Magistrate's dismissal.\n\nI may here mention that Captain Crespin, of the French gun-boat \"Argus,\" who has just left in a steam-launch for Kueihsien in order to survey the river, was repeatedly urged by the local officials not to proceed; the pretext was danger of attack by robbers en route, but as, by all accounts, the river is perfectly safe up to that point (there is daily communication by steam-launch between this and Kueihsien), they doubtless connect the Captain's visit with the incident above referred to.\n\nMethods of Barbarism.\n\nAs always happens in China when the military are called in to assist in \"pacifying\" the people, the innocent suffer for the crimes of the guilty.\n\nA British missionary stationed at Hsunchow, writes: \"Numbers of the poorer classes are being executed without proper trial or evidence against them. I do not believe that 50 per cent. of those executed are the real offenders. On three occasions since the New Year, batches of half-naked, half-starved wretches have been dragged, bound with ropes round neck and feet, past our house on the way to the execution ground. The soldiers have harried and plundered the neighbouring villages till the people have been driven into the hills (that is, became \"rebels\"). In the market they force the people to sell them provisions at half price on pain of being denounced as robbers.\"\n\nThis description may fairly be applied to every town in the province where soldiers are quartered.\n\nSafety of Nanning.\n\nA missionary in Nanning writes, under date the 11th March: \"There is no likelihood of Nanning being attacked, but along the routes of travel, both by land and water, robbery and murder is of frequent occurrence.\"\n\nL\n\n3\n\nThis form of bond has been sanctioned by His Majesty's Government for presentation to the Chinese Delegates for their signature, in accordance with the provisions of paragraph (c) of Article VI of the Final Protocol signed at Peking in 1901.\n\nThe text of Article VI (which is already in your possession) is to be attached to the bond when it is presented for signature.\n\nThe British Delegate on the Commission of Bankers at Shanghae has already issued a bond for the Portuguese share of the indemnity couched in similar terms, under instructions from Mr. Townley, who had the concurrence of the Portuguese Chargé d'Affaires at Peking in adopting this course.\n\nI request that you will communicate the text of the British bond to the Portuguese Government, and will inquire whether Mr. Townley's action is in accordance with their wishes.\n\nI am, &c.\n\n(Signed)\n\nLANSDOWNE.\n\n(Signed)\n\nHARRY H. FOX.\n\n(No. 31.) Sir,\n\nNo. 2.\n\nThe Marquess of Lansdowne to Sir M. Gosselin.\n\nForeign Office, April 30, 1903.\n\nWITH reference to the telegram from His Majesty's Chargé d'Affaires at Peking, No. 101 of the 24th instant, which was repeated to you, and to my telegram No. 34 of the 26th instant, I transmit to you a copy of a form of bond, expressing in sterling the British share of the Chinese indemnity.\n\n* M. Beirs, December 5, 1902,", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-321 - Public Offices & Others - 1903.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 391207, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-321 - Public Offices & Others - 1903", "page_number": 168, "title": "CO129-321 - Public Offices & Others - 1903", "content_text": "Inclosure in No. 1.\n\nMr. Townley to Prince Ch'ing.\n\nYour Highness,\n\nPeking, March 6, 1903.\n\nIN the course of a conversation which I had the honour to have with your Highness on the 3rd instant you stated that the Chinese Minister in London had reported that he had submitted to the Marquess of Lansdowne the proposal of the Chinese Government that, in order to meet the increased demands upon China on account of the indemnity in consequence of the fall in the price of silver, the customs duties should be payable in gold. Your Highness added that the Minister had received no definite answer from Lord Lansdowne.\n\nYour Highness will remember that I at once informed you that the Chinese Representative must have entirely misunderstood Lord Lansdowne, since his Lordship had informed me by telegraph that the Chinese Minister had been told that His Majesty's Government could not entertain the proposal, whilst my own instructions had, from the first, been most explicit in that same sense.\n\nIn order that there should be no possibility of confusion, I reported our conversation of the 3rd instant to Lord Lansdowne by telegraph, and have now received a reply expressing surprise that the Chinese Minister in London should have so completely misunderstood the terms of a note addressed to him on the 9th ultimo, and instructing me to repeat to your Highness what I had the honour to say during our conversation, namely, that His Majesty's Government cannot entertain the proposal that customs duties should be payable in gold.\n\nI avail, &c.\n\n(Signed)\n\nWALTER TOWNLEY.\n\nNo. 2.\n\nMr. Townley to the Marquess of Lansdowne.-(Received April 27.) (No. 96.)\n\nMy Lord,\n\nPeking, March 12, 1903.\n\nWITH reference to my despatch No. 79 of the 4th instant reporting a conversation I had with Prince Ch'ing on the subject of the Chinese indemnity, I have the honour to transmit to your Lordship herewith translation of a note which His Highness has addressed to the doyen of the Diplomatic Body, reminding him that no answer has been received to the note from the Foreign Board under date of the ultimo, requesting that the foreign Representatives in Peking would submit, for the consideration of their respective Governments, a proposal of the Chinese Government that import duties should be levied on a gold basis with the value of the tael fixed at 3s., the rate chosen by the framers of the Final Protocol at which the indemnity should be paid.\n\nAs your Lordship will perceive, Prince Ch'ing points out that the scheme proposed by the Chinese Government is really a proper method of procedure. According to the general purport of the Protocol, since Article 6 of that Act, in its section having reference to the resources fixed upon as security for the bonds, states that the duty on imports shall be raised to an effective 5 per cent. ad valorem duty, whereas actually owing to the depreciated value of silver, as compared with the prevailing rate at the date of the Protocol, it is, as a matter of fact, not equal to 4 per cent.\n\nThe note deliberately avoids all reference to the signature of the fractional bonds which has been demanded in a joint note before the foreign Representatives will consent to submit the Chinese proposals to their respective Governments.\n\nI have, &c.\n\n(Signed)\n\nWALTER TOWNLEY.\n\n3\n\nInclosure in No. 2.\n\nPrince Ch'ing to Doyen of Diplomatic Body.\n\nMarch 10, 1903.\n\n(Translation.)\n\nON the 8th of the 1st moon, 29th year of Kuang Hsü, our Board sent a despatch, replying to your Excellency, dean of the Diplomatic Corps, in which we proposed that, owing to the rising price of gold which was making the amounts of silver appropriated by China in accordance with the Table of Amortization of the Protocol for the payment of the indemnity insufficient for that purpose, the revised tariff should be considered a gold tariff, and requested you to transmit the said despatch to the Ministers of the various Powers for their information, that their respective Governments might take the matter into consideration, so as, on the one hand, to determine a reliable method of procedure, and on the other hand, enable us, Prince and Ministers, to issue instructions to the Shanghae Taotai to make the necessary preparations in the matter of the fractional bonds, all of which is a matter of record.\n\nNot having received any reply, it becomes necessary for me to again set forth clearly that the payment of the customs duties in accordance with the price of gold is really a proper method of procedure according to the general purport of the Protocol, and by no means an extraordinary demand.\n\nAs we\n\nExamination shows that Article 6 of the Protocol, in the first item of the section concerning the resources fixed upon as a security for the bonds (Article 6 (e) 1), says that the duty on imports shall be raised to an effective 5 per cent. ad valorem. must consider the capital invested in foreign goods as originally a gold investment, when the price of gold becomes dear, the equivalent in silver of the prices of these goods must be increased, and the duty upon them collected in silver ought to increase in proportion; only so it can be considered an effective 5 per cent.\n\nThe price of gold at present, as compared with that of the date at which the Protocol was signed, is, generally speaking, one-third dearer, from which it may be seen that the silver of the customs duties is in a way reduced by one-third, and has only the empty name of being 5 per cent. ad valorem; as a matter of fact, is not equal to 4 per cent. Therefore, the silver payments of the tariff ought to be reckoned according to the price of gold at the date of the signing of the Protocol, in which case only will they correspond with the idea of an effective 5 per cent.\n\nMoreover, the Protocol regards this matter as that which furnishes security for the bonds, and since the various Powers desire that the indemnity mentioned in the bonds shall be carefully reckoned in gold, the customs duties, increased so as to make them a security for the bonds, ought also to be calculated in gold. Such a course would be just; any other must result in making the customs duties by no means an effective 5 per cent., and the resources allowed for security become deficient. How then can China bear the blame?\n\nAs in duty bound, I send this despatch to your Excellency the dean, requesting you to transmit it to the Ministers of the various Powers that they may take into consideration what I have said above as to the collection of the duties in gold being in real accord with the purport of the Protocol to have an effective 5 per cent., so as to make a perfect security for the bonds, and communicate the same to their respective Governments that they may consider it and send reply.", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-321 - Public Offices & Others - 1903.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 391225, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-321 - Public Offices & Others - 1903", "page_number": 186, "title": "CO129-321 - Public Offices & Others - 1903", "content_text": "This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.\n\nCHINA TRADE.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL.\n\nNo. 1.\n\n182\n\n[June 8.]\n\nSECTION 2.\n\n(No. 14.) My Lord,\n\nConsul-General Scott to the Marquess of Lansdowne.--(Received June 8.)\n\nCanton, May 8, 1903. WITH reference to my despatch No. 71 of the 13th August last, I have the honour to inclose herewith copy of my despatch No. 14 of the 5th instant to His Majesty's Chargé d'Affaires at Peking, with respect to the transference of the native customs to the Imperial Maritime Customs Department, in terms of the Final Peace Protocol of the 7th September, 1901, from which it will be seen that, with the exception of Canton itself, the native customs stations throughout the Delta still remain under the control of the Hoppo.\n\nI have, &c. (Signed)\n\nJAMES SCOTT.\n\nInclosure in No. 1.\n\nConsul-General Scott to Mr. Townley.\n\n(No. 14.)\n\nCanton, May 5, 1903. Sir,\n\nI BEG to acknowledge the receipt of your telegram No. 2 of the 2nd instant, having reference to the native customs and my despatch No. 68 of the 12th August last.\n\nFully a year has now elapsed since the transfer by the Hoppo of the native customs at Canton to the Imperial Maritime Customs Department in terms of the Final Peace Protocol of the 7th September, 1901, and the result of the past year's operations, in respect to the amount of duty collected, may well be considered disappointing. As you are no doubt aware, it was only after considerable pressure from Peking that the Hoppo consented to surrender his control of the Chang Kuan in Canton itself; the other stations in the Delta, some twelve in number, remaining under his control.\n\nIn my despatch No. 68 of last year, I ventured to point out that the Hoppo would not fail to so organize arrangements at the different out-stations as to minimize the effect of the transfer of the Chang Kuan to the Imperial Maritime Customs. I beg to report that my forecast in this respect has been fulfilled, more especially in regard to the two native customs stations at Ch'ên Ts'un and Fatshan. I learn from reliable and confidential sources that formerly, in ordinary years, some 600,000 taels were annually collected by the native customs at Canton, while at Fatshan and Ch'ên Ts'un combined some 2,000 taels per month covered the total revenue collected. On the other hand, under the Imperial Maritime Customs' control, the revenue received at the Ch'ang Kuan in Canton during the first year's management amounted to 320,000 taels, while at Chên Ts'un and Fatshan trustworthy evidence places the amount now being collected at fully 10,000 taels per month. Further, I learn that the Hoppo is so organizing his system, by granting reduced duty and other facilities to the native merchants, as to induce them to make Ch'ên Ts'un their head-quarters. It is well known that many articles which were formerly dispatched from Canton now find their way to Ch'ên Ts'un from the producing districts direct, and are thence exported to Hong Kong, paying duty to the Hoppo.\n\nAs reported in my despatch No. 68 above referred to, all native customs stations within a radius of 50 li (17 miles) should have been handed over to the control of the Imperial Maritime Customs Department. Ch'ên Ts'un and Fatshan are only 10 miles from Canton, but the Hoppo, on the ground that a detour by water is necessary to reach them, has been successful in resisting all attempts to withdraw them from his control.\n\nI have, &c. (Signed)\n\nJAMES SCOTT.\n\nPage 183\n\n[illegible characters]\n\n \n督", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-321 - Public Offices & Others - 1903.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 391235, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-321 - Public Offices & Others - 1903", "page_number": 196, "title": "CO129-321 - Public Offices & Others - 1903", "content_text": "the object of the sign is to satisfy customers that they are obtaining the actual goods of the foreign firm concerned.\n\nI do not think any objection could properly be taken to the exhibition of signs indicating that the shopkeeper was the agent of a foreign firm,\n\nI approve the answer returned by you to the Taotai's despatch, as reported in your despatch No. 7.\n\nI am forwarding a copy of your despatches to His Majesty's Secretary of State and\n\nyou must take my present instructions as subject to his Lordship's approval.\n\nI am, &c.\n\n0\n\n(Signed) WALTER TOWNLEY,\n\nOffice or Individual.\n\nForeign\n\nGeneral\n\nNo. 21480\n\n1903 Importation of Wine\n\nLast previous Paper.\n\n(58)—1081-20000-21-9\n\nReasons for\n\n(Subject)\n\nRELE\n\n192\n\nC.O.\n\n21480\n\nDOMESTIC.\n\nF 12 JUN 03\n\nArms into China\n\na\n\nA copy note to Hussey not consenting to proposal to request Japan (or to extend terms of prohibition of\n\nthe import of arms\n\nMr. Lucas\n\n(Minutes.)\n\nAnnex, a copy of the Final Protocol of 1st Sept. 1901 (d. 13.9.01) from Article 5 of which it appears that the prohibition of the import of arms expires on\n\n25 August next.\n\nThe Proclamation under the Foreign Enlistment Act is, I think, still in force, but it would no doubt be repeated when the Chinese edict expired, if there were renewing\n\nNext subsequent Paper\n\nas\n\n70\n\n27370\n\nwas not the latter.\n\nintention of\n\nAnnex 193151. M to the smuggling faced with client\n\nsmuggling into\n\nprobably\n\n\"Hong Kong is more closely concerned with the question than all the others put together; but", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-321 - Public Offices & Others - 1903.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 391242, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-321 - Public Offices & Others - 1903", "page_number": 203, "title": "CO129-321 - Public Offices & Others - 1903", "content_text": "199\n\nrestrictions which were imposed in accordance with the request made in your letter of the 13th August, 1900.\n\n3. Mr Chamberlain proposes, subject to Lord Lansdowne's concurrence, to issue a notification to this effect to the Governments of the Colonies, Protectorates, &c., with which this Department is concerned. The removal of the prohibition will presumably take effect on the expiry of the period covered by the Imperial Edict annexed to the Final Protocol of 7th September, 1900 (Cd.1390. Annexure No.11), i.e., from the 25th August next.\n\n(sd.)\n\nI am, &c.,", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-321 - Public Offices & Others - 1903.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 391251, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-321 - Public Offices & Others - 1903", "page_number": 212, "title": "CO129-321 - Public Offices & Others - 1903", "content_text": "203\n\napplying to the British and German Postmasters at the Port the Chinese Postmaster found to be correct.\n\nOn this state of matters being brought to the notice of the Imperial Government by Sir Robert Hart, the Wai-Woo-Boo addressed a Note to the Doyen of the Diplomatic Body in Peking, requesting him to call the attention of his colleagues to the contravention of the Universal Postal Union Regulations as regards parcels containing dutiable articles, and evasion of the Customs duties payable under the Final Protocol of September 1901 and ask them to instruct their respective Postal Agents at the Treaty Ports not to deliver such parcels in future until such time as the Customs duty on them shall have been paid.\n\nIn requesting Your Lordship to instruct His Britannic Majesty's Representative in Peking in this sense, I am also to express to you, on behalf of the Imperial Government, the hope that, inasmuch as a very effective native and foreign Postal Service under the direction of Sir Robert Hart has been established, and is now in operation at all the Treaty Ports, His Majesty's Government will see that the circumstances that justified and necessitated the establishment of British Post Offices in China have now passed away, and consent to withdraw them at an early date.\n\n(Signed)\n\nI have &c.,\n\nT. J. Chang.", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-321 - Public Offices & Others - 1903.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 391273, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-321 - Public Offices & Others - 1903", "page_number": 234, "title": "CO129-321 - Public Offices & Others - 1903", "content_text": "This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.]\n\n2\n\ncarry out its pledge that foreign goods and native goods intended for export should not be interfered with, it might possibly happen that one or other of the provincial authorities might make such arrangements for the collection of the consumption tax as would involve interference with these classes of goods, and thus the Central Government would be exposed to a charge of failing to keep its engagements. It is assumed, therefore, that the Chinese Government has considered in advance the arrangements it will make, and what is desired is information as to what those arrangements are to be. The British merchants, for instance, consider that the Chinese Government must by this time—that is, eight months after the signing of the Treaty—be in a position to state in what places the consumption tax will be levied, and by what class of officials, and under what rules.\n\nThe second point on which in my earlier note information was asked related to the excise on goods of foreign type manufactured by machinery in China. The Treaty provides that the excise is to be collected through the Imperial Maritime Customs, whether the goods are manufactured by foreigners at the Treaty ports or by Chinese anywhere in China. The British commercial community are anxious to know what arrangements the Chinese Government proposes to make to insure the payment to the Customs of this excise on goods manufactured at places in the interior where no Maritime Customs officers are stationed.\n\nThe third point was the amount of the remittances which the provinces will be required to make out of the funds to be obtained from the increased import duties. To this inquiry your Highness answered that the amount could not be determined until it was seen what was the actual revenue produced by the surtax. But I am instructed by His Majesty's Government to point out that there is no necessity to wait till the actual yield of the surtax is ascertained. An examination of the Annexes to the Treaty will show your Highness that the provinces are to continue to remit to Peking the same contribution as that they have hitherto remitted out of their li-kin revenue, and that they shall also continue to provide whatever is necessary for the service of the foreign loan, to which li-kin is partly pledged. Both these amounts must at the present moment be known to the Board of Revenue; they must know what is the amount of the present contribution from each province out of li-kin receipts, and also what are the annual payments for the foreign loan secured on li-kin revenue, and what His Majesty's Government ask is to be informed what these amounts are.\n\nA further point is the following:\n\nBy section 3 of Article VIII of the Treaty, the Chinese Government engage to furnish the British Government with a list of the native custom-houses now existing, as enumerated in certain official Regulations; and, by section 5 of the same Article, the Chinese Government promise to draw up and communicate to the British Government a list of the places where it is proposed to retain offices for the collection of duty on native opium. I shall be glad to know whether your Highness can supply me in advance with these lists for communication to His Majesty's Government.\n\nThe reference in your Highness' note to the negotiations with other Powers makes it desirable to point out that the British Treaty contains a provision that the ratifications of it are to be exchanged at Peking within a year from the date of signature. When that exchange has been made, both Governments will be bound by the provisions of the Treaty; the only way in which the negotiations of other Powers affect it is that the operation of Article VIII is suspended until they have entered into similar engagements. I have further the honour to suggest to your Highness that the points with regard to which the British commercial communities entertain misgivings, and on which they wish for fuller explanations, are likely also to engage the attention of the merchants of other countries and of the Treaty negotiators who represent them, and that any explanations it is in your Highness' power to give tending to allay those misgivings will in all probability favourably affect the course of China's negotiations with other Powers.\n\nI avail, &c.\n\n(Signed) WALTER TOWNLEY.\n\nINA TRADE.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nNo. 1.\n\n[July 20.]\n\nSECTION 1,\n\n230\n\nMr. Townley to the Marquess of Lansdowne,—(Received July 20.)\n\nNo. 212.)\n\nPeking, June 1, 1903.\n\nLord,\n\nUPON the receipt of your Lordship's telegram No. 92 of the 25th ultimo, I called upon the Japanese Minister and informed him that His Majesty's Government had decided, since no better scheme had been put forward, to renew the proposal made last June to accept payment of the Chinese indemnity in silver up to 1910. I said that I was instructed to tell him that His Majesty's Government were now about to make this offer to the Chinese Government on their own account, since none of the Powers Signatory of the Final Protocol, except America, had agreed to it last summer, and that I was to inform the Chinese Government that the proposal was conditional upon the signature of the fractional bonds, and that it would be left to future decision whether the payment in silver should be considered as full satisfaction for the debt, or whether the Chinese Government should be called upon at a later date to make good the difference between the amount received and what was due to the British Government in gold.\n\nMr. Uchida, who promised to refer the matter to his Government, has since informed me that the Japanese Government still insist upon full payment in gold.\n\nI subsequently spoke to all the Representatives of the Powers Signatory of the Final Protocol, and explained to them the nature of the instructions that I had received from your Lordship. No one was in a position to give me an answer without referring the matter home, but I gathered that the majority were disposed to recommend to their Governments some measure of alleviation as soon as China had signed the fractional bonds. The Representatives of those countries which have raised loans off their claims at once are of opinion that it will be hard to adopt the scheme proposed to the Chinese Government by His Majesty's Government. Whilst all think that the increase of China's burden in consequence of the fall in the price of silver entitles her to some consideration, the opinion is almost unanimous that China can quite well pay the full amount in gold if she chooses to do so. This is very likely the case, but there is nevertheless no denying the fact that the increased payment does weigh very heavily upon some, at least, of the poorer provinces, and that the Central Government is much hampered in carrying out necessary measures by want of money.\n\nI have the honour to inclose copies of my letters to the doyen of the Diplomatic Body and to Prince Ching upon the subject.\n\nI have, &c.\n\n(Signed) WALTER TOWNLEY.\n\nInclosure 1 in No. 1.\n\nMr. Townley to Mr. Conger.\n\nPeking, May 26, 1903.\n\nDear Mr. Dean,\n\nON the 30th June last Sir Ernest Satow informed you that His Majesty's Government had come to the conclusion that the Powers ought to allow a relaxation of the terms imposed upon China in respect of the indemnity provided for in the Final Protocol, and that they considered that the most convenient form of doing this would be that the Powers should agree to accept during the years 1902 to 1910, inclusive, payment in silver, according to the actual figures of the Table of Amortization, crediting the Chinese Government with the corresponding amounts in gold, and writing off the balance due for those nine years altogether.\n\nThe above quoted proposal did not meet with the support of the other Powers at the time.\n\nThe British Government are now prepared, since the discussions of the foreign Representatives at Peking have not led to the suggestion of any other alternative,\n\n[2077 U -1]", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-321 - Public Offices & Others - 1903.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 391274, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-321 - Public Offices & Others - 1903", "page_number": 235, "title": "CO129-321 - Public Offices & Others - 1903", "content_text": "2 \n\nto renew the proposal of last year to the Chinese Government upon their account.\n\nI am, in accordance with the instructions which I have received, to inform the Chinese Government that the British Government are willing to accept payment in silver for their share of the yearly payment of 18,829,500 Haikwan taels up to the year 1910 as a provisional discharge of their obligations under the conditions of Article 6 of the Final Protocol. The offer is made conditional upon the signature of the fractional bonds as presented by the Shanghae Commission of Bankers to the Taotai. The difference between the sum received in silver and the full amount to which the British Government are entitled under the Protocol is to be considered as a debt remaining due to Great Britain, and the question as to whether payment should or should not be required will form the subject of future decision.\n\nI have the honour to request you to be so good as to bring the above statement of the action taken by me to the knowledge of the Representatives of the Powers who signed the Final Protocol, and greatly oblige yours, &c.\n\n(Signed)\n\nInclosure 2 in No. 1.\n\nWALTER TOWNLEY,\n\nThis Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.]\n\n231\n\n[August 4.]\n\nSECTION 1.\n\nCHINA TRADE.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL.\n\nNo. 1.\n\nMr. Townley to the Marquess of Lansdowne,.--(Received August 4.)\n\n(No. 224.) My Lord,\n\nPeking, June 10, 1903. WITH reference to my despatch to your Lordship, No. 223, of the 4th June, I have the honour to transmit herewith a copy of a note from the Board of Foreign Affairs in reply to my protest against the proposed farm for the collection of duty on opium at Canton.\n\nI have, &c. (Signed)\n\nWALTER TOWNLEY.\n\nYour Highness,\n\nMr. Townley to Prince Ch'ing.\n\nIT will be within the recollection of your Highness that last June His Majesty's Government arrived at the conclusion that there should be some relaxation of the burden of the indemnity payable by the Chinese Government in accordance with the Protocol signed at Peking in 1901, and they proposed that the Powers to whom a share of the indemnity was due should accept their proportion of a yearly payment by China of 18,829,500 Haikwan taels up to the year 1910, without regard to the amount of gold to which this amount in silver may be equivalent.\n\nHis Majesty's Government were prepared either to accept the payment of the annual amount in silver as a full discharge of China's debt for the years mentioned, or, if the other Powers would not agree to that arrangement, they proposed to reserve for subsequent settlement the question of the manner in which the difference between the amount actually due in gold from the Chinese Government and the amount paid by them should be made good.\n\nThe other Powers did not accept either of the above proposals, and though there have been many discussions between their Representatives at Peking, they have not led to any agreement.\n\nHis Majesty's Government, therefore, now intend to take separate action in accordance with the views they expressed last year, and they have instructed me to inform the Chinese Government that they are prepared, as soon as the fractional bonds are signed, to accept up to the year 1910 payment in silver for the share due to the British Government of the yearly payment of 18,829,500 Haikwan taels as a provisional discharge of the obligations of the Chinese Government towards the British Government under Article 6 of the Final Protocol. The difference between the sum received in silver and the full amount to which the British Government are entitled under the Protocol is to be considered as a debt remaining due to Great Britain, and the question as to whether payment of it shall or shall not eventually be made will remain for future decision.\n\nI avail, &c.\n\n(Signed) WALTER TOWNLEY.\n\nSir,\n\nInclosure in No. 1.\n\nPrince Ching to Mr. Townley,\n\nPeking, June 6, 1903. I HAVE the honour to acknowledge receipt of your despatch of the 3rd instant, stating that, from a report received by you from His Majesty's Consul-General at Canton, it appeared that the provincial officials had devised a fresh mode of taxation of foreign opium which was, equally with the previous system attempted, an infringement of the provisions of the Additional Article of the Chefoo Convention. According to the proposed Regulations of the new farm which had been established, all existing prepared opium shops would have to obtain a licence from the farm. The farm even proposed to place a tax of 1 m. 2 c. on each ounce of Indian opium already in the hands of the opium dealers without any regard for the question as to whether the conditions of the Treaty regulating the imposition of additional taxation on opium had been satisfied. Moreover, the number of licences issued to prepared opium shops was to be limited, and it was evident that the farm would in time obtain a complete monopoly of the sale. Such a monopoly was opposed to the Vth Article of the Treaty of Nanking, whereby British subjects might carry on their mercantile transactions with whatever persons they pleased. You therefore requested me to telegraph to the Canton Government that the proposed farm could not be permitted.\n\nIt appears that last year the farm which proposed to levy the tax on prepared opium consumed in the Canton Province calculated the consumption of the drug on the amount of raw opium imported. The Board considering this an infraction of the Additional Article of the Chefoo Convention, ordered the Canton Government to withdraw the tax and devise some other system of collection.\n\nSubsequently, a telegram was received from the Canton Viceroy, stating that it was a matter of extreme difficulty to find the heavy sums required for the indemnity, and that the licence system on prepared opium must be developed and extended. It was proposed therefore to intrust the business to the Heng Chi farm.\n\nBoth foreign and native opium would pay 2 m. 2 c. per ounce, and the total proceeds of the tax would be handed over yearly to the authorities by the farm. The British Consul having however objected to the tax as being too heavy and likely to diminish the consumption of foreign opium, it was decided to reduce both the tax and the sum to be paid over by the farm by one half. The question of licences for the sale of prepared opium is one which concerns China's internal administration, If the system is to be extended, it will only affect the opium after it has reached its place of consumption, when the bales have been opened and the opium prepared. The foreign and native drug will pay both the same amount, and there will be no preferential treatment and infringement of the Additional Article of the Chefoo Convention.\n\nThe third clause of the Additional Article referred to is to the following effect: \"After the import and li-kin duties on foreign opium have been paid, the owner shall apply for a transit certificate. Such certificate shall free the opium to which it applies, provided that the package has not been opened.\" The present extension of the licence\n\n[2091 d-1]", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-321 - Public Offices & Others - 1903.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 391278, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-321 - Public Offices & Others - 1903", "page_number": 239, "title": "CO129-321 - Public Offices & Others - 1903", "content_text": "[This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.]\n\nCHINA TRADE.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL.\n\nNo. 1.\n\n[June 29.]\n\nSECTION 1.\n\nSir M. Gosselin to the Marquess of Lansdowne.-(Received June 29.)\n\n(No. 79. Very Confidential.) My Lord,\n\nLisbon, June 12, 1903.\n\nWITH reference to my despatch No. 48 of the 20th April last, inclosing copies of the Portuguese White Book, on the subject of Senhor de Azevedo Castello Branco's negotiations with China, I have the honour to report that the Treaty of the 15th October last came up for discussion in the Chamber of Deputies on the 27th ultimo.\n\nSenhor Dias Costa, on behalf of the Progressist opposition, asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs for information on the following points:--\n\nQuestion 1-How do the Portuguese Government interpret Article III of the Treaty of the 15th October? Does it imply that a Chinese custom-house can be established in the territory of the Province of Macau?\n\nAnswer. The Portuguese Government hold that by this Article no custom-house or delegation of the Imperial Chinese Customs can be established in Macau territory.\n\nQuestion 2.--Has the Portuguese Government still a free hand with regard to adhering or not to the Final Protocol of the 7th September, 1901?\n\nAnswer. By Article II of the Treaty, Portugal agrees to the increase in the import Tariff duties stipulated for in the Protocol of the 7th September, 1901; it is clear, however, that the Treaty has no effect until ratified, and that until this is done the Government have complete liberty of action in the matter.\n\nQuestion 3.-Does China apply, in violation of the Treaty of 1887, the new Customs Tariff to Macau merchandise without protest by the Portuguese Government?\n\nAnswer. The Minister replied that if the Deputy would read the White Book he would find there an answer to his question.\n\n(On page 40 of the White Book, Senhor Azevedo, in his explanatory despatch to Senhor Mattoso Santos, written on the 20th December, after his return to Lisbon, points out that Portuguese goods ought not to be subjected to the higher Tariff until Portugal had adhered to the Protocol of the 7th September, 1901; but that, as a matter of fact, \"as early as October 1901, China, to the manifest prejudice of our rights, and with the consent of the Powers, began to levy duties according to the new Tariffs without troubling herself as to the arbitrary nature of this proceeding.\")\n\nQuestion 4.-Have the Government consented to any alteration in the customs duties on opium, as laid down in the Treaty of 1887?\n\nAnswer.-No change has been made.\n\nQuestion 5.-During the absence of the Portuguese Minister from Peking, have negotiations been completely suspended?\n\nAnswer.--The Minister replied in the affirmative.\n\nAfter a short and somewhat desultory discussion, a Resolution in the following terms was carried by the Government majority in the Lower Chamber :--\n\n64\n\nThe Chamber, approving the declarations of the Government, and in accord with them, resolves to suspend the discussion of this Treaty, in order that its meaning may be made clear between the two High Contracting Parties, so as to avoid doubts as to its execution, and trusts that the patriotism and forethought of the Government and of their Representative at the Court of Peking will bring the negotiations to a satisfactory conclusion.\"\n\nI called this morning on Senhor de Azevedo Castello Branco, and asked him to be good enough to explain the intentions of the Government with regard to his Treaty, as it seemed to me that the action taken by the Chamber, suspending all discussion of the subject, almost amounted to a rejection of the Treaty.\n\nSenhor Azevedo entered at great length into the difficulties with which he had to contend on his arrival at Peking, he had signed the Treaty faute de mieux, but no one was more alive than himself to the unsatisfactory nature of some of the clauses; the arrangement as to the Customs had been misunderstood; it was of undoubted advantage that Macau should become a free port, open to the coasting trade; but an outcry had been raised here as to Article III, according to which a delegation of the Chinese Imperial Customs was to be established \"dans un local choisi d'accord entre le Gouvernement de la\n\nPage 235", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-321 - Public Offices & Others - 1903.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 391279, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-321 - Public Offices & Others - 1903", "page_number": 240, "title": "CO129-321 - Public Offices & Others - 1903", "content_text": "Colonie de Macau, et l'Administration des Douanes Impériales Chinoises\"; as a matter of fact, this delegation already existed—nominally, indeed, it was established on the island of Lapa, opposite Macau, but in reality it was located in Macau itself, under the Portuguese Governor's nose; and by the terms of Articles III-VI of this Treaty, this Customs delegation will have to treat vessels sailing from Macau as if the delegation were a Treaty port customs-house.\n\nAmongst other difficulties which he had to meet, Senhor Azevedo said that the French Legation at Peking had opposed his Treaty because they feared it might give Portugal undue control of the West River trade.\n\nSince he had left Peking, the Portuguese Chargé d'Affaires had signed a Supplementary Commercial Convention with the Chinese Government. (This statement hardly tallies with the reply given by Senhor Wenceslau de Lima to question 5, as recorded above; but the news of this signature may have reached Lisbon subsequently to his Excellency's reply in Parliament.)\n\nSenhor de Azevedo intends to return to China in September, and, after presenting his Letters of Credence as Portuguese Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary to the Court of Peking, will proceed to Shanghae, where he hopes to be able to negotiate with the Chinese Commissioners a Commercial Treaty on the lines adopted by Sir James Mackay.\n\nIn reply to my inquiry as to what he proposes to do with regard to the delimitations of the frontiers of Macau, a question on which public opinion here lays great stress, Senhor de Azevedo said that it was quite a mistake to suppose, as the newspapers have asserted, that the Portuguese want to acquire the island of Lapa. It is true that guns planted on Lapa would entirely command Macau; but the Chinese have no guns there, or anywhere near; and the Portuguese could seize the island long before the Chinese could get their guns in position.\n\nAll that he wanted to effect was a delimitation of the territorial limits of the country in accordance with the letter of the Treaty of 1887; this would not imply any breach of the engagement by which all the Powers had undertaken not to seek any further territorial aggrandizement, inasmuch as the delimitation would only be carrying out an agreement long anterior to the self-denying engagement; and he had every hope that the Chinese would be reasonable and concur in his proposals, when carrying out the arrangement for the construction of a railway from Macau to Canton.\n\nSenhor de Azevedo authorized me to report the above to your Lordship, provided the information was treated as strictly confidential. If Sir E. Satow was at Peking at the date when the Commercial Convention was signed, he had little doubt that the Portuguese Chargé d'Affaires had communicated a copy to him; anyhow, he had no objection whatever to the British Legation at Peking knowing all that had passed, and what he proposed to do on his return.\n\nI gather from our conversation that the Portuguese Government intend to insist that the terms of the Railway Concession and the delimitation of the frontier of Macau must be settled before they accept Article VI* of the Final Protocol of Peking of the 7th September, 1901.\n\nWith regard to the Portuguese share of the Indemnity, Senhor de Azevedo said that this would be deposited in a Bank at Shanghae, and not withdrawn until the Treaty has been ratified; the Portuguese Government intend themselves to pay the various claimants, but thought it more correct not to touch the Indemnity money until all the outstanding questions had been settled.\n\nFor convenience of reference, I am forwarding with this despatch an additional copy of the Portuguese White Book on the negotiations with China.\n\nI have, &c. (Signed)\nMARTIN GOSSELIN.\n\nConfidential.\n\nThe Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs\npresents his compliments to the Under-Secretary of State,\nand is directed by the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs\nto transmit, to be laid before the Secretary of State for\nthe Colonies\n, further section of confidential\ncorrespondence, as marked in the margin.\n\nTrade 30,$2\nForeign Office,\nAugust 20th,\n1903.\n\n* Article VI includes the revision of the Tariff.\n\nPage 240\nPage 241", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-321 - Public Offices & Others - 1903.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 391333, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-321 - Public Offices & Others - 1903", "page_number": 294, "title": "CO129-321 - Public Offices & Others - 1903", "content_text": "„1-ms Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.]\n\nCHINA TRADE.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL.\n\nNo. 1.\n\n290\n\n[July 20.]\n\nSECTION 4.\n\nMr. Townley to the Marquess of Lansdowne.~(Received July 20.)\n\n(No. 208.) My Lord,\n\nPeking, May 29, 1903. UPON the receipt of your Lordship's despatch No. 230 of the 3rd November last, upon the subject of the failure of the local authorities at Canton to hand over the Native Custom-houses at Ch'ên Ts'un and Fatshan to the Imperial Maritime Customs, I inquired of His Majesty's Consul-General at Canton whether anything further had been done in the matter since the date of Sir Ernest Satow's despatch No. 248 of the 2nd September last, to which your Lordship's above-quoted despatch was in answer.\n\nI have now received Mr. Scott's despatch No. 14 of the 5th instant, copy of which has been forwarded to your Lordship direct, informing me that the Hoppo still maintains control of the two stations in question, and explaining the conditions under which he has contrived to attract trade to those points, to the detriment of the Returns for Canton of the Imperial Maritime Customs on behalf of Native Customs.\n\nI have the honour to inclose copy of a note which I have to-day addressed to Prince Ch'ing, setting forth the circumstances under which the Hoppo still refuses to carry out the conditions of the Final Protocol, and calling upon his Highness to cause the necessary instructions to be issued to that official to hand over without further delay the Native Customs stations at Ch'ên Ts'un and Fatshan to the Imperial Maritime Customs Administration.\n\nI have, &c. (Signed)\n\nWALTER TOWNLEY,\n\nYour Highness,\n\nInclosure in No. 1.\n\nMr. Townley to Prince Ch'ing.\n\nPeking, May 29, 1903. I AM in receipt of a despatch from His Britannic Majesty's Consul-General at Canton with reference to the transfer of the Native Customs at that port to the Imperial Maritime Customs, in accordance with the terms of the Final Protocol.\n\nThe Consul-General complains that, although instructions had been received by the local authorities that every Native Customs station within a radius of 50 li from Canton was to be transferred to the management of the Imperial Maritime Customs, the Hoppo still retains control of the Native stations at Ch'ên Ts'un and Fatshan. Both these places are within 30 li of Canton, but the Hoppo, on the ground that a detour by water is necessary to reach them, resists all attempts to withdraw them from his control.\n\nThe object of the Hoppo in disobeying his instructions and retaining control of these two important stations is to minimize as far as possible the effect of the transfer of the Chang Kuan at Canton to the Imperial Maritime Customs. By granting reduced duties and other facilities to the native merchants, he has induced many of them to make Ch'ên Ts'un their head-quarters in lieu of Canton, and many articles formerly exported to Hong Kong, via Canton, now reach their destination via Ch'ên Ts'un.\n\nThe result of the Hoppo's policy has been that, under Imperial Maritime Customs control, the revenue received at the Chang Kuan, in Canton, has very seriously diminished, as compared with previous years, whereas at Ch'ên Ts'un and Fatshan the amount collected shows a large increase,\n\nAs the revenues of the Native Customs administered by the Imperial Maritime Customs have been assigned as security for the payment of the foreign indemnities, the question is one which seriously concerns all the Treaty Powers.\n\nThe Hoppo's excuse for refusing to hand over the Administration of the Native Customs at Ch'ên Ts'un and Fatshan to the Imperial Maritime Customs is so very frivolous that it is unnecessary for me to make any remarks on the subject. His object\n\n[2077 -4]\n\n...\n\n1", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-321 - Public Offices & Others - 1903.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 394517, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-325 - Public Offices & Others - 1904", "page_number": 507, "title": "CO129-325 - Public Offices & Others - 1904", "content_text": "504\n\nof the Permanent Commission as referred to in the penultimate paragraph of my letter above quoted, viz: that the refined Sugar is produced in a factory which does not work Sugars coming from any country to which a special duty or prohibition is applied.\n\nThe Board take this opportunity of remarking that the form of Certificate lately employed in the United Kingdom (of which the Hong Kong form is a reproduction) had to be withdrawn from use in consequence of objections being raised to it in Germany on the ground that it only certified to a declaration having been made as to the facts of the case and did not directly certify to the facts themselves. This is now done in the new form, a copy of which is appended to the accompanying Customs General Order 78 and the Board are of opinion\n\n1903\n\nthat the Hong Kong form should be recast to correspond therewith,—with the slight amendment as shown in red to meet the special circumstances of the Colony.\n\nI am to add, with reference to paragraph 5 of Mr. Lucas' letter, that the position of the Dutch Colonies in regard to the Convention, as indicated in the final Protocol, appears to be the same as that of British Crown Colonies, and that that position is not inconsistent with the prohibition of, or the levy of countervailing duties on the importation of bounty-fed Sugar into those Colonies.\n\nI am, Sir,\n\nYour obedient Servant,\n\nUnder Secretary of State,\n\n&c. &c. &c.. Colonial Office.", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-325 - Public Offices & Others - 1904.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 394697, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904", "page_number": 34, "title": "CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904", "content_text": "32\n\n2\n\nThe United States of America and His Majesty the Emperor of China, being animated by an earnest desire to extend further the commercial relations between them and otherwise to promote the interests of the peoples of the two countries, in view of the provisions of the first paragraph of Article XI of the Final Protocol signed at Peking on the 7th day of September, A.D. 1901, whereby the Chinese Government agreed to negotiate the amendments deemed necessary by the foreign Governments to the Treaties of Commerce and Navigation and other subjects concerning commercial relations, with the object of facilitating them, have for that purpose named as their Plenipotentiaries:\n\nThe United States of America: Edwin H. Conger, Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary of the United States of America to China; John Goodnow, Consul-General of the United States of America at Shanghai; John F. Seaman, a citizen of the United States of America, resident at Shanghai;\n\nAnd His Majesty the Emperor of China: Lü-Hai-huan, President of the Board of Public Works; Sheng Hsuan-huai, Junior Guardian of the Heir Apparent, Formerly Senior Vice-President of the Board of Public Works;\n\nwho, having met and duly exchanged their full powers, which were found to be in proper form, have agreed upon the following amendments to existing Treaties of Commerce and Navigation formerly concluded between the two countries, and upon the subjects hereinafter expressed connected with commercial relations with the object of facilitating them:\n\nARTICLE I.\n\nIn accordance with international usage, and as the Diplomatic Representative of China has the right to reside in the capital of the United States, and to enjoy there the same prerogatives, privileges, and immunities as are enjoyed by the similar Representative of the most favoured nation, Diplomatic Representative of the United States shall have the right to reside at the capital of His Majesty the Emperor of China. He shall be given audience of His Majesty the Emperor whenever necessary to present his letters of credence or any communication from the President of the United States. At all such times he shall be received in a place and in a manner befitting his high position, and on all such occasions the ceremonial observed towards him shall be that observed towards the Representatives of nations on a footing of equality, with no loss of prestige on the part of either.\n\nThe Diplomatic Representatives of the United States shall enjoy all the prerogatives, privileges, and immunities accorded by international usage to such Representatives, and shall in all respects be entitled to the treatment extended to similar Representatives of the most favoured nation.\n\nThe English text of all notes or despatches from United States' officials to Chinese officials, and the Chinese text of all from Chinese officials to United States' officials shall be authoritative.\n\nARTICLE II.\n\nAs China may appoint Consular officers to reside in the United States and to enjoy there the same attributes, privileges, and immunities as are enjoyed by Consular officers of other nations, the United States may appoint, as its interests may require, Consular officers to reside at the places in the Empire of China that are now or that may hereafter be opened to foreign residence and trade. They shall hold direct official intercourse and correspondence with the local officers of the Chinese Government within their Consular districts, either personally or in writing as the case may require, on terms of equality and reciprocal respect. These officers shall be treated with due respect by all Chinese authorities, and they shall enjoy all the attributes, privileges, and immunities, and exercise all the jurisdiction over their nationals which are or may hereafter be extended to similar officers of the nation the most favoured in these respects. If the officers of either Government are disrespectfully treated or aggrieved in any way by the authorities of the other, they shall have the right to make representation of the same to the superior officers of their own Government, who shall see that full inquiry and strict justice be had in the premises. And the said Consular officers of either nation shall carefully avoid all acts of offence to the officers and people of the other nation.\n\n3\n\nOn the arrival of a Consul duly accredited at any place in China opened to foreign trade it shall be the duty of the Minister of the United States to inform the Board of Foreign Affairs, which shall, in accordance with international usage, forthwith cause the proper recognition of the said Consul and grant him authority to act.\n\nARTICLE III.\n\nCitizens of the United States may frequent, reside, and carry on trade, industries, and manufactures, or pursue any lawful avocation, in all the ports or localities of China which are now open or may hereafter be opened to foreign residence and trade; and, within the suitable localities at those places which have been or may be set apart for the use and occupation of foreigners, they may rent or purchase houses, places of business, and other buildings, and rent or lease in perpetuity land and build thereon. They shall generally enjoy as to their persons and property all such rights, privileges, and immunities as are or may hereafter be granted to the subjects or citizens of the nation the most favoured in these respects.\n\nARTICLE IV.\n\nThe Chinese Government, recognizing that the existing system of levying dues on goods in transit, and especially the system of taxation known as li-kin, impedes the free circulation of commodities to the general injury of trade, hereby undertakes to abandon the levy of li-kin and all other transit dues throughout the Empire and to abolish the offices, stations, and barriers maintained for their collection and not to establish other offices for levying dues on goods in transit. It is clearly understood that, after the offices, stations, and barriers for taxing goods in transit have been abolished, no attempt shall be made to re-establish them in any form or under any pretext whatsoever.\n\nThe Government of the United States, in return, consents to allow a surtax, in excess of the Tariff rates for the time being in force, to be imposed on foreign goods imported by citizens of the United States, and on Chinese produce destined for export abroad or coastwise. It is clearly understood that in no case shall the surtax on foreign imports exceed one and one-half times the import duty leviable in terms of the Final Protocol signed by China and the Powers on the 7th day of September, A.D. 1901; that the payment of the import duty and surtax shall secure for foreign imports, whether in the hands of Chinese or foreigners, in original packages or otherwise, complete immunity from all other taxation, examination or delay; that the total amount of taxation, inclusive of the Tariff export duty, leviable on native produce for export abroad shall, under no circumstances, exceed 7.5 per cent. ad valorem.\n\nNothing in this Article is intended to interfere with the inherent right of China to levy such other taxes as are not in conflict with its provisions.\n\nKeeping these fundamental principles in view, the High Contracting Parties have agreed upon the following method of procedure:\n\nThe Chinese Government undertake that all offices, stations, and barriers of whatsoever kind for collecting li-kin duties, or such like dues on goods in transit, shall be permanently abolished on all roads, railways, and waterways in the nineteen provinces of China and the three Eastern Provinces. This provision does not apply to the Native Customs offices at present in existence on the seaboard, at open ports where there are offices of the Imperial Maritime Customs, and on the land frontiers of China embracing the nineteen provinces and the three Eastern Provinces.\n\nWherever there are offices of the Imperial Maritime Customs, or wherever such may hereafter be placed, Native Customs offices may also be established, as well as at any point on the seaboard or land frontiers.\n\nThe Government of the United States agrees that foreign goods on importation, in addition to the effective 5 per cent. import duty as provided for in the Protocol of 1901, shall pay a special surtax of one and one-half times the amount of the said duty to compensate for the abolition of li-kin, of other transit dues besides li-kin, and of all other taxation on foreign goods, and in consideration of the other reforms provided for in this Article.\n\nThe Chinese Government may recast the foreign export Tariff with specific duties, as far as practicable, on a scale not exceeding 5 per cent. ad valorem; but existing export duties shall not be raised until at least six months' notice has been given. In cases where...", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 394701, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904", "page_number": 38, "title": "CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904", "content_text": "36\n\n10\n\nWe\n\nThis more completely covers the ground than such a despatch would have done. therefore only desire now to state again that China reserves her right to levy any and all taxes, provided only that they do not conflict with the provisions of our Treaty with you.\n\nHon. J. Goodnow, Hon. J. F. Seaman, Treaty Commissioners for the United States.\n\nWe are, &c.\n\n(Cards inclosed), Treaty Commissioners for China.\n\n11\n\nWhereas Hon. T. S. Sharretts requested and obtained permission from his Government to return to the United States, and left Shanghae before the above-written Agreement was signed by and with the Special Commissioners of China,\n\nI, being empowered by the Secretary of State of the United States of America to sign the Tariff as agreed to by Hon. T. S. Sharretts, now sign the above-written Agreement for the United States of America.\n\nSeptember 6, 1902.\n\n(Signed) JOHN GOODNOW. (Signatures of the Special Commissioners of China.)\n\nGentlemen,\n\nShanghae, September 30, 1903.\n\nWe have received your despatch of the 24th instant. In framing this Treaty we have endeavoured to recognize the right of China as a Sovereign State to levy such taxes as are not in conflict with the provisions of this Treaty which is intended to extend the commercial relations between, and promote the best interests of, the people of the two countries. With this end in view, we inserted at your request in Article IV the clause \"Nothing in this Article is intended to interfere with the inherent right of China to levy such other taxes as are not in conflict with its provisions.\" We, with your Excellencies, appreciate the fact that this clause is comprehensive and conserves to the fullest extent the sovereign rights of China except as specified in this Treaty.\n\nWe are, &c. (Signed)\n\nJOHN GOODNOW, J. F. SEAMAN, Treaty Commissioners for the United States.\n\nTo their Excellencies, Lu Hai-huan, Sheng Hsüan-huai, Wu Ting-fang, Treaty Commissioners for China.\n\nWhereas it was provided by the Final Protocol signed at Peking on the 7th September, 1901 (Article VI), that the existing Tariff on goods imported into China should be increased to an effective 5 per cent., and whereas it was further provided that all duties levied on imports ad valorem should be converted, as far as feasible and with the least possible delay, into specific duties, this conversion to be effected in the following manner-The average value of merchandise at the time of landing during the three years 1897, 1898, and 1899, that is to say, the market price less the amount of import duty and incidental expenses to be taken as the basis for the valuation of such merchandise:-\n\nThe Special Commissioners of the United States of America, Mr. T. S. Sharretts; and of China, Their Excellencies Lu Hai-Huan and Sheng Hsuan-Huai, have agreed and determined, on the basis aforesaid, upon the Tariff hereto appended together with certain Rules for the application thereof; and do hereby agree that the said Tariff and Rules shall be binding on the Governments and subjects of their respective countries.\n\nThe Tariff and Rules aforesaid shall be binding on and after the 31st October, 1902, the first day of the tenth Chinese moon.\n\nShould it be ascertained hereafter that any Articles have been omitted from this Tariff which it is found can be conveniently provided for on a specific basis in terms of the Final Protocol of 1901, it is understood that the necessary additions shall be made at rates to be mutually agreed upon by Representatives of the various Powers by whom this Tariff has been signed.\n\nIt is understood that, in the event of there being any difference of meaning between the English and Chinese texts of the Tariff and Rules, the sense as expressed in the English text shall be held to be the correct sense.\n\nThe present Agreement has been drawn up in two identical copies and signed by the Special Commissioners of the countries aforesaid. One copy shall be given to the Special Commissioner of the United States of America, and one copy shall be given to the Special Commissioners of China.\n\nSigned:\n\nSchedule of Chinese Import Duties, signed September 6, 1902, by the United States and Chinese Commissioners, with Rules attached.*\n\n* Not printed.", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 394702, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904", "page_number": 39, "title": "CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904", "content_text": "[This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.]\n\nCHINA TRADE.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL.\n\nNo. 1.\n\n37\n\n[January 14.]\n\nSECTION 1.\n\nChino-Japanese Commercial Treaty signed at Shanghae (1903).--(Communicated by Japanese Minister, January 14, 1904.)\n\n(Translation.)\n\nHIS Majesty the Emperor of Japan, and His Majesty the Emperor of China, in order to give full effect to the provisions of Article 11 of the Final Protocol, signed at Peking on the 7th day of the 9th month of the 34th year of Meiji, corresponding to the 25th day of the 7th moon of the 27th year of Kuang-Hsü, have resolved to conclude a supplementary Treaty of Commerce and Navigation, designed to facilitate and promote the commercial relations between Japan and China, and have, for that purpose, named as their Plenipotentiaries, that is to say:\n\nHis Majesty the Emperor of Japan, Hioki Eki, Jugoi, Fifth Class of the Imperial Order of the Rising Sun, First Secretary of Legation, and Odagiri Masnoske, Shorokui, Fifth Class of the Imperial Order of the Rising Sun, Consul-General;\n\nAnd His Majesty the Emperor of China, Lu Hai-Huan, President of the Board of Public Works, Sheng Hsuan-Huai, Junior Guardian of the Heir Apparent, formerly Senior Vice-President of the Board of Public Works, and Wu Ting-Fang, Senior Vice-President of the Board of Commerce:\n\nWho, after having communicated to each other their full powers found to be in good and due form, have agreed upon and concluded the following Articles:-\n\nARTICLE I.\n\nWhereas China, with the object of reforming its fiscal system, proposes to levy a surtax in excess of the Tariff rates on all goods passing through the custom-houses, whether maritime or inland and frontier, in order to compensate in a measure for the loss incurred by the complete abolition of li-kin; Japan consents to pay the same surtax as is agreed upon between China and all the Treaty Powers. With regard to the production tax, consumption tax, and excise, and the taxes on native opium and salt, leviable by China, Japan also consents to accept the same arrangements as are agreed upon between all the Treaty Powers and China. It is understood, however, that the commerce, rights and privileges of Japan shall not, on account of the above, be placed at any disadvantage as compared with the commerce, rights and privileges of other Powers.\n\nARTICLE II.\n\nThe Chinese Government agree to permit Japanese steam-ship owners to erect, at their own expense, appliances for hauling through the rapids of that part of the Yang-tze-kiang, between Ichang and Chungking. But, as the interests of the population of the provinces of Szechuen, Hunan, and Hupeh are involved, it is, therefore, necessary that the approval of the Imperial Maritime Customs be obtained before such appliances may be so erected.\n\nThese appliances, which shall be at the disposal of all vessels, both steamers and junks, shall not obstruct the waterway, nor interfere with the free passage of junks or of persons on the banks of the river. Such appliances shall be subject to special Regulations to be drawn up by the Imperial Maritime Customs.\n\nARTICLE III.\n\nThe Chinese Government agree that any Japanese steamer capable of navigating the inland waterways, upon reporting at the Imperial Maritime Customs, may proceed for the purpose of trade from a Treaty port to places inland, so reported, on complying with the original and supplementary Regulations for steam navigation inland.\n\n[1827 0-1]", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 394796, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904", "page_number": 133, "title": "CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904", "content_text": "2\n\nLe Doyen fait savoir qu'il a convoqué ses collègues en vue d'examiner diverses questions qui lui ont été soumises récemment.\n\nIl s'agit en premier lieu de la question de la franchise de douane pour les Consuls étrangers en Chine. Cette question a déjà été soulevée au cours de plusieurs séances précédentes, et n'a pas été résolue. M. Dubail a une proposition à faire à ce sujet.\n\nM. Dubail fait remarquer que dans la plupart des pays les Consuls envoyés jouissent d'un traitement de faveur pour l'entrée de leurs effets et mobiliers. Ce traitement leur est accordé, non comme un droit, mais par courtoisie.\n\nEn Russie, les Consuls de Carrière de tout grade, envoyés par les Gouvernements, se voient accordés à leur entrée en Russie, pour les objets destinés à leur usage personnel, une franchise montant à 750 roubles par personne et 1,350 roubles par famille.\n\nLes objets destinés au service officiel des fonctionnaires—tels que registres, pavillons, uniformes—sont complètement exempts des droits.\n\nEn Allemagne la matière est réglée par l'Article 5 de la Loi Douanière, en vertu duquel toute personne venant fonder en Allemagne un établissement permanent a droit à l'entrée en franchise de tous ses objets d'usage.\n\nLa pratique, plus large encore, accorde aux personnes venant établir leur domicile en Allemagne, et notamment celles qui viennent y remplir une mission d'un Gouvernement étranger, l'entrée en franchise d'objets n'ayant pas servi, à condition qu'ils seront réexportés lorsque la personne quittera l'Allemagne, ou qu'ils acquitteront les droits s'ils ne sont pas réexportés.\n\nDans la ville libre de Hambourg les Consuls peuvent, dans le délai d'une année, faire entrer en franchise tous objets destinés à leur usage personnel, en provenance de leur dernière résidence.\n\nEn Autriche-Hongrie on applique aux Consuls étrangers l'Article 8 de la Loi Douanière, en vertu duquel les objets appartenant à une personne qui prend son domicile en Autriche-Hongrie sont exempts de droits.\n\nEn Suisse la matière est régie par les Articles 171 et 173 du Règlement consécutif à la Loi de Douane du 12 Février, 1895.\n\nToute personne prouvant sa résolution d'établir son domicile en Suisse a droit à l'importation en franchise de ses effets personnels et mobiliers d'usage sur production d'un certificat de propriété, qui lui est délivré par le Consul Suisse de sa dernière résidence.\n\nCette franchise n'est toutefois accordée qu'aux ressortissants des pays qui accordent la réciprocité.\n\nL'Italie accorde la franchise complète des droits de douane aux objets mobiliers qu'apporte un Consul lors de son installation.\n\nEn Suède les Consuls n'ont droit à aucune exemption. En fait, on leur accorde le bénéfice du traitement appliqué aux sujets Suédois ayant résidé plus d'un an à l'étranger et revenant dans leur pays, c'est-à-dire, que tous les objets destinés à leur usage personnel sont exempts.\n\nLa loi Portugaise n'accorde aucun privilège aux Consuls, mais il est d'usage de leur accorder, sur demande d'autorisation transmise par la voie diplomatique, la franchise des droits pour les objets réservés à leur usage personnel.\n\nLes Etats-Unis, l'Espagne, et la Belgique (ces deux derniers à condition de réciprocité) autorisent l'entrée en franchise des objets destinés à la Chancellerie du Consulat tels qu'imprimés, sceaux, &c.\n\nL'Angleterre, le Danemark, la Hollande, la Saxe n'accordent aux Consuls étrangers aucun privilège douanier.\n\nEn France, il est d'usage d'accorder aux Consuls lors de leur nomination, l'autorisation, demandée par voie diplomatique, d'entrer en exemption des droits les objets destinés à leur première installation.\n\nAu Japon il en est de même. La franchise de douane est généralement accordée par courtoisie, aux Consuls de Carrière, sur une demande de leurs Légations respectives au Gouvernement Japonais.\n\nOn pourrait demander au Gouvernement Chinois le même traitement de courtoisie, tout au moins pour les Consuls envoyés, par conséquent, de carrière.\n\nSir Ernest Satow.—Dans l'opinion de mon Gouvernement, il n'est pas justifié de demander la franchise comme un droit. D'autre part aucune distinction n'est à faire entre les Consuls envoyés et les Consuls honoraires. Nous ne pouvons reconnaître cette distinction, et d'après les instructions envoyées à Mr. Townley, il me serait impossible de me joindre à une demande ayant pour but de demander la franchise dans les conditions indiquées.\n\n3\n\nM. Dubail.—Ce n'est pas un droit que nous demandons, mais un traitement de courtoisie.\n\nM. le Baron Czikann.—On pourrait d'ailleurs demander la franchise pour les objets usagers seulement.\n\nM. Joostens.—Je suis disposé à accepter la proposition faite par M. Dubail, mais je dois déclarer que la Belgique ne pourrait accorder la réciprocité. Notre Législation ne nous le permettrait pas.\n\nM. Lessar—La franchise de douane pour les Consuls n'est qu'une question de courtoisie. Ce n'est pas un droit, et le Protocole n'apporte aucun changement aux coutumes suivies précédemment. Les privilèges, dont jouissaient autrefois les Consuls, ils ne les avaient que par courtoisie.\n\nSir Ernest Satow—Ce n'est qu'en qualité d'étranger, conformément au Règlement 2 annexé au Traité, et nullement en qualité de Consul, qu'ils jouissaient de la franchise pour certaines marchandises. Je trouve que par le Protocole, la situation de tout le monde s'est trouvée changée.\n\nM. Lessar.—Le Règlement 2 exemptait simplement de droits de douanes certains articles, sans faire aucune distinction entre étrangers et Chinois. C'est vrai que l'exemption portait presque sur tous les objets dont avaient besoin les Européens et c'est probablement la raison pourquoi la question de la franchise pour les Consuls n'a pas été soulevée plus tôt et le Protocole final ne s'en est pas occupé. Par suite actuellement, le Gouvernement Chinois en fait désire restreindre les prérogatives dont jouissaient précédemment les Consuls. Mais je répète, notre demande de retourner à l'ordre de choses antérieur ne saurait être considérée que comme question de courtoisie et non de droit.\n\nSir Ernest Satow.—Il n'y a rien dans le Règlement qui ait trait aux Consuls. Le Règlement parle d'un privilège qui est reconnu à tout le monde.\n\nM. Lessar.—De même le Règlement et le Protocole final ne parlent pas de franchise de douanes pour les Chefs de Missions, qui ne l'ont que par mesure de courtoisie. Nous devons demander la même faveur pour les Consuls.\n\nM. de Mumm.—Je n'ai pas reçu de mon Gouvernement d'instructions à ce sujet. Je ne sais donc quelle est sa manière de voir. Mais quant à moi, je partage l'opinion de MM. Dubail et Lessar, et par courtoisie nous pouvons demander l'exemption de droits. Quant à l'objection soulevée par Sir Ernest Satow, elle ne me paraît pas grave; car s'il n'est pas question des Consuls dans les Traités de 1858, c'est que tous les étrangers jouissaient de la même faveur. Si les étrangers n'avaient pas joui de la franchise dans certaines conditions, on aurait certainement fait une exception pour les Consuls.\n\nM. Uchido.—J'ai reçu comme instructions de mon Gouvernement de me joindre à mes collègues pour demander au Gouvernement Chinois l'exemption des droits pour les Consuls, non pas comme un droit, mais comme une mesure de courtoisie. La franchise n'existait jamais au Japon comme un droit depuis 1876, mais toutes les facilités possibles sont accordées pour l'entrée des effets mobiliers appartenant aux Consuls.\n\nM. Dubail.—La lettre qui devra être adressée au Wai-wu-pou pourrait être rédigée dans les termes qui ne seraient pas contraires aux instructions de Sir Ernest Satow. Nous ne demandons qu'une mesure de courtoisie, qui n'engage pas nos Gouvernements. Actuellement Sir Robert Hart accorde des facilités assez grandes aux Consuls par simple courtoisie.\n\nSir Ernest Satow—Tout dépendrait des termes de la lettre. Mais je ne pourrais en tout cas accepter une différence de traitement pour les Consuls de Carrière et les Consuls Honoraires. Il n'existe à mes yeux aucune différence entre eux.\n\nM. le Baron Czikann.—Cependant en droit international, au point de vue des immunités, il y a de grandes différences entre les deux catégories.\n\nEst-on d'accord pour adresser une lettre dans les termes indiqués au Gouvernement Chinois ?\n\nMr. Coolidge.—Je dois déclarer que les Etats-Unis n'accordant pas ces privilèges aux Consuls envoyés par la Chine, je ne suis pas autorisé à me joindre à mes collègues pour cette démarche.\n\nM. Joostens s'en tient à sa déclaration précédente et fait des réserves au sujet de traitement de réciprocité qui ne pourrait être octroyé par son Gouvernement.\n\nM. de Carcer fait une déclaration identique.\n\nM. Lessar.—Nous n'avons pas besoin de l'unanimité pour envoyer une note au Gouvernement Chinois. Chaque Représentant pourrait en écrire une séparément.\n\n131", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 394797, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904", "page_number": 134, "title": "CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904", "content_text": "4\n\nmême demander la mesure à titre de réciprocité. Les autres pays en jouiraient comme \"nation la plus favorisée.”\n\nM. de Mumm.--Il semble, d'après les déclarations de nos collègues, que seul le Ministre des États-Unis n'est pas autorisé à signer une note de ce genre.\n\nDans ces conditions la lettre pourrait être signée non par le doyen, mais par tous les Ministres intéressés.\n\nsans\n\nM. Dubail.-La lettre pourrait demander la franchise pour \"les Consuls\" spécifier; on laisserait ainsi au Gouvernement Chinois le soin de faire un Règlement.\n\nM. le Baron Csikann.-La première démarche du doyen auprès Sir Robert Hart étant restée sans effet, la lettre devrait être adressée au Wai-ou-pou. La Commission de Rédaction pourrait se charger de la préparer.\n\nM. de Mumm--Si le Représentant des États-Unis peut se joindre à ses collègues, le doyen signerait seul la lettre adoptée.\n\nInclosure 2 in No. 1.\n\nNote addressed by the Diplomatic Body to Prince Ch'ing.\n\nVotre Altesse,\n\nPékin, le 23 Octobre, 1903. IL était d'usage jusqu'à ces derniers temps d'admettre en franchise les objets personnels destinés aux Consuls étrangers en Chine. Depuis, l'Administration des Douanes a estimé que ces objets pourraient être également soumis aux droits d'importation. Les Ministres soussignés ont pensé que, suivant la coutume, toute de courtoisie, qui se pratique dans beaucoup de pays, le Gouvernement Chinois voudrait bien continuer à donner aux Consuls des Puissances, tout au moins dans une certaine mesure, les facilités dont ils ont bénéficié jusqu'ici.\n\nIls suggèrent en conséquence qu'à titre de courtoisie le Gouvernement Impérial attribue aux Consuls étrangers en Chine l'exemption des droits pour l'entrée de leur mobilier, lors de leur installation, et pour l'entrée des objets à leur usage personnel pendant la durée de leurs fonctions, jusqu'à concurrence d'une somme que l'Administration des Douanes serait appelée à déterminer.\n\nVeuillez agréer, &c. (Signé)\n\nMUMM.\n\nCZIKANN.\n\nJOOSTENS.\n\n5\n\nVoici ce que, nous, le Wai-ou-pou, estimions.----\n\nLorsque le Protocole final fut discuté à Pékin, il y a deux ans, les Règlements annexés au Tarif (the Rules appended to the Tariff) dans les Traités de toutes les Puissances contenaient un Article spécial (Rule II-sur la franchise douanière de certaines marchandises); dans cet Article les noms des marchandises qui doivent jouir de franchise étaient aussi énumérés. Les douanes dans les différents ports faisaient passer en franchise les marchandises inscrites dans cette catégorie, sans faire une différence, si l'importateur était fonctionnaire, marchand, ou missionnaire; il n'existait ni de franchise spéciale pour les Consuls, ni même une stipulation spéciale sur la franchise pour les Consuls.\n\nEn vertu du Protocole final, l'Article sur la franchise des marchandises fut aboli et les douanes des différents ports procédèrent maintenant conformément au Protocole final, à savoir, les marchandises qui étaient auparavant en franchise sont sujettes au paiement des droits comme marchandises frappées de droits, également sans distinguer, si l'importateur soit fonctionnaire, marchand, ou missionnaire; il n'existe pas non plus un Article spécial sur la franchise douanière des effets Consulaires; moins encore est-il question d'un changement dans le sens d'un paiement de droits par les Consuls; il s'agit simplement d'une perception des droits sur les marchandises conformément au Protocole, et il n'y a certainement aucune disposition relative à cette franchise complète (pour les Consuls).\n\nCependant, comme les Ministres des divers États nous prient de vouloir accorder un traitement de faveur aux Consuls, nous, le Wai-ou-pou, avons décidé un moyen d'accommodement.\n\nA part l'entrée en franchise des objets envoyés par le Gouvernement et destinés à l'usage de la Chancellerie du Consulat, tels que papier, plumes, &c. (ustensiles nécessaires pour écrire), autorisée par des stipulations antérieures, nous accordons aux Consuls à leur première entrée en fonctions dans un port, l'exemption des droits pour les objets apportés avec eux et destinés à leur usage personnel, si le Ministre résidant à Pékin demande cette franchise pour son Consul expressément dans la notification officielle adressée au Wai-ou-pou et fait parvenir en même temps une liste des objets pour lesquels la franchise est demandée.\n\nTous les autres objets et les objets importés plus tard ainsi que les objets appartenant au personnel du Consulat ne jouiront pas de ce privilège.\n\nNous devons faire remarquer qu'il s'agit simplement d'un arrangement à titre de courtoisie et non pas d'une modification aux stipulations du Protocole.\n\nNous croyons devoir en donner connaissance à vos Excellences, pour qu'elle en prennent acte, et nous attendons une réponse pour pouvoir donner les instructions nécessaires à toutes les douanes.\n\nPAK CHEI SOON. CARCER. DUBAIL.\n\nNo. 2.\n\n(Traduction.)\n\nInclosure 3 in No. 1.\n\nPrince Ching to the Doyen of the Diplomatic Body.\n\nDÉPÊCHE de son Altesse le Prince Ching, Président du Ministère des Affaires Étrangères à leurs Excellences M. le Baron Mumm, Ministre d'Allemagne; M. le Baron Czikanu, Ministre d'Autriche-Hongrie; M. Joostens, Ministre de Belgique; M. Pak Chei Soon, Ministre de Corée; M. de Carcer, Chargé d'Affaires d'Espagne; M. Dubail, Ministre de France; Sir Ernest Satow, Ministre de Grande-Bretagne; M. le Comte Gallina, Ministre d'Italie; M. Uchida, Ministre du Japon; M. Jonkheer van Citters, Ministre des Pays-Bas; M. de Almeida, Chargé d'Affaires de Portugal; M. Lessar, Ministre de Russie.\n\nKuanghsi, 29 année, 10° lune, 2o jour (20 Novembre, 1903).\n\n(Réponse officielle.)\n\nLe 18 de la 9 lune nous avons reçu des Plénipotentiaires étrangers la dépêche suivante :-\n\n(Reproduction de la dépêche adressée au Wai-ou-pou en date du 23 Octobre dernier.)\n\nSir E. Satow to the Marquess of Lansdowne.—(Received January 31, 1904.)\n\n(No. 419.) My Lord,\n\nPeking, December 11, 1903. IN continuation of my despatch to your Lordship No. 352 of the 17th October, inclosing a Report from His Majesty's Consul at Amoy respecting certain action by the authorities of Fukien in support of the scheme to establish a camphor monopoly in that province, I have the honour to transmit copies of notes which I have exchanged with the Chinese Government on that subject.\n\nIn their note of the 23rd November the Foreign Board state that they have directed the Viceroy at Foochow to order the release of Messrs. Butterfield and Swire's agent and to conclude some satisfactory arrangement with regard to the purchase of camphor by British merchants.\n\nMr. Hausser has so far not reported to me that these instructions have been given effect to, and on receipt of your Lordship's telegram No. 203 this morning I have addressed a telegram to him inquiring as to the present state of the case.\n\nI have, &c.\n\n[1827 hh-1]\n\n(Signed) ERNEST SATOW.\n\n132", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 394803, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904", "page_number": 140, "title": "CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904", "content_text": "This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.]\n\nCHINA TRADE.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL,\n\nNo. 1.\n\n[January 5.]\n\n138\n\nSECTION 1.\n\n(No. 5.) Sir,\n\nThe Marquess of Lansdowne to Sir E. Monson.\n\nForeign Office, January 5, 1904. YOUR Excellency is aware that by Article 11 (6) of the Final Protocol, signed at Peking on the 7th September, 1901, between the foreign Powers and China, a Conservancy Board, charged with the management and control of the works for the improvement of the Wangpoo, was created.\n\nAnnex No. 17 of the Protocol, a copy of which is inclosed,* lays down rules for the constitution of such a Board on which there will, in addition to the foreign Representatives, be three members representing Chinese interests, viz.:--\n\n1. The Taotui.\n\n2. The Commissioner of Customs.\n\n3. A Chinese Delegate to be appointed in virtue of § 4 (h) of Annex No. 17 to the Protocol.\n\nEver since the signature of the Final Protocol, however, the nomination of this latter official has been delayed by the Viceroy on various pretexts.\n\nSo long ago as the 9th January last the Shanghae General Chamber of Commerce pointed out to the Senior Minister at Peking that foreign shipping was seriously affected owing to the difficulties and delays in discharging cargo outside Woosung due to the state of the outer bar, while the additional expense thereby entailed to ship-owners was a great burden.\n\nThe Diplomatic Body thereupon addressed a note to Prince Ching bringing this representation to his notice, and requesting that the Nanking Viceroy might be instructed to appoint the official to represent China on the Board without delay.\n\nOn the 20th March, 1903, a telegram was received from His Majesty's Chargé d'Affaires at Peking, in which he reported that some time before a promise had been given to the United States' Minister at that capital by the Chinese Government that the Chinese Delegate would be appointed immediately upon the arrival of the new Viceroy at Nanking.\n\nMr. Townley stated that as the latter should have reached his post by then, the United States' Minister was addressing a note to the Board of Foreign Affairs; Mr. Townley was authorized to take similar action.\n\nAs, however, no progress was made in the matter, His Majesty's Minister was, on the 1st ultimo, instructed to make renewed representations to the Chinese Government, and it was suggested to him that they might be informed that, unless their Delegate were nominated without delay, the Board would be constituted and enter upon its duties without their participation.\n\nA telegram has now been received from Sir E. Satow, of which I inclose a copy for your Excellency's information, stating that, in conjunction with the German and United States' Ministers, he has addressed a Circular to the Diplomatic Body proposing that course.\n\nThe Italian and Netherlands Ministers have concurred, while no opinion has been expressed by the Spanish, Belgian, or Russian Representatives.\n\nSir Ernest reports that the French Minister has requested instructions, and he has since telegraphed that, as these instructions have only been asked for by post, much time must elapse before they can be received.\n\nI request your Excellency to inform the French Minister for Foreign Affairs that His Majesty's Government are of opinion that the Chinese Government should\n\n* Final Protocol (Treaty Series No. 17, 1902).\n\n↑ Sir E. Satow, No. 272, Telegraphic, December 20, 1903.\n\n[1827 e-1]", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 394971, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904", "page_number": 308, "title": "CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904", "content_text": "[This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.]\n\nC. O.\n\n# CHINA TRADE\n\n## CONFIDENTIAL\n\nNo. 1.\n\n22338\n\n305\n\n[June 3.]\n\n## RECEIVED 23 JUN 1904\n\nSir,\n\nForeign Office to China Association.\n\nForeign Office, June 3, 1904.\n\nI LAID before the Marquess of Lansdowne your letter of the 18th ultimo, inclosing a copy of a telegram from the Shanghae Branch of the China Association, in which they state their views with regard to the scheme proposed by the Viceroy at Nanking for the solution of the question of the Whangpoo Conservancy.\n\nYou state that your Committee concur with the Shanghae Branch in their desire to press upon His Majesty's Government the advisability of adopting this proposal.\n\nI am directed by Lord Lansdowne to inform you that the scheme embodied in Annex 17 of the Final Protocol can only be abandoned in favour of another scheme with the consent of all the Signatories of that instrument; that the Viceroy's scheme has been communicated to the Diplomatic Body at Peking, and on hearing the result of the Minister's conference on the subject, His Majesty's Government will, in considering it, bear in mind the opinion expressed by the China Association.\n\nI am, &c. (Signed) F. A. CAMPBELL.\n\n[2032 c-1]", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 394980, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904", "page_number": 317, "title": "CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904", "content_text": "This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government\n\nAFFAIRS OF CHINA.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL.\n\n314\n\n22910\n\n[Jus\n\nFREE 28 JUN 04,\n\nSECTION 5.\n\nNo. 1.\n\nSir E. Satow to the Marquess of Lansdowne.-(Received June 6.)\n\n(No. 132. Very Confidential.) My Lord,\n\nPeking, April 11, 1904. IN continuation of my immediately preceding despatch, I beg to report that I pointed out to Mr. Stewart that the question of opening Waichow was linked together with that of the Kowloon-Canton Railway in the letter of the 12th December last from the Hong Kong branch of the China Association to the parent body in London. I observed that the question of the immediate construction of the railway took up three-quarters of that letter, and it was described as a larger and more important question than that of the opening of Waichow. I added that I entirely agreed with the observations of the Committee on this matter and with the remarks made by Sir Henry Blake in his farewell speech of the 20th November last.\n\nYour Lordship will notice that the Hong Kong Committee propose a route for the Kowloon-Canton Railway, which would cross the East River at Sheklung, whence it would be easy to run a branch up to Waichow, and, in the opinion of Mr. Stewart, this would be of equal utility, as far as trade is concerned, with the opening of that place as a Treaty port.\n\nIn connection with this subject he gave me an extract from the Minutes of a meeting of the General Committee of the China Association held in London on the 22nd January with Mr. Keswick, M.P., in the chair, of which a copy is inclosed. To some of the statements contained in this document I have the honour to direct your Lordship's attention.\n\nAt the meeting in question the letter of the Hong Kong branch, previously referred to, was read, requesting the Committee to urge upon your Lordship's Office the desirability of the immediate opening of Waichow, and complaining of the delay in the construction of the Kowloon-Canton Railway.\n\nThe Chairman stated that “(1) it had been necessary to wait until the Shanghae-Nanking Railway Agreement had been signed before taking steps to formulate the final contract for the Kowloon-Canton line, and it should be borne in mind that (2) delay was also in great measure due to the state of affairs in China consequent upon the Boxer troubles; and (3) that negotiations were suspended at the request of the Chinese authorities.\"\n\nAs to (1), it may be observed that as the final Agreement for the Canton-Kowloon Railway was to be subject to the provisions of the final Agreement for the Shanghae-Nanking Railway, and as the latter was signed on the 9th July, 1903, the negotiations for its conclusion might, as far as this provision is concerned, have been proceeded with last summer. But there is no reason to suppose that any steps have as yet been taken to that end.\n\n2. As regards the delay having been in great measure due to the state of affairs in China consequent upon the Boxer trouble, the fact is that the state of the country became normal when the Protocol of the 7th September, 1901, was signed, and that the British and Chinese Corporation took no measures, except of the perfunctory character commented on in my despatch No. 79 of the 26th March, 1902, for negotiating the Shanghae-Nanking Railway Agreement until they dispatched Mr. Brenan to China in the autumn of 1902.\n\n3. I am ignorant of the facts upon which the statement is founded that the negotiations were suspended at the request of the Chinese authorities. It would be interesting to know what Chinese authorities are meant, the date of their request, and the name of the person to whom it was addressed.\n\nMr. Keswick went on to state that \"the terms and conditions of the preliminary Concessions were all subject to revision and final settlement when complete surveys were made and proper estimates formed. Such a survey was made after the preliminary Concession was signed.\"\n\nIt would be useful if Mr. Keswick would communicate to the Foreign Office a copy of the Report of the engineer or engineers who made a \"complete survey\" for the Canton-Kowloon Railway. According to the information that has reached me, the only sort of survey made was a hasty inspection by a civil engineer, accompanied...\n\n[2023 ƒ-5]", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 395000, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904", "page_number": 337, "title": "CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904", "content_text": "The Basement is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government. 10.\n\n23446\n\nCHINA TRADE.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL.\n\nNo. 1.\n\n[June 10\n\n334\n\nBed 2 JUL 04/\n\nSECTION\n\nMemorandum communicated to M. Cambon, June 15, 1904.\n\nBY Article 11 (b) of the Final Protocol, signed at Peking on the 7th September, 1901, between the foreign Powers and China, a Conservancy Board, charged with the management and control of the works for the improvement of the Whang-po, was created.\n\nAnnex No. 17 of the Protocol which contained the stipulations concerning the composition of the Board, provided for three Chinese members:\n\n1. The Taotai,\n\n2. The Commissioner of Customs,\n\n3. A Chinese Delegate to be appointed in virtue of § 4 (h) of Annex No. 17.\n\nThe Viceroy has delayed the appointment of the last-named official on various pretexts during a period which has now extended over a year and nine months.\n\nOn the 9th January, 1903, the Shanghae General Chamber of Commerce pointed out to the Senior Minister at Peking that foreign shipping was seriously affected owing to the difficulties and delays in discharging cargo outside Woosung due to the state of the outer bar, while the additional expense thereby entailed to shipowners was a great burden.\n\nThe Diplomatic Body thereupon addressed a note to Prince Ch'ing, bringing these representations to his notice, and requesting that the Viceroy of Nanking might be instructed to appoint the Chinese Delegate without delay.\n\nAs no progress was made in the matter the British, German, and United States' Ministers in December last addressed a Circular to the Diplomatic Body proposing that renewed representations should be made to the Chinese Government, and that they should be informed that unless the Chinese Delegate were nominated without delay the Board would be constituted and enter upon its duties without their participation.\n\nThe French Minister at Peking requested the instructions of his Government with regard to this proposal, but as he only asked for them by post it was evident that much time must elapse before they could be received.\n\nHis Majesty's Ambassador at Paris was therefore instructed to represent to the French Government that the Chinese Government should not be permitted to render nugatory by their obstruction one of the provisions of a Protocol which they had signed with Representatives of all the Powers, and to express the hope that the French Government would take the same view and telegraph to that effect to the French Minister at Peking.\n\nSir E. Monson addressed a communication to the French Government on the subject on the 12th January, and on the 16th February he received a note to the effect that the French Minister at Peking had promised to forward further particulars, and that it was hoped before long to be able to furnish the reply of the French Government and thus expedite the settlement of the question.\n\nAt the end of April Sir E. Monson, in reply to an inquiry, was informed that he might expect an early answer. The answer has, however, not yet been received.\n\nHis Majesty's Minister recently reported that the Viceroy at Nanking had proposed a scheme, to take the place of the scheme embodied in Annex 17 to the Final Protocol.\n\nWith the exception of the French Minister, who has stated that he must await instructions, all the Representatives at Peking of the Powers have accepted the view that the Viceroy has no locus standi for making proposals to set aside arrangements formally concluded between China and the Powers, and that the Consular Body at Shanghae, through whom the scheme had been forwarded to the Diplomatic Body, cannot discuss it unless specially authorized.\n\nThey consider that if the Chinese Government nominate their Delegate under Article 11 of the Protocol, that Government would then be in a position to put forward proposals, but must present them to the Diplomatic Representatives. If they do not avail themselves of their right to nominate a Delegate the Representatives consider that the Board can meet without the Chinese Delegate and proceed to work.\n\nIt is probable that if the French Minister would act with the other foreign Representatives in this matter China would be obliged to abandon her obstructive attitude and\n\nPage 1082", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 395045, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904", "page_number": 382, "title": "CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904", "content_text": "CONFIDENTIAL.\n\nNo. 1.\n\nSir,\n\nForeign Office to China League.\n\nForeign Office, July 6, 1904.\n\nI am directed by the Marquess of Lansdowne to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 27th ultimo, in which, by direction of the Committee of the China League, you urge the desirability of adopting the scheme put forward by Wei-kwang-tao, Viceroy of Nanking, for the solution of the question of the Whangpoo Conservancy.\n\nI am to inform you that Lord Lansdowne has not yet received the terms of the Viceroy's scheme in extenso, but that, when they have been received, his Lordship will, considering them, give due weight to the representations made by the China League.\n\nI am, however, to point out that the scheme embodied in Annex 17 of the Final Protocol can only be abandoned in favour of another scheme with the consent of all the signatories of that Instrument, and that the maritime customs revenue from which it is proposed, under the Viceroy's scheme, to provide the funds required for carrying out the works, are already fully pledged for other purposes.\n\nWith regard to the fears which you express as to the work which the proposed International Conservancy Board is likely to undertake, and as to possible friction between the Board and the Municipal Council at Shanghae, I am to remind you that the International Board on the Peiho has been doing excellent work, and that no difficulties have arisen.\n\nLord Lansdowne considers that there is no guarantee that, if the work is undertaken by the Chinese Government alone, it will ever be carried into effect. The discussion with regard to the improvement of the water-way began in 1865, and the Chinese Government and the Imperial Maritime Customs have never shown any inclination to undertake the necessary works.\n\nI have, &c.\n\n(Signed)\n\nF. A. CAMPBELL.\n\n[2056 ƒ-1]", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 395095, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904", "page_number": 432, "title": "CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904", "content_text": "This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.\n\nCHINA TRADE.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL.\n\nNo. 1.\n\nC. O.\n\n429\n\n29509 [July 29,]\n\nIRECT\n\nSECTION 22 AUG 041\n\nChang Ta-Jen to the Marquess of Lansdowne.--(Received July 29.)\n\nMy Lord Marquess,\n\nChinese Legation, July 27, 1904.\n\nI HAVE been directed by the Wai-wu Pu to invite your Lordship's attention to a matter connected with the taxation of opium, to which the Imperial Government attach much importance from a fiscal point of view, and which they think calls for the immediate attention of the two Governments.\n\nI shall not here revert to the unfortunate troubles to which the importation of the fatal drug gave rise in days past, but will merely mention that after many attempts to suppress its consumption by the people of China, and many futile protests against its introduction into the country, the Imperial Government, in 1858, as the lesser of two evils, felt themselves constrained to legalize its importation and sanction its being included in the Tariff, hoping by this means to terminate the evils of smuggling. Considering the nature of the traffic, the duty then imposed on the drug was exceedingly moderate, consisting of an import duty of 30 Haikwan taels per chest of 100 piculs, or 133 lbs. avoirdupois. But this payment covered the import duty only, the free and unrestricted taxation of the drug on its passing into Chinese hands being left entirely to the discretion of the provincial authorities.\n\nFreed from the risk of foreign complications, it was hoped that, once in the interior, the consumption of the drug might be held in check by increasing the war tax then leviable on it and all other goods under the designation of li-kin. But the operation of this expedient was soon found only to have been to remove the evils of smuggling from the seaboard to the interior. Daily, and often sanguinary, feuds took place between the contrabandists and the excise. Another expedient had to be sought, and happily was found for this, in the Additional Article of the Chefoo Convention, signed in London in 1885.\n\nBy this Article, which is still in force, the import duty and the li-kin were to be paid simultaneously at the Treaty port; and the latter, instead of being leviable as heretofore at the discretion of the provincial authorities, was limited to 80 taels, making with the original import duty of 30 taels, 110 taels per chest, an amount which, calculated at the exchange of the date when the new arrangement came in force, was equivalent to 27 per cent. on the then value of the opium, but which now, owing to the depreciation of silver and the greatly enhanced tael-value of the drug, amounts to no more than 13 per cent.\n\nIn 1885, when the Additional Article came in force, 400 taels was the price of a chest of opium and 5s. the value of a Haikwan tael, thus making the value of the drug to be £100 per chest, and the combined import and li-kin duties, calculated at the same rate, £27. 10s.\n\nIn 1904 opium sells for 800 taels per chest and the tael for 2s. 6d.; the sterling value of the opium thus remains at £100 per chest, whilst that of the combined import and li-kin duties amounts to only £13. 15s., or exactly one-half of what it was in 1885.\n\nHere it will be seen that, in spite of the depreciation of silver, the action of economic laws has enabled the price of the drug to be maintained at the same gold value. But in the case of the duties it has been far otherwise, for, regulated by an unyielding Convention, no change, no power of adaptation to circumstances, was possible in them without the common consent of the two High Contracting Parties; the consequence of this being that, whilst remaining nominally the same, they have shrunk—and shrunk—always to the betterment of the merchant and the detriment of the Government—until what was equal to £27. 10s. in 1885 is now worth only £13. 15s.\n\nA similar shrinkage concurrently took place in the gold value of the duties on all other goods, but this was rectified in principle by the Final Protocol of September 1901, and subsequently in practice by the Mackay Treaty of last year.\n\nThe effect of this and the latter rectification when it comes in force will, with the surtax, be that the gold value of the duties on ordinary merchandise will fall but little short of that now levied on opium.\n\n[2056 -1]", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 395096, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904", "page_number": 433, "title": "CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904", "content_text": "[This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.]\n\n29509\n\n430\n\nNow, having regard to the fact that opium belongs to the same category of goods as wines, spirits, and tobacco, articles which in all civilized countries are, for moral as well as fiscal reasons, made to bear a very substantial proportion of the national revenue, I would respectfully submit that this approximate equality in the taxation of two categories of goods so widely different constitutes a fiscal anomaly which calls for the serious consideration of the two Governments.\n\nTo restore the taxation of opium to the effective ad valorem percentage at which it stood in 1885, and give the Chinese Government their just due, would require the duties now paid on it to be raised to 220 Haikwan taels per chest; and with a view to this, I have been instructed by the Wai-wu Pu to invite your Lordship to an exchange of views on this most important subject.\n\n46\n\nSection 8 of the Additional Article provides for \"any modifications in its provisions which experience may show to be desirable\" being made, and surely the time for this has arrived, when the duty actually levied on the drug has ceased to have the effect of placing restrictions on its consumption—a principle specifically recognized in the preamble to the Agreement itself as being \"undesirable.\"\n\nI have, &c. (Signed) CHANG TA JÊN.\n\nCHINA TRADE.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL.\n\nNo. 1.\n\n[August 19]\n\n22 AUG 04 SECTION 1\n\nSir E. Satow to the Marquess of Lansdowne.—(Received August 1.)\n\n(No. 203.) My Lord,\n\nPeking, June 8, 1904.\n\nIn my despatch No. 191 of the 27th May I informed your Lordship that the proposals put forward by the Viceroy of Nanking for the transfer of the execution of the Whangpoo River improvement schemes from the International Board, instituted by the Final Protocol of the 7th September, 1901, to the Chinese Government, had been submitted to the Diplomatic Body and were being circulated among the Representatives for their observations.\n\nI have now the honour to transmit to your Lordship herewith a copy of the Doyen's circular, with the observations of the various Representatives attached.\n\nYour Lordship will observe that, with the exception of the French Minister, who states that he must ask for instructions, and the Spanish and Portuguese Representatives, who merely take note of the receipt of the document, all the other Representatives state their concurrence in the views expressed by the German Minister and myself, to the effect that, as the whole question of the constitution of the Conservancy Board was arranged by the Final Protocol, any alterations desired by the Chinese Government must be submitted to the Representatives of the Signatory Powers by the Wai Wu Pu.\n\nMy German colleague further draws attention to the fact that the Board is entitled to meet and transact business even should the Chinese Government still persist in their delay to nominate a Delegate, and your Lordship will observe that I have taken occasion to emphasize the views of His Majesty's Government on this point.\n\nI have, &c. (Signed) ERNEST SATOW.\n\nInclosure 1 in No. 1.\n\nBaron Czikann's Circular No. 100 respecting the Proposals of the Viceroy of Nanking.\n\nPékin, le 24 Mai, 1904.\n\nLE Doyen a l'honneur de mettre en circulation une lettre du Doyen du Corps Consulaire de Shanghai concernant une proposition du Gouverneur-Général de Nankin de changer l'Annexe 17 du Protocole Final relative aux travaux d'amélioration du Huang-Pou (Whangpou), et concernant les délibérations du Corps Consulaire de Shanghaï à propos de la Convention de la Commission du Whangpou à une séance.\n\n(Signé) M. CZIKANN.\n\nLa question de la correction du Whangpou a été réglée par l'Article 11 (b) et par l'Annexe 17 du Protocole Final du 7 Septembre, 1901, signé par les Représentants de la Chine et des Puissances étrangères à Pékin. Par conséquent, il n'est pas du ressort du Surintendant des ports méridionaux de faire de nouvelles propositions et d'en saisir le Corps Consulaire à Shanghai. La question à l'ordre du jour est non un changement des stipulations du Protocole Final agréées à l'unanimité par la Chine et les Puissances Signataires de ce Protocole, mais la constitution du Conseil Fluvial. Tous les membres de ce Conseil, excepté le Représentant à qui la Chine a droit par suite de l'Article 4 (h) de l'Annexe susmentionné, ayant été désignés depuis longtemps, cette constitution pourrait avoir lieu dès à présent. Si la Chine ne juge pas utile de désigner le Délégué à qui elle a droit par suite de son commerce maritime, n'empêche en aucune façon la réunion du Conseil, qui pourra délibérer lorsque quatre de ses membres au moins seront présents, et dont déjà deux Représentants du commerce sont arrivés à Shanghai.", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 395097, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904", "page_number": 434, "title": "CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904", "content_text": "2\n\nGouvernement Chinois, le Taotai et le Commissaire des Douanes à Shanghai, font partie par suite de leurs offices.\n\nIl me semble que le Doyen du Corps Diplomatique devrait répondre dans ce sens au Doyen du Corps Consulaire, en le chargeant en même temps de notifier au Taotai et aux autres membres du Conseil de procéder incessamment à la constitution du Conseil Fluvial.\n\nSi, après la constitution de ce Conseil, le Gouvernement Chinois juge à propos de soumettre aux Puissances intéressées des amendements changeant les stipulations du Protocole Final, rien ne s'oppose à ce que le Wai Wu-pou fasse des ouvertures dans ce sens aux Représentants des Puissances Signataires du Protocole Final, et que ceux-ci en saisissent leurs Gouvernements respectifs. Mais on ne doit pas perdre de vue que jusqu'à ce qu'un nouvel accord ait été conclu avec le consentement unanime de toutes les Puissances Signataires du Protocole Final, les stipulations de ce Protocole tiennent bon.\n\nMUMM.\n\n(Signé)\n\nJe partage entièrement l'avis de son Excellence le Ministre d'Allemagne au sujet de la communication faite par le Viceroi de Nankin aux membres du Corps Consulaire de Shanghai. Mon Gouvernement tient à ce que le Gouvernement Chinois exécute les stipulations du Protocole touchant l'amélioration du Huangpu, et m'a donné des instructions m'autorisant à appuyer toute proposition tendant à la réunion du Conseil, même dans le cas où le Gouvernement Chinois continuerait à ne pas nommer un Représentant pour ses intérêts maritimes. Il me paraît, du reste, peu désirable de prendre en considération des propositions présentées d'une manière tellement irrégulière.\n\nERNEST SATOW.\n\nLe 27 Mai, 1904.\n\n(Signé)\n\nI wholly agree with opinions expressed by their Excellencies Baron von Mumm and Sir Ernest Satow.\n\nE. H. CONGER.\n\n(Signed)\n\nJe partage l'avis de son Excellence le Ministre d'Allemagne.\n\n(Signé)\n\nP. LESSAR\n\nIdem.\n\n(Signé)\n\nM. CZIKANN.\n\nGAIFFIER.\n\nJ. UCHIDA.\n\nVAN CITTERS.\n\nGALLINA.\n\nVu:\n\n(Signé)\n\nCARCER.\n\nALMEIDA.\n\nExcellency,\n\n3\n\nInclosure 2 in No. 1.\n\nMr. J. Goodnow to Baron Czikann.\n\nConsular Service, U.S.A., Shanghae, May 11, 1904.\n\nI AM directed by my colleagues to inform you that his Excellency Wei, Viceroy at Nanking, has requested us to lay before you his proposals to substitute the hereto attached five rules for Annex 17 to the Final Protocol.\n\nThe following motion is now before the Consular Body :-\n\n\"The Consular Body of Shanghae decides in accordance with (1), paragraph b, Article 2, of the Peace Protocol, signed in Peking on the 7th September, 1901, and (2), Annex 17 of the same Protocol, to give notice to his Excellency the Viceroy at Nanking that the first meeting of the Huang-pu River Conservancy Board will take place on next.\"\n\nWe respectfully ask instructions of the Diplomatic Body on the above.\n\nI have, &c. (Signed) JOHN GOODNOW, Consul-General, U.S.A., and Senior Consul,\n\nInclosure 3 in No. 1.\n\nProjet de Règlement en Cinq Articles relativement aux Travaux d'Amélioration du Huang-Pou, soumis à l'Approbation du Corps Consulaire pour le prompt Commencement de ces Travaux.\n\nLES bateaux des Grandes Puissances ont déjà des droits à payer; la Chine sera confuse de réclamer encore des contributions pour les dépenses des travaux du Huang-Pou aux étrangers qui viennent faire le commerce chez elle. Aussi le Gouvernement Chinois prélèvera sur les recettes de la Douane une somme de 230,000 taels pour son compte et prendra aussi à sa charge les 230,000 taels que les commerçants étrangers avaient consenti à fournir; cela fera en tout une somme de 460,000 Haikwan taels, qui sera versée annuellement jusqu'à l'achèvement des travaux.\n\n2. Les travaux du Huang-Pou seront sous la direction du Taotai de Shanghaï et de la Douane; ce sera également la Douane qui aura la haute main sur la police et les phares.\n\n3. Trois mois après l'acceptation de ce projet de Règlement, le Gouvernement Chinois invitera le concert des Puissances à nommer un ou deux ingénieurs spécialistes pour les travaux des fleuves, qui dirigeront cette entreprise.\n\n4. Tous les trois mois il sera dressé un état des dépenses faites pour les travaux, qui sera soumis au Corps Consulaire.\n\n5. Le Gouvernement Chinois s'engage à ne réclamer pour les travaux du Huang-Pou aucun impôt, soit à Shanghai soit aux endroits environnants, sur les bateaux, sur les marchandises ou sur les propriétés.\n\nJe dois demander des instructions de mon Gouvernement.\n\n(Signé)\n\nG. DUBAIL\n\n431", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 395099, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904", "page_number": 436, "title": "CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904", "content_text": "Your Excellency,\n\nInclosure in No. 1.\n\nPrince Ch'ing to Sir E. Satow.\n\nPeking, June 9, 1904\n\nIN Article 11 of the Final Protocol of 1901 it is laid down that a Conservancy Board charged with the management and control of the works for straightening the Whangpoo and the improvement of the course of that river is thereby created, that this Board shall consist of members representing the interests of the Chinese Government and those of foreigners in the shipping trade of Shanghae, and that the expenses incurred for the works and the general management of the undertakings are estimated at the annual sum of 460,000 Haikwan taels for the first twenty years, which sum is to be supplied in equal portions by the Chinese Government and the foreign interest concerned.\n\nThe object of this conservancy scheme is merely to improve the course of the Whangpoo for the benefit of commerce. Now the Chinese Government is willing to undertake the work of conserving the stream itself and to provide the whole of the necessary funds without requiring contributions from merchants of all nationalities. The proposed method of procedure is stated in the following five clauses:\n\n1. The Chinese Government will bear the entire cost itself. A sum of 460,000 taels will be set aside yearly from the revenues of the Imperial Maritime Customs to meet the expense of dredging the Whangpoo, payment to cease on completion of the work. The taxes, which it was arranged to collect under clause 30 of Annex No. 17, will be abolished, and are not to be levied under pretext of it.\n\n2. The works in connection with the Whangpoo will be under the management of the Shanghae Taotai and the Maritime Customs. The control of the river police, sanitary, and other matters will remain in the same hands as under the old Regulations.\n\n3. Three months after the present scheme has been approved by the Diplomatic Body in Peking, the Chinese Government will select and appoint one or two engineers who are well versed in river conservancy to take the work in hand; but for all contracts tenders will be invited, and they will be considered and choice made from them in public.\n\n4. Every quarter an account of the moneys issued for and expended on the works will be made up and submitted to the Shanghae Consular Body for their inspection in general meeting.\n\n5. The Chinese Government, having undertaken to bear the entire cost of dredging the Whangpoo, Annex No. 17 cannot be quoted as a justification for collecting taxes for the purpose from owners of property on the banks of the river, or from the shipping, or on merchandise.\n\nThe five clauses quoted above are advantageous both to China and other nations. I have the honour, therefore, to request that your Excellency will be so good as to communicate the proposals to your Government for its consideration and to favour me with a reply.\n\n[This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.]\n\nCHINA TRADE.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL.\n\nC.C.\n\n29509 [August 1.] 433\n\nTRECE SECTION 3. REG 22 AUG 04.\n\nNo. 1.\n\nSir E. Satow to the Marquess of Lansdowne.~(Received August 1.)\n\n(No. 212.) My Lord,\n\nPeking, June 14, 1904.\n\nI HAVE received your Lordship's despatch No. 127 of the 30th April, in which you request me to report on the present state of the case for the protection of patents in China, and more especially as to whether any steps have been taken to carry into effect Article X of the new American Commercial Treaty.\n\nIn my despatch No. 205 of the 9th instant I have already touched on this question in connection with the particular case which formed the subject of the inquiry contained in your Lordship's despatch No. 95 of the 15th April.\n\nIn a despatch from Shanghae, a copy of which was transmitted to your Lordship in my despatch above referred to, His Majesty's Consul-General states that no arrangements for the registration of patents have, so far, been made at that place, and no steps have been taken to carry into effect the provisions of the United States' Commercial Treaty relating to the protection of patents.\n\nAs the result of inquiries made at the United States' Legation here, however, I am informed that they are urging the Chinese Government to fulfil the obligations imposed upon them by the Treaty.\n\nThe Chinese Government have already made a start with Provisional Trade-mark Regulations, and it is hoped that they will soon set to work on the establishment of a Patent Office.\n\nIt must be remembered that legislation on such subjects in China is an absolutely new development, and it would not be wise for British patentees to expect that it should come to fruition here any more rapidly than it would in other countries where similar conditions prevail, and where such legislation would be equally novel. The remarks contained in my despatch No. 392 of the 18th November, 1903, relative to International Agreements for the protection of trade-marks apply with equal force to the protection of patents.\n\n[2103 a-3]\n\nI have, &c.\n\n(Signed)\n\nERNEST SATOW.", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 395134, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904", "page_number": 471, "title": "CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904", "content_text": "(This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government)\n\n468\n\nCHINA TRADE,\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\n[August 15.]\n\nSECTION 2.\n\nIt is unlikely, in my opinion, that His Majesty's Government will assent to a portion of the Customs revenue being diverted to any other purpose than those stipulated in Article 6 of the Protocol. Moreover, the present proposals of the Chinese Government do not, in my view, offer the same guarantees for the proper execution of the necessary works as those which the Chinese Government accepted in 1901.\n\nUnder these circumstances, while transmitting to my Government a copy of your Highness' note under reply, I am unable to recommend to them the adoption of the proposals which it contains.\n\nI avail, &c. (Signed) E. SATOW.\n\nNo. 1.\n\nSir E. Satow to the Marquess of Lansdowne,—(Received August 15.)\n\n(No. 222.)\n\nPeking, June 19, 1904.\n\nMy Lord,\n\nI HAVE the honour to transmit to your Lordship herewith a copy of an Intelligence Report for the period from the 1st January to the 24th May, which I have received from the British Acting Consul at Chungking,\n\nI have, &c. (Signed) ERNEST SATOW.\n\nYour Imperial Highness,\n\nInclosure 2 in No. 1.\n\nMr. Conger to Prince Ching,\n\nPeking, June 21, 1904.\n\nI HAVE the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your Imperial Highness' note of the 9th instant, inclosing a proposition for the Conservancy of the Whangpu River which the Chinese Government desires to substitute for the arrangement agreed to by China and the Powers in the Final Protocol of September 1901, and contained in Annex 17 thereto.\n\nFor three years the Chinese Government has been repeatedly urged by the Representatives of the Signatory Powers to appoint the Chinese member which it has the privilege of appointing under Article 4 (h) of Annex 17, in order that the work arranged for by the Protocol might be begun, and several times I have been personally assured by your Highness and other members of the Wai Wu Pu that the said appointment would be speedily made,\n\nOf course, your Imperial Highness is well aware that a change in the Protocol or the adoption of any new plan must be unanimously accepted by all the Signatory Powers. In their present form I fear the proposals of the Chinese Government will not meet with unanimous approval, and the presentation of them must necessarily cause great delay. The Chinese Government can hardly expect that the Powers will consent to the appropriation for this purpose of any portion of the Customs revenue, which is already wholly pledged to the payment of foreign loans and indemnities, or agree to its diversion to any other purpose than that stipulated in Article 6 of the Protocol.\n\nBesides, the proposals now made, in my judgment, do not offer the same guarantees for the faithful execution of the necessary works as those which were agreed to by China and the Powers in 1901.\n\nPropositions similar to these were some time since made to me verbally by one of the Ministers of your Board, and I replied that until the Chinese Government evidenced its intention to carry out the provisions of Article 4 (h) of Annex 17, by appointing its member of the Conservancy Board, I could not entertain any proposition whatever for a change in the plan already agreed upon.\n\nBut, since the proposals have come to me in a formal manner, I will, as your Imperial Highness requests, transmit them at once to my Government. Under present circumstances, however, I am unable to recommend their adoption.\n\nI avail, &c.\n\nInclosure in No. 1.\n\nExtract from Chungking Intelligence Report, January 1 to date.\n\nLi-kin.\n\nTHE Viceroy, through his henchman, the Chief of the Head Li-kin Office at Chengtu, Liu Tsung Tai, has during the last two or three months made it perfectly clear that he is determined to obtain every quota of li-kin available; nor are the sums collected to find their way in such large proportions as formerly into the pockets of the subordinate officials collecting them. Almost the first official to suffer locally was his Excellency the Taotai, who was charged with want of energy in prosecuting the li-kin collection, and was eventually transferred temporarily to the Chufan Nan circuit. (See \"Official Changes.”) Subsequently, the four officials in charge of the export li-kin (Hsin Li-chin) offices situated-- (1) in the city; (2) at Hsiang K'uo Ssu, on the Little River; (3) at Tang Chia T'o, 30 li below Chungking; and (4) at Hui Lung Ssu, the same distance above--were, one and all, discharged and replaced by officers specially sent from Chengtu, the Taotai here having expressed himself unable to find on the spot men of sufficient ability to satisfy the Viceroy's requirements.\n\nTwo Proclamations bearing on this subject have appeared: the first, which was posted on the 28th March, had for its object the diversion of the export duty on opium emanating from Fuchou from the hands of the foreign Customs at Chungking into those of the li-kin authorities. Fuchou is the mart for the drug produced in the rich districts of Liangshan and Fengtu, and is distant on the up-river trip from seven to ten days from Chungking. It has in the past been the practice of the li-kin officials to issue to purchasers of opium in the interior, who had duly notified their intention to bring the commodity to Chungking for export through the Imperial Maritime Customs, passes exempting them from any payment to the li-kin offices other than the provincial li-kin of 5.28 taels. The Proclamation in question, while expressing surprise that merchants, unless moved by some desire to evade li-kin, should subject the drug to the long up-river journey from Fuchou to Chungking, to there ship it through the foreign Customs, took especial care to lay stress on the fact that, in future, the passes hitherto issued by the li-kin officials would cease. Further, that the buyer in the interior, unless furnished with a transit pass (\"Tzu K'ou Ping Chu\") granted by the Imperial Maritime Customs, would be compelled to pay his export duty and li-kin to the li-kin authorities, i.e.—\"robbing Peter\" the Imperial Government, \"to pay Paul\"--the provincial. The scheme, too, if carried into effect, would, apart from its adverse influence on the revenue of the foreign Customs, have been a bitter blow to the principal shipping firms engaged in the carrying trade by chartered junk, namely, Messrs. Butterfield and Swire, Messrs. Jardine, Matheson and Co., and the China Merchants' Steam Navigation Company. The last would have suffered most, and lost little time in petitioning the Commissioner of Customs to exert himself to assist them. At the same time Messrs. Jardine, Matheson, and Co.'s agent appealed to me to see to it that no privilege should be given to the China Merchants which did not also apply to them--a somewhat unnecessary request. The Commissioner represented the matter.\n\nPage 2103\n\n \n[2103 p-2]", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 395171, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904", "page_number": 508, "title": "CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904", "content_text": "This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.]\n\n505\n\nCHINA TRADE.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL.\n\nNo. 1.\n\n33181\n\n[23 SEP 04]\n\n# SECTION\n\nSir,\n\nThe Marquess of Lansdowne to Baron d'Asbeck.\n\nForeign Office, September 3, 1904.\n\nI HAVE the honour to acknowledge the receipt of Baron Gericke's note of the 6th ultimo, inquiring what decision His Majesty's Government have come to in view of the action of the Chinese Government with regard to the Whangpoo Conservancy Board.\n\nIn reply, I have the honour to inform you that, from telegrams which have been received from His Majesty's Minister at Peking, it appears that the United States' Government are willing to accept the alternative scheme proposed by the Viceroy at Nanking, provided that sufficient guarantees are given for the immediate and satisfactory completion of the works. An intimation to that effect was made by the United States' Minister to the Chinese Government, and the latter, in reply, offered to set aside 600,000 taels annually out of the opium revenue of the Szechuan and Kiang Su provinces for the purpose. The United States' Minister then stated that the Chinese Government must forthwith submit to the foreign Representatives a detailed plan for the speedy execution and future maintenance of the necessary works, the cost being provided for by bonds secured on the revenue offered. If that were at once done, the United States' Government would consent to waive temporarily their right to insist on the terms agreed to in Article VI of the Final Protocol regarding the question, reserving their right to claim compliance with the terms of the original Agreement in case the work were not promptly and satisfactorily carried out.\n\nAfter careful consideration His Majesty's Government have expressed concurrence in the course suggested by the United States.\n\nI have, &c.\n\n[2156 c-1]\n\n(Signed)\n\nLANSDOWNE.", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 395372, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904", "page_number": 709, "title": "CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904", "content_text": "705\n\n2\n\nIt remains to be seen whether the Chinese Government will accept this counter-proposal; but a refusal of conditions which constitute the minimum of what the Powers are justly entitled to claim in return for the surrender of their rights under the Protocol of 1901, would doubtless be regarded as a proof that their offer to undertake the conservancy work at their own cost, provided the control were left in their hands, was not made in good faith.\n\nAs I have been informed by his Excellency Natung, to whom I gave an outline of my note a few days ago, that it would be referred to the Shanghae Taotai for his opinion, I am sending a copy of this despatch and the enclosed note to Sir Pelham Warren for his confidential information.\n\nThe new Agreement would, of course, require to be signed by the Representatives of the Powers who were parties to the original Protocol, and by no others.\n\nI have, &c.\n\n(Signed)\n\nInclosure 1 in No. 1.\n\nMr. Conger to Prince Ch'ing.\n\nERNEST SATOW,\n\nLegation of the United States of America, Peking, August 11, 1904.\n\nYour Imperial Highness,\n\nIN reply to your Highness' note of the 5th instant stating that the Chinese Government would give as a guarantee for the faithful carrying out of the Whangpoo Conservancy scheme certain opium revenues, I have the honour to say that I at once telegraphed the substance of your Highness' note to my Government, and have received a reply to the effect that, while it is not willing to deny the sufficiency of the revenue proposed as a guarantee, yet it thinks that, in view of the enormity of the enterprise, the great cost of organizing the work, and of the necessary plant and long continuance of the work, that some kind of satisfactory bond measure should be arranged.\n\nAt any rate, before my Government can consider any abrogation of the provisions of the Final Protocol, a full programme of the plans for work and maintenance must be submitted. If, then, China is really desirous of promptly taking up this work and hastening it to a conclusion, I suggest that she forthwith present to the Representatives of the Powers a full and detailed plan, which secured by the revenues mentioned and supported by some kind of bond measure, will insure the speedy and satisfactory carrying out of the important work and its permanent maintenance in good condition.\n\nIf this should be done at once, my Government will not oppose it, and I shall be glad personally to do whatever I properly may for its furtherance.\n\nIt should be clearly understood, however, that whereas the United States is willing to waive temporarily its right to insist on China complying with the terms agreed to by her in Article VI of the Final Protocol concerning the improvement of the course of the Whangpoo River, it will do so only so long as the Chinese Government promptly and satisfactorily discharges the new obligations which it now wishes to assume. Should it become evident at a later date that the conservancy work is not being done promptly, or that a disposition is evidenced not to carry out the work to the satisfaction of all interests concerned, the United States will insist upon full and strict compliance with the terms of the original Agreement.\n\nI avail, &c.\n\n(Signed)\n\nE. H. CONGER.\n\nNote. The revenues are those arising from opium in Szechuan and Kiangsu, estimated to amount to 600,000 taels.\n\nInclosure 2 in No. 1.\n\nSir E. Satow to Prince Ch'ing.\n\nYour Highness,\n\nPeking, September 16, 1904.\n\nIN my note of the 22nd June last relative to the new proposals of the Chinese Government for carrying out the Whangpoo River Conservancy works, I informed your Highness that I would transmit to my Government a copy of your Highness' note of the 9th June, and I have now been authorized to reply to those proposals as follows:--\n\n3\n\nAs I had the honour to point out in my previous reply, the whole of the Customs revenue is pledged for the payment of foreign loans and for the indemnity due to the Powers for the next thirty or forty years, and His Majesty's Government are unable to assent to any portion of the Customs revenue being diverted to any other purpose than those stipulated in Article VI of the Protocol of 1901, but I hope that your Highness will be able to inform me that other revenues are available for the works which the Chinese Government have declared their willingness to undertake.\n\nYour Highness will no doubt understand that His Majesty's Government can only entertain the present proposals, which it is desired to substitute for the formal stipulation contained in Article XI (6) and Annex 17 of the Protocol, if they are recorded in a documentary Agreement of equal diplomatic force. Such an Agreement, I conceive, would begin by stating the desire of the Chinese Government to substitute for the Conservancy Board created by those stipulations, wherein also the powers, composition, duty, and revenues of the Board were defined, other stipulations, by which they would undertake to carry out all the necessary works and bear the entire cost, and the acceptance by the representatives of that proposal in principle on certain conditions.\n\nThe conditions on which my Government would authorize me to agree with the Chinese Government are the following: They include those contained in your Highness' note of the 9th June last, with others which seem necessary in order to secure the punctual execution and efficient maintenance of the works:\n\n1. The works in connection with the improvement and maintenance of the water approaches to Shanghai, consisting of the Whangpoo River and the inner and outer bars at Woosung, will be placed under the management of the Shanghai Taotai and the Commissioner of Customs at that port, the control of the river police and sanitary and other matters remaining in the same hands as before the signature of the Protocol of the 7th September, 1901.\n\n2. Within three months from the signature of the Agreement, the Chinese Government will select an engineer well versed in river conservancy, and will submit his name for the consideration of the Representatives of the Signatory Powers, and on his approval by a majority of them will appoint him to frame a scheme and carry out the necessary works.\n\nIn case of the post becoming vacant at any time during the execution of the works, his successor will be selected, approved, and appointed in the same manner.\n\n3. For all contracts for carrying out the works and providing the necessary materials and machinery, public tenders will be invited, and the most advantageous will be accepted.\n\n4. Every quarter, an account of the moneys expended on the works will be made up and submitted to the Consuls of the Signatory Powers for their inspection.\n\n5. The authorization of the Taotai and the Commissioner of Customs shall be necessary before any new bunds are built, jetties constructed, or pontoons or hulks are placed in the river.\n\n6. The Taotai and the Commissioner of Customs to be empowered to expropriate existing moorings, and to establish a system of public moorings in the river.\n\n7. No dredging to be carried out in the river except with the authorization and under the control of the Taotai and the Commissioner of Customs.\n\n8. The Taotai and the Commissioner of Customs to be empowered to acquire by purchase the lands necessary for carrying out the works of conservancy and improvement of the water approaches to Shanghai as defined in paragraph 1, and to dispose of them. If, for this purpose, it shall be deemed necessary to expropriate land outside the foreign Settlements, the rules laid down in Article 6 (a) of \"The Land Regulations for the Foreign Settlements at Shanghai north of the Yangking-pang\" to be followed. The price to be fixed by a Committee, consisting of (1) a person chosen by the Consular authority of the Power to whose jurisdiction the owner is subject; (2) one chosen by the Taotai and the Commissioner of Customs; (3) one chosen by the Senior Consul.\n\n9. Riparian owners to have the refusal of all land made in front of their properties by the reclamation carried out for the improvement of the water approaches in question. The purchase price of these lands to be fixed after consideration of all the circumstances by a Committee composed in the same manner as provided in paragraph 8.\n\n10. The Chinese Government to bear the whole cost of the necessary works.\n\n11. The Chinese Government to deliver within three months from the date of the Agreement to the Doyen of the Diplomatic Body twenty bonds for 460,000 Haikwan taels secured upon the revenues assigned as security for the expenditure, maturing at the end of each successive year during twenty years from the date of signature of the Agreement. At the end of each year, if the Consular Representatives of the Signatory Powers report to the Senior Diplomatic Representative of such Powers that the works are being carried...", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 395385, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904", "page_number": 722, "title": "CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904", "content_text": "c.o 718 40931\n\nDECO\n\n(No. 306.) My Lord,\n\nEnclosure in No.\n\nFrom Sir E. Satow to the Marquess of Lansdowne.- (Received December 6.\n\nPeking, October 22, 1902.\n\nI HAVE the honour to inclose copy of the Treaty signed by the Portuguese and Chinese Plenipotentiaries on the 15th instant, with which my colleague, Senhor Azevedo da Castello Branco, has been so good as to furnish me. This copy does not contain the Articles relating to the number of copies, the ratification and publication which were appended to the original.\n\nArticle I simply confirms the Treaty of 1887. By Article II, Portugal accepts the increase of the Import Tariff stipulated for by Article 6 of the Final Protocol of the 7th September, 1901, and annuls the Tariff Article of the Treaty of 1887.\n\nArticles III to VI provide for the establishment at Macao of a branch of the Chinese Imperial Maritime Customs, which will treat vessels sailing from the Colony as if this branch was a Treaty port Custom-house, and for the establishment of appropriate Customs Regulations.\n\nSenhor Azevedo was so obliging as to inform me that he had signed at the same time an exchange of notes by which China undertakes to accord to Portugal a Concession for a railway between Macao and Canton (Samshui), the details of which are to be settled hereafter, and names Sir Robert Hart as the Chinese Plenipotentiary for drawing up the Agreement relative to the Customs Regulations of Macao, provided for in Article VI of the Treaty.\n\nMy Portuguese colleague expects that after the ratification of this Treaty the Portuguese Government will appoint a Plenipotentiary, possibly himself, to negotiate a new Commercial Treaty with China, which, it is understood, the Chinese Government desire to negotiate on the lines of Sir James Mackay's Treaty.\n\nIn saying good-bye to me before he quitted Peking on leave of absence, Senhor Azevedo expressed his warm thanks for the friendly assistance I had afforded to him during the progress of his negotiations with the Chinese Government, which have resulted in the present Treaty.\n\n(Signed)\n\nI have, &c.\n\nERNEST SATOW.\n\n3", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 395426, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904", "page_number": 763, "title": "CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904", "content_text": "This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.\n\nC.O.\n\n# CHINA TRADE.\n\n**CONFIDENTIAL.**\n\nNo. 1.\n\n43490 December\n\n759\n\nSHOPDEC 04\n\nMr. Choate to the Marquess of Lansdowne.-(Received December 3.)\n\nAmerican Embassy, London, December 2, 1904.\n\nMy Lord,\n\nI HAVE the honour to call the attention of your Lordship to the various projects for the improvement of the navigation of the Whangpoo River, in which my Government has taken a profound interest, the question being, in its opinion, of ever-increasing importance for the foreign commerce of Shanghae and of China generally.\n\nSince the signing of the Final Protocol of Peking of the 7th September, 1901, wherein provision was made for this work, which is becoming year by year more urgent, my Government has, on numerous occasions, made earnest representations to that of China with a view to the appointment of representatives on the Conservancy Board as provided for by Annex 17 of the Final Protocol in order that the organization might thus be completed and enabled to begin the work assigned to it by the Agreement of China and the Powers. But our efforts have, unfortunately, not overcome the disinclination of the Chinese Government to make the necessary appointments, nor has my Government even been able to secure the unanimous and active support of all the Diplomatic Representatives at Peking in its efforts to overcome the dilatoriness of the Chinese.\n\nOpposition to the provisions of Annex 17 of the Final Protocol, especially to the additional taxes which it imposed, has furthermore steadily increased among a considerable section of the foreign community of Shanghae, and this, coupled with the persistent opposition to the Conservancy Board of the Chinese Viceroy at Nanking and of the Chinese Maritime Customs, on the ground that the terms of the Protocol seriously infringe Chinese sovereignty, forced on my Government the belief that the scheme as therein provided for must be considerably amended if this vital work is to be undertaken at an early date, or at all.\n\nOn the 9th June last, the Chinese Foreign Office addressed a note to the Diplomatic Representatives of the Powers at Peking, asking the repeal of Annex 17 of the Final Protocol of the 7th September, 1901, and expressing the desire to improve the bed of the Whangpoo River under the sole control and at the sole expense of China. With this note was submitted a set of proposals outlining the manner in which it sought to accomplish this end.\n\nThe Minister of the United States at Peking, having transmitted the suggestions of the Chinese Government to Washington, was informed that they were objectionable in principle to my Government, if good and sufficient guarantees were given that China would promptly begin the conservancy work, carry it to a satisfactory termination, and maintain it afterwards.\n\nThe above reply was duly communicated to the Chinese Foreign Office, and the latter, on the 5th August last, informed the American Minister that the Chinese Government offered as guarantee for the carrying out of the work certain revenues aggregating about 600,000 taels annually. The Foreign Office expressed the hope that this would be accepted by the United States as a sufficient guarantee.\n\nOn the 11th August, the American Minister at Peking, under instructions from this Government, addressed a note to the Chinese Foreign Office, in which, after stating the general acceptance by my Government of the proposals of China, he said that the United States, before considering the abrogation of the provisions of the Final Protocol, must insist that China submit detailed plans and a general programme of the way in which it proposed doing the work. It was to be clearly understood, however, that, whereas the United States was willing to waive temporarily its right to insist on China complying with the terms agreed on by her in Article 6 of the Final Protocol concerning the improvement of the course of the Whangpoo River, it would do so only so long as the Chinese Government promptly and satisfactorily discharged the new obligations which it now wished to assume. Should it become evident at a later date that the conservancy work was not being done promptly, or should there be evidence of a disposition not to carry out the work to the satisfaction of all interests concerned, the United States would insist upon full and strict compliance with the terms of the original Agreement.\n\n[2288 c-1]", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 395427, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904", "page_number": 764, "title": "CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904", "content_text": "No reply has been received from the Chinese Foreign Office to the above communication, although it has intimated to our Minister that it would submit a detailed plan for the carrying out of the proposed work.\n\nConsidering, however, that the abrogation of these provisions of the Final Protocol of Peking relating to the conservancy of the Whangpoo can only be brought about by the unanimous agreement thereto of the Signatory Powers, my Government is of opinion that the universally recognized urgency of the work makes an early agreement among the interested Powers imperatively necessary, and that such desired agreement can be more promptly reached by direct submission of our views to the interested Powers than through the Diplomatic Representatives at Peking.\n\nI am therefore instructed, in bringing the matter to the attention of your Lordship, to urge your serious consideration of the foregoing views of my Government, and to express its hope that, should the proposals submitted by the Chinese Government to the Signatory Powers in June last meet with the general approval of His Majesty's Government, the British Minister at Peking may be instructed accordingly in order that this important undertaking may be promptly begun to the satisfaction of all parties concerned, and to the benefit of the vast commercial interests which it so vitally affects.\n\nI have, &c. (Signed)\n\nJOSEPH H. CHOATE.\n\nOffice or Individual.\n\nForeign\n\nYW\n\nHONG KONG\n\nNo 45564\n\n(Subject.)\n\n760\n\nDOMESTIC.\n\nC. O.\n\n43564\n\nLast previous Paper,\n\ntoo do\n\nReports receipt of. And that formey make exquiries as to constitution of the So\n\nwhether it is a British concern\n\n(Minutes.)\n\nSor\n\nOby sw cars carf\n\nAno 23 Marchios\n\nTopy To cif\n\nW & A£ (78)--13860-90906-11-3\n\nNext subsequent Paper.\n\n9074\n\nдочу\n\n?: Copy for: Caye canon\n\n& Topat 20\n\nAle\n\nсмо\n\nreply\n\nAPP\n\nپوشی\n\na\n\n30", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-326 - Foreign Office - 1904.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 397771, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-330 - Public Offices - 1905", "page_number": 261, "title": "CO129-330 - Public Offices - 1905", "content_text": "**CONFIDENTIAL**\n\n# CHINA TRADE.\n\nNo. 1.\n\nC.O. 254 \n[December 19.] \n610 \nRECO \nSBOTTON 2.. (Red 9 JAN 05: \n05 \n3 \n? \nNo. 17.) Lord,\n\n## Mr. Jamieson to the Marquess of Lansdowne.--(Received December 19.)\n\nShanghue, November 14, 1904.\n\nI HAVE the honour to report that the revised Treaty of Commerce, in terms of Final Protocol of 1901, between Portugal and China was signed here on the 14th instant.\n\nThis instrument consists of twenty Articles, and together with it are published the terms of the Canton-Macao Railway Contract. I have the honour to submit a hasty précis thereof (translated from the Chinese text), to catch the outgoing mail.\n\nArticle I provides that, in so far as it has not been modified by the present document, the Treaty of 1897 and its opium annex hold good.\n\nArticle II stipulates for the most-favoured-nation treatment in the matter of any increase of the Tariff import or export duties.\n\nBy Article III Portugal undertakes to supervise the storage in bond of all opium imported into Macao. Special regulations to be drawn up hereafter.\n\nArticle IV contemplates a code of joint international rules for preventing smuggling around Macao.\n\nArticle V extends the privileges of the Inland Water Navigation Rules, with certain modifications, to vessels trading to and from Macao.\n\n| Article | Description |\n|---------|-------------|\n| VI | Grants to Portuguese subjects and goods, in all respects, most-favoured-nation treatment |\n| VII | A special clause ensures that wine, the produce of Portugal, over 14° of alcohol, accompanied by a Consular certificate of origin, shall only be subject to the rate of duty laid down in the Tariff annexed to the Treaty |\n\nArticle VIII provides for the drawing-up of regulations to control the nationalization, by Portuguese subjects, of Chinese resident in Macao.\n\nIn Article IX Portugal consents to the increase of the import duty by a surtax, equal to a duty and a-half, in return for the abolition of li-kin, when all other Treaty Powers shall have signified their assent to this proposal.\n\nArticle X deals with the cash payment of drawbacks.\n\nIn Article XI the institution of an uniform system of currency by Portugal is promised.\n\nArticle XII agrees to prohibit the importation of morphia.\n\nIn Article XIII China undertakes to place her Mining Regulations on a satisfactory footing.\n\nArticle XIV is similar to the Article in the Japanese Treaty dealing with partnership agreements between Chinese and foreigners.\n\n| Article | Description |\n|---------|-------------|\n| XV | Mutual protection of trade-marks |\n| XVI | Revision of China's Civil and Criminal Codes |\n| XVII | Portugal will assist at any conference between China and other Treaty Powers on the subject of the missionary question |\n\nAccording to Article XVIII, this Treaty is to remain in force for ten years, with the option of renewal for another ten years, unless, prior to expiry, either Government gives six months' notice of a desire for revision.\n\nArticle XIX. The Treaty is drawn up in Portuguese, Chinese, and English. In the event of discrepancies between the two former versions, the English text is to be followed.\n\nArticle XX. Ratifications are to be exchanged as soon as possible.\n\nI have, &c.\n\n(Signed) J. W. JAMIESON, \nCommercial Attaché. \n[2288 -2]", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-330 - Public Offices - 1905.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 397982, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-330 - Public Offices - 1905", "page_number": 472, "title": "CO129-330 - Public Offices - 1905", "content_text": "## CHINA TRADE\n\n**CONFIDENTIAL**\n\nNo. 1.\n\n465\n\n[March 11.]\n\n## SECTION 3.\n\n(No. 17.) My Lord,\n\nSir E. Satow to the Marquess of Lansdowne.--(Received March 11.)\n\nPeking, January 14, 1905.\n\nIN continuation of my despatch No. 425 of the 10th December, I have the honour to report that at a meeting of the Diplomatic Representatives of the Powers who were Parties to the Protocol of the 7th September, 1901, the note from Prince Ch'ing relative to the new proposals for the Whangpoo Conservancy was discussed, and a Committee, consisting of my American, French, and German colleagues and myself, was appointed to prepare a counter-draft. I have the honour to inclose an extract from the procès-verbal of the meeting relating to this question, and also a copy of the counter-draft prepared by the Committee, which has now been approved by all the Representatives concerned. I add also, for convenience of reference, a copy of the English text from which the French version was derived.\n\nThe foreign Representatives are all of opinion that before communicating the counter-draft to the Chinese Government it must receive the approval of their respective Governments, and I have the honour to request that I may be informed by telegram whether His Majesty's Government would be disposed to accept the scheme embodied in it in place of the provisions of the Protocol, it being always understood and agreed that, if China neglects to provide the promised funds or to carry out any other essential provision of the present scheme, the stipulations of the Protocol will immediately revive in full force.\n\nTo complete the papers, I beg to inclose a letter from certain firms and public bodies at Shanghae forwarding a Memorandum drawn up by Sir Robert Bredon, and a copy of the reply returned to it by the doyen of the Diplomatic Body on behalf of the Representatives concerned. The most important point in the Memorandum was the suggestion regarding the engagement of the well-known hydraulic engineer, M. de Rijke, but we did not consider that it could be usefully introduced into the Agreement which is proposed as a substitute for the stipulations of the Protocol.\n\n(Signed)\n\nERNEST SATOW,\n\n### Inclosure 1 in No. 1.\n\nExtract from Procès-verbal of Meeting of Diplomatic Body, held December 14, 1904.\n\nLe Doyen. Au mois de Juin le Gouvernement Chinois a proposé de faire lui-même et à ses frais les travaux d'amélioration du cours du Whangpou, en excluant la Commission prévue à l'Annexe 17 du Protocole Final.\n\nLe Quai-d'Orsay nous a envoyé récemment à ce sujet de nouvelles propositions, en douze Articles cette fois.\n\nUne dépêche ci-annexée m'a été adressée hier soir de Shanghaï, à l'issue d'une réunion qui a eu lieu à ce sujet, et un Mémorandum doit nous être remis.\n\nM. Dubail. Je ne peux pas prendre en considération un projet qui n'est pas présenté par le Gouvernement Impérial.\n\nSir Ernest Satow. Ni moi non plus pour le moment. Nous nous occuperons plus tard de l'opinion publique de Shanghai.\n\nMr. Conger. Mon Gouvernement a toujours tenu à ce que les Chinois exécutent le Protocole Final intégralement, mais le travail projeté pour l'amélioration du Whangpou est une chose si importante, sa prompte exécution est si nécessaire, que j'ai reçu l'instruction d'accepter la première proposition qui nous a été faite par le Gouvernement Impérial, pourvu que des garanties suffisantes nous soient données relativement à la prompte et bonne exécution des travaux.\n\nLes nouvelles propositions qui nous sont faites n'apportent pas de grandes modifications aux premières. Je crois pouvoir les accepter, en demandant seulement que...", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-330 - Public Offices - 1905.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 397983, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-330 - Public Offices - 1905", "page_number": 473, "title": "CO129-330 - Public Offices - 1905", "content_text": "## \n\ngaranties concernant la bonne exécution des travaux et la régularité des paiements soient un peu précisées.\n\nLe Doyen. - Il faudrait pourtant attendre de connaître le Mémorandum des intéressés : leur opinion vaut d'être prise en considération.\n\nM. Dubail. - J'ai l'instruction formelle et l'opinion de Shanghaï n'y changera rien - de me rallier à la proposition des Etats-Unis et d'accepter l'offre Chinoise, en nous entourant des garanties nécessaires et en réservant d'en revenir au système de l'Annexe 17 du Protocole Final si les travaux n'étaient pas régulièrement exécutés.\n\nSir Ernest Satow. J'ai des instructions analogues.\n\nM. Lessar. - Conformément aux instructions que je viens de recevoir de mon Gouvernement, je suis prêt à adopter en principe la proposition du Prince Ch'ing contenue dans sa note en date du 13 (26) Novembre, 1904, au sujet de l'amélioration du cours de la rivière Whangpou.\n\nQuant aux garanties à demander à la Chine pour s'assurer que l'allocation des sommes nécessaires sera faite et qu'elles seront dûment employées, je me joins d'avance à la décision de la majorité ; bien entendu que, relativement au contrôle de l'exécution des travaux, le Consul-Général de Russie à Shanghai aura les mêmes droits que les Consuls des autres Puissances.\n\nSir Ernest Satow. - Naturellement. Nous pourrions donc nous entendre sur les bases des propositions faites par le Ouai-wu Pou. Sur quelques points j'aurais des observations à faire :\n\nDans l'Article 2, à propos de la nomination de l'ingénieur, il est dit \"la Chine pourra\", mieux vaudrait \"la Chine devra\".\n\nL'Article 5 devrait être plus explicite, en vue d'empêcher les riverains d'empiéter sur la rivière.\n\nL'Article 7 devrait interdire les dragages par les particuliers.\n\nL'Article 8. Il faudrait adopter le système d'expropriation qui avait été prévu au Protocole au lieu de laisser aux Consuls et Taotai le soin de régler la question. Le système du Protocole appliqué depuis longtemps dans les Concessions internationales a donné de bons résultats.\n\nLe Gouvernement Chinois, en exécutant les travaux, découvrira des terrains nouveaux, gagnés par la rivière ; les propriétaires riverains devraient avoir sur ces terrains un droit de préemption seulement, et non le droit de les acheter en remboursant purement et simplement les dépenses effectuées.\n\nJe ne sais pas si les Articles 11 et 12 satisfairont mon Gouvernement.\n\nLes stipulations du Protocole sur les travaux du Whangpou ne sauraient être annulées ; elles ne peuvent être que suspendues et seraient mises en vigueur si la Chine ne se conformait pas d'une manière satisfaisante à ses obligations.\n\nM. Dubail. - Nous pourrions demander à Sir Ernest Satow d'indiquer, en regard de la note Chinoise, les modifications qui lui sembleraient nécessaires. Nous les examinerions ensuite et nous mettre d'accord.\n\nLe Baron de Mumm. - Mon Gouvernement est décidé d'insister sur la mise en vigueur de l'Annexe 17 du Protocole Final tant que la Chine ne donne pas de garanties réelles pour l'exécution effective de la régularisation du Whangpou par elle-même et pour un prompt commencement des travaux. D'après l'opinion de mon Gouvernement, de telles garanties ne sont pas contenues dans les cinq Articles de la note Chinoise du 9 Juin dernier. Quant à la note Chinoise du 26 Novembre, elle n'est pas encore sous les yeux de mon Gouvernement, et je ne peux donc pas dire si les propositions qu'elle contient seraient considérées par mon Gouvernement comme une base suffisante pour un nouvel arrangement avec le Gouvernement Chinois. Quoique tout disposé à chercher, d'accord avec mes honorables collègues, une issue de l'impasse dans laquelle nous nous trouvons actuellement par suite du refus du Gouvernement Chinois de se conformer à ses engagements formels du Traité de 1901, je crois pourtant devoir affirmer que dans leur forme actuelle aussi, les dernières propositions du Gouvernement Chinois ne pourront guère induire mon Gouvernement à quitter la base sûre du Protocole Final.\n\nMon Gouvernement, cependant, pourrait accepter les propositions Chinoises revisées, amendées, changées. Je suis prêt à rechercher une entente sur ces bases.\n\nJ'adopterais les changements proposés par Sir Ernest Satow. Je crois en outre qu'il serait bon de s'assurer que les revenus affectés aux travaux seront bien utilisés dans ce but.\n\nOn avait spécifié au Protocole les revenus qui devraient servir au paiement de l'indemnité. Le Gouvernement Chinois, cependant, a demandé des fonds aux Gouverneurs des Provinces, ainsi a augmenté la prévarication des mandarins et l'impopularité des étrangers. Il faudrait une Commission pour surveiller la perception et l'emploi des fonds destinés à subvenir aux dépenses nécessitées par les travaux projetés.\n\nJe n'entends pas, d'ailleurs, traiter ici l'affaire en détail ; nous aurons à y revenir. Tant qu'un accord ne sera pas intervenu, le Protocole restera en vigueur.\n\nM. Lessar. Je crois qu'il serait fort grave et irréalisable d'entreprendre de surveiller la perception des impôts en Chine.\n\nM. Dubail. - Peut-on prier Sir E. Satow d'indiquer dans un Mémorandum les modifications qu'il propose.\n\nLe Doyen. - J'élargirai cette proposition. Autrefois, MM. le Baron de Mumm, Conger, et Sir Ernest Satow s'étaient occupés ensemble de la question. On pourrait reconstituer cette ancienne Commission du Whangpou, en priant M. Dubail d'en faire également partie. Cette Commission élaborerait un texte sur lequel nous pourrions nous entendre.\n\nJe suis pour ma part sans instructions à ce sujet.\n\nJe regrette personnellement la brèche faite au Protocole, et j'espère qu'on trouvera un moyen de ne pas annuler l'Annexe 17, et de faire comprendre à la Chine qu'en échange de cette grande concession elle doit apporter de la bonne volonté au règlement de la question de l'indemnité.\n\nCette proposition est adoptée.\n\n## Inclosure 2 in No. 1.\n\n## Alterations in the Stipulations regarding the Whangpoo Conservancy, contained in the Protocol of September 7, 1901.\n\n### Preamble.\n\nWITH reference to the provisions of the Final Protocol of 1901, relating to the establishment of a Whangpoo Conservancy Board, its functions and revenues, China being now desirous of substituting a different Arrangement, charging herself with the work and making herself responsible for the whole cost, and the Powers who were Parties to the Protocol having given their consent, the Arrangement agreed to is set forth as follows:-\n\n1. The works in connection with the improvement of the channel of the Whangpoo River, and of the condition of the inner and outer bars at Wusung, together with the maintenance of such improvements, shall all be placed under the management of the Shanghae Customs Taotai and the Commissioner of Customs. The control of the Whangpoo river-police, lights, beacons, sanitary matters, pilot services, &c., shall be under the same control as formerly.\n\n2. Within three months from the signature of this Agreement, China will herself select an engineer well versed in river conservancy work, and if a majority of the Representatives of the Powers who were Parties to the Protocol consider him suitable, China will at once appoint him to undertake the work. If, after the commencement of the work, a fresh appointment, for reasons approved by a majority of such Representatives becomes necessary, the selection and appointment shall be made in accordance with the method above mentioned.\n\n3. For all contracts for undertaking the river works in whole or in part, and for purchasing materials and machinery and the like, public tenders shall be invited, and the most advantageous accepted.\n\n4. Every quarter a detailed report of the work accomplished, and an account of the moneys expended on the river works shall be made up and sent for inspection to the Consular Body at Shanghae.\n\n5. The authorization of the Shanghae Customs Taotai and of the Commissioner of Customs shall be necessary before new bunds or jetties are constructed or pontoons placed in position or bulks stationed in the river.\n\n6. The Shanghae Customs Taotai and the Commissioner of Customs shall have authority to expropriate existing moorings as well as to establish a system of public moorings in the river.\n\n## Page 466", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-330 - Public Offices - 1905.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 397984, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-330 - Public Offices - 1905", "page_number": 474, "title": "CO129-330 - Public Offices - 1905", "content_text": "## \n7. No dredging or other operations shall be carried out without the authorization of the Shanghae Customs Taotai and the Commissioner of Customs.\n\n8. The Shanghae Customs Taotai and the Commissioner of Customs shall have power to acquire any land outside the foreign Settlements necessary for the work of improvement and maintenance of the Whangpoo River, and to dispose of such lands. If, for this purpose, it is considered necessary to proceed by way of expropriation, the price shall be fixed by a Commission composed of---\n(1.) A person selected by the Consular authority or the proprietor;\n(2.) Another, chosen by the Shanghae Customs Taotai and the Commissioner of Customs; and\n(3.) Another, chosen by the Senior Consul.\n\nIn case the Senior Consul is also the Consular authority of the proprietor, the Consul next in seniority shall choose the third member of the Commission. Consular authority of the owner shall provide for the execution of the Arbitrators' decision.\n\nRiparian owners outside the foreign Settlements shall have the right of pre-emption over all land formed in front of their property by reclamation from the river in the course of the execution of the works for the improvement of the channel, at a price to be fixed by a Commission formed in the same manner as prescribed in the preceding paragraph.\n\n9. The Chinese Government bears the whole cost of the river works, and will levy for this purpose no dues on riparian property, nor on shipping, nor on goods passing up or down.\n\n10. China now indicates and gives the entire opium duty of Szechuan and of Hsuchou-fu in Kiangsu as the security for the whole cost of the river works, and in accordance with the estimated cost, as stated in the Protocol of 1901, will annually supply 460,000 Haikwan taels for a term of twenty years. If, during any year after the commencement of the operations, it is necessary to incur especially heavy expenditure for the purchase of materials, machinery, &c., China may raise a loan for the required amount and issue bonds on the security of the above-mentioned opium revenues. The total sum annually provided for meeting the repayment and interest of such bonds, for carrying out works, and maintaining works already completed, will be not less than 460,000 Haikwan taels, to be paid in equal monthly instalments by the Provincial authorities concerned to the Shanghae Customs Taotai and the Commissioner of Customs. Should the revenues assigned fall short, the Chinese Government will provide the amount specified from other sources.\n\n11. If the works are not being carried out with diligence, care, and economy, a majority of the Consular Body may unite to point out to the Shanghae Customs Taotai and the Commissioner of Customs, and call upon them to direct the engineer to take steps to remedy the matters complained of; and if the work is still not properly done, they may recommend the engineer's dismissal and the selection and appointment of another engineer, the process being the same as that described in Article 2. In case no notice is taken by the Shanghae Customs Taotai and Commissioner of Customs, the Consular Body may report to the foreign Representatives concerned.\n\n12. After the present stipulations have been discussed, settled, and signed, section (b) of Article 11 and Annex 17 of the Protocol of 1901 will be suspended. But if China does not, in accordance with this new Agreement, annually furnish sufficient funds, so that the needs of the work are impeded, or if she omits to fulfil any other of the essential stipulations of this Agreement, the original stipulations of the Protocol of 1901 and of Annex 17 thereto will immediately resume their force.\n\nLe soussigné Ministre d'Allemagne, quoiqu'étant personnellement prêt à soumettre ce contre-projet avec ses recommandations à son Gouvernement, doit pourtant se réserver un avis officiel, ne sachant point si les propositions Chinoises du 26 Novembre seront regardées par son Gouvernement comme base suffisante d'un nouvel Arrangement avec le Gouvernement Chinois, qui viserait la suspension de l'Annexe 17 du Protocole Final.\n\nPar la lettre ci-annexée du 29 Décembre votre Excellence a bien voulu faire parvenir aux Soussignés une lettre de différentes Corporations de Shanghai du 14 Décembre, recommandant au Corps Diplomatique d'une façon générale les propositions contenues dans le Mémoire ci-joint de Sir Robert Bredon, Vice-Inspecteur-Général des Douanes Impériales Maritimes. Les Soussignés ont l'honneur de soumettre ci-joint à l'approbation de leurs honorables collègues le projet d'une réponse aux dites Corporations de Shanghai qu'ils proposent de leur faire parvenir par l'entremise du doyen du Corps Consulaire à Shanghai.\n\nVeuillez, &c.\n\n(Signé)\n\nE. H. CONGER, A. VON MUMM. ERNEST SATOW. G. DUBAIL.\n\n## Circular addressed by Baron Czikann to Foreign Representatives.\n\nPékin, le 5 Janvier, 1905.\n\nLE doyen a l'honneur de mettre en circulation une lettre de la Commission chargée de reviser les propositions Chinoises concernant l'amélioration du Whangpou, par laquelle elle soumet à l'approbation de MM. les Représentants des Puissances Signataires du Protocole Final un contre-projet dans cette question.\n\nIl a en même temps l'honneur de soumettre à l'approbation de ses honorables collègues un projet de lettre que la dite Commission a bien voulu rédiger comme réponse à la lettre du 14 Décembre, 1904, par laquelle les Représentants du Conseil Municipal, de la Chambre de Commerce et des Associations Anglaise, Allemande, Américaine, et Japonaise à Shanghaï avaient recommandé au Corps Diplomatique un Mémorandum de Sir Robert Bredon au sujet de l'amélioration du Whangpou.\n\n(Signé) M. CZIKANN.\n\nDans les instructions qu'il m'a adressées, mon Gouvernement m'avait prescrit d'insister afin que les travaux du Whangpou fussent exécutés sans la direction du Conseil fluvial institué par l'Article 11 du Protocole. Dès que j'ai connu l'attitude qu'avait prise les Représentants des Puissances les plus intéressées à la navigation du Whangpou vis-à-vis du projet Chinois du 28 Novembre dernier, j'ai prié mon Gouvernement de m'autoriser à m'y rallier. Avant d'avoir reçu sa réponse, qui ne tardera pas à me parvenir, je ne serai pas en mesure de signer l'arrangement à conclure avec la Chine.\n\n(Signé) E. DE GAIFFIER.\n\nI approve the draft of the letter to M. Knappe. As to the modifications proposed, I will ask for instructions of my Government.\n\nK. MATSUI.\n\n(Signed)\n\nVu.\n\n(Signé)\n\nCARCER.\n\n(Signé)\n\nP. LESSAR.\n\n## Inclosure 3 in No. 1.\n\nCommittee of Foreign Representatives to Baron Czikann.\n\nM. le Ministre et cher Doyen,\n\nPékin, le 4 Janvier, 1905.\n\nLES Ministres soussignés, auxquels MM. les Représentants des Puissances Signataires du Protocole Final ont bien voulu confier, dans la séance du 14 Décembre, 1904, la tâche de reviser les propositions Chinoises concernant l'amélioration du Whangpou, ont l'honneur de soumettre ci-joint, comme résultat de leurs délibérations, un contre-projet qu'ils recommandent à l'approbation de leurs honorables collègues.\n\nVu et approuvé.\n\nC \n467", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-330 - Public Offices - 1905.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 397986, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-330 - Public Offices - 1905", "page_number": 476, "title": "CO129-330 - Public Offices - 1905", "content_text": "## 8\n\nThe D.I.G. proposed that the revenues from which these payments should be made should be specifically stated, implying, of course, that the payments were a first charge on those revenues, and there seemed no objection to this being done. The Taotai, though not entirely accepting the D.I.G.'s idea in detail, admitted the principle of it by saying that in any case the funds for the first year's work could be raised and be in hand before commencing it.\n\nThe Taotai and the D.I.G. had an interview with the Viceroy, during which his Excellency showed a very genuine interest in the whole subject. He asked questions about M. de Rijke, to which the D.I.G. gave answers in the sense of the remarks above. He expressed his own desire and intention to carry out any approved scheme, casually remarking that he had already, elsewhere, had experience of such work. As regards funds, he said they would surely be provided; and he authorized the D.I.G. to say that, as far as the matter relied on him, the public could have absolute confidence that the work would be fully and faithfully carried out.\n\nAs regards the question of guarantee of funds that is now offered—\n\n1. We have the knowledge that China has never defaulted in or shown the least inclination to repudiate any regularly-incurred official or public debt;\n2. We should have the assurance of the Chinese Government embodied in a formal Convention that funds would be provided, and that their provision would be charged on certain specified revenues;\n3. We have the personal assurance, which would no doubt be put in writing, of an exceptionally enlightened and high-charactered Viceroy;\n4. We should have a provision that the funds should always be in advance of the work;\n5. We should have the security of any made land to which the Chinese Government had a claim, making, of course, full allowance for the right of, and claims for, value of work individually taken under proper authority by riparian proprietors; the value or price of this land should be considered an asset of the Conservancy Fund and not divertible to other purposes till the full work primarily required had been fully done and only needed maintenance;\n6. We should have the knowledge that, with one or two years' work done, and with a certain amount of money invested, with a certain amount always held in advance, any cessation would be impossible in face of the Convention, and in any case improbable;\n7. We should have a provision that if certain work was not done in a specified time, as provided for in the new Agreement, the Protocol scheme, with all its bad features, was still liable to be insisted on, which the Chinese Government cannot desire, if anyone does; but it should be understood that when the work has been in hand and is being done and Chinese bona fides established for a certain number of years, say three—the Protocol scheme becomes a dead letter.\n\nThe D.I.G. therefore has suggested to the Chinese and recommends—\n\n1. The immediate inviting of M. de Rijke.\n2. At the same time, while he is preparing his scheme, the making of a new Convention on the lines of Viceroy Wei's and the Minister's first ten proposals.\n3. The provision of funds always a year in advance, with the detailing of where they are to come from and who is responsible for their being provided.\n4. The carrying out of the work on the engineer's lines, to be at once undertaken by the Customs Service—the men who are to be employed in doing it to be selected with the fact in view that it is to serve international interests and satisfy foreign as well as Chinese demands.\n5. That when the scheme has been decided upon, full consideration will be given to the claims and rights of riparian owners, and facilities where, and as far as possible, accorded to them to do in advance such work as they are specially interested in.\n\nThe above views are put forward with the idea that they represent a workable scheme, fair to the Chinese Government, reasonable with regard to other interests, work necessary and entirely free from any motive but the desire to see a useful and properly and honestly done on business principles.\n\n**ROBERT E. BREDON**\n\n(Signed)\n\n## 9\n\n### Inclosure 7 in No. 1\n\n**Baron Csikann to M. Knappe**\n\nM. le Consul-Général,\n\nPékin, le 13 Janvier, 1905.\n\nPar une lettre en date du 14 Décembre, 1904, MM. les Représentants du Conseil Municipal, de la Chambre de Commerce, et des Associations Anglaise, Allemande, Américaine, et Japonaise de Shanghaï se sont adressés à moi pour me prier de recommander à MM. les Représentants des Puissances Signataires du Protocole Final l'acceptation des propositions faites le 1 Décembre, 1904, par Sir Robert Bredon pour l'amélioration du Whangpou.\n\nMM. les Représentants des Puissances Signataires du Protocole Final m'ont chargé de répondre à ces messieurs qu'ils ont pris note de leur lettre et du Mémoire y joint et qu'ils sont heureux de pouvoir les informer que des négociations visant le même but ont été engagées avec le Gouvernement Chinois depuis plusieurs mois déjà. Ces négociations ayant abouti à un résultat avant l'arrivée même de leur lettre du 14 Décembre, les termes sur lesquels on est tombé d'accord n'attendent plus que l'approbation des Gouvernements intéressés.\n\nJ'ai l'honneur de vous prier, M. le Consul-Général, de bien vouloir porter ce qui précède à la connaissance de MM. les Représentants des Corporations susmentionnées.\n\nVeuillez, &c.\n\nDecember 1, 1904.\n\n469", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-330 - Public Offices - 1905.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 398030, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-330 - Public Offices - 1905", "page_number": 520, "title": "CO129-330 - Public Offices - 1905", "content_text": "**CONFIDENTIAL**\n\n## CHINA TRADE\n\n### SECTION 1\n\n#### No. 1\n\nQuestion asked in the House of Commons, April 19, 1905.\n\nSir Gilbert Parker,-To ask the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has any official information showing that the terms of the Mackay Treaty made in pursuance of Article XI of the Peking Protocol of September, 1901, to facilitate commercial relations between China and foreign countries have, in effect, been ignored by China; that the rights referred to have been violated by provincial officials who have levied li-kin on goods covered by transit passes, have forcibly seized cargo at the barriers; and have illegally interfered with agents and employés of British merchants; that, in contravention of the Mackay Treaty, heavier duties are levied upon foreign-owned cotton-mills than on native mills in the country; that, in contravention of Article II of the Treaty which provided for the introduction of a national uniform coinage, the provincial authorities continue to mint new copper currency; and that the reform in mining Regulations arranged for in Article IX of the Treaty have remained unfulfilled; and if so, whether the Government intend taking action, in concert with other Powers, to secure the fulfilment of the obligations into which China entered in 1901.\n\n## Answer\n\nNo information of the acts alleged in the question has reached us. Such acts would be violations, not of the Treaty of 1902, but of Treaties concluded with China at an earlier date.\n\nHis Majesty's Minister at Peking has been informed, in reply to his inquiries as to the steps which had been taken to carry out the provisions of Article II of the Treaty of 1902, that the Office of Financial Administration has presented a Memorial to the Throne proposing the establishment of a general mint at Tien-tsin, for the coinage of silver and copper, and the introduction of a uniform national coinage. As soon as definite arrangements have been made, they will be communicated to Sir E. Satow.\n\nWith regard to the mining Regulations, the Chinese Government state that Regulations have been drawn up, but that it is necessary to consult the provincial authorities before the final arrangements could be settled.\n\nPage 513", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-330 - Public Offices - 1905.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 403339, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-331 - Public Offices - 1905", "page_number": 248, "title": "CO129-331 - Public Offices - 1905", "content_text": "## Provincial Mints and Uniform Coinage\n\n4\n\nProvincial mints, and that it has been found that the proportion of copper in those which have the appearance of copper is very large, some of them consisting of almost pure metal.\n\nIn the brass pieces, there is in many cases as much as 70 per cent. of copper. But these facts do not indicate that the authorities of the provincial mints are alive to the necessity of uniformity in the coinage.\n\nThe Article of the Treaty is thus worded:-\n\n\"China agrees to take the necessary steps to provide for a uniform national coinage, which shall be legal tender in payment of all duties, taxes, and other obligations throughout the Empire, by British as well as Chinese subjects.\"\n\nAnd the new United States and Japanese Commercial Treaties contain Articles of similar import.\n\nIt is an obvious remark that among the ranks of Chinese officials, it will probably be difficult to find any functionary possessing the knowledge of currency facts and theories requisite for dealing with this vast and complicated problem, and that the most effectual means of carrying this Article into effect would be for the Powers interested in the reform of Chinese currency to combine in lending the services of the necessary number of experts to study existing conditions, and to recommend what remedies should be adopted.\n\n## Revision of Mining Regulations\n\nI come now to the Article regarding the revision of the Mining Regulations. Your Lordship is in possession of Reports relating to the steps which I have taken, under instructions, with the view of urging the speedy execution of this Article. In my despatch No. 204 of the 12th June, I inclosed a note from the Foreign Board stating that the revised draft (which is probably that referred to in Sir Pelham Warren's despatch inclosed herewith) might be expected to reach Peking in about a month's time, when it would be taken into consideration by the Boards of Foreign Affairs and Commerce. In the meantime, it seems clear that, until the new Regulations come into force, British subjects can carry on mining enterprises in China only under existing Regulations.\n\nThe Shanghae letter states that there is no sign of such Regulations as will conform to the requirements of the Treaty. But I am informed that the gentleman who framed the letter was cognizant of the fact that Mr. Broad had completed the draft of the new Regulations. It goes on to call attention to a letter published in the \"North China Daily News,\" in which the British Consul states that British subjects are only allowed to obtain permits to mine under Regulations issued by the Wai-wu Pu, and reference is made to the inclosure marked A. As this inclosure distinctly states that the Consul in question is His Majesty's Consul at Wuhu, it is right to mention that the British merchant referred to is Mr. E. S. Little, and I inclose copies of the correspondence to complete the extract given in the Shanghae letter. It will be seen that Mr. Ker's letter of the 5th December is not accurately reproduced. A more serious error is the statement in Mr. Little's letter of the 12th December, 1904, to Mr. Ker, that clause IX of the Treaty of 1902 gives foreigners exactly the same right to buy and hold land as the natives anywhere in the interior. China has never conferred such a right on foreigners in general, and there is nothing in the clause in question which could possibly be held to justify such an interpretation.\n\n## Taxation\n\nThe next point treated of in the Shanghae letter is taxation. It is alleged that although it was provided that Article VIII of the Treaty was not to come into force until all the other Treaty Powers had agreed thereto, China nevertheless, recognizing certain \"fundamental principles,\" engaged to reform and systematize her taxation as far as merchandize is concerned.\n\nThis is a complete misrepresentation of the wording and intent of Article VIII. Independently of that Article, China has entered into no \"engagement to reform and systematize her system of taxation as far as merchandize is concerned.\" The \"fundamental principles\" alluded to in it are, firstly, that China would discard completely the system of levying li-kin and other dues on goods at the place of production, in transit, and at destination, with the limitation that she should be at liberty to impose a consumption tax on articles of Chinese origin not intended for export; secondly, that the British Government would in return consent to a surtax on foreign goods imported, and on Chinese produce destined for export abroad or coastwise; thirdly, that no attempt should be made to revive li-kin barriers and other stations for taxing goods in transit, that the surtax should in no case exceed one and a-half times the import duty leviable in terms of the Final Protocol of the 7th September, 1901, that payment of import duty and surtax should secure for foreign imports complete immunity from other taxation, examination, or delay, and that the total amount of taxation on native produce for export abroad should under no circumstances exceed 7 per cent. ad valorem.\n\n\"Keeping these fundamental principles steadily in view, the High Contracting Parties have agreed upon the following methods of procedure.\" is the wording of the Article, and it is plain that neither the methods of procedure nor the fundamental principles on which they are based come into operation or receive application until, as stated in section 15, all the Powers shall have signified their acceptance of the engagements embodied in the Article.\n\n## Cases Cited\n\nThe cases referred to under Inclosures B, C, D, and E consequently are not violations of the Treaty of 1902, but in so far as the acts complained of are violations of Treaty, they must, as stated in Earl Percy's reply to Sir Gilbert Parker's Parliamentary question of the 19th April, be referred to Treaties concluded with China at an earlier date.\n\nIt may consequently be inferred that, if the signatories of the Shanghae letter had been at leisure to examine into the statements made under this heading and to compare them with the actual wording of Article VIII of the Treaty of 1902, they would have been disinclined to append their signatures.\n\nOf the cases cited, Sir Pelham Warren's despatch reports on three-C, D, and F. B is a case in which Messrs. Brunner, Mond, and Co., for whom Mr. E. S. Little is the agent, are concerned. His Majesty's Consul at Chinkiang has been asked to furnish a detailed report on case B. Case E is that of the British merchant Bennertz, on which reports have been furnished to your Lordship in my despatches Nos. 12 of the 10th January, 107 of the 29th March, 113 of the 5th April, 118 of the 11th April, 142 of the 27th April, 183 of the 29th May, and 233 of the 3rd July, 1905, and the question whether the walled city of Changsha forms part of the port of that name is still the subject of discussion between myself and the Chinese Government. Case A comes under the head of mining, and has already been explained.\n\n## Navigation\n\nThe last point is navigation. Mention is made of the fact that as yet no steps have been taken to carry out the promised works for the improvement of the Huangpu River, provided for by Annex 17 to the Final Protocol. The causes which have led to this delay have been fully placed before your Lordship in a long series of despatches, and I will only observe now that this delay is no case of ignoring the Commercial Treaty of 1902. It is further stated that there is also evident a great reluctance on the part of the Chinese officials to allow the free use of inland waters to vessels carrying a foreign flag, and one case (F) is cited. Two other cases in which the Chinese authorities are opposing the issue of inland water certificates have been reported to me, but there is at present no reason to suppose that they will not be satisfactorily disposed of.\n\nThe letter concludes with a statement that the Chinese Government and the officials throughout the Empire are now more obstructive in their treatment of British subjects and trade than formerly, and that there is no evidence of any endeavour to carry out either the spirit or the letter of the Treaty. I think it my duty to say that I do not share this view. Differences of opinion from time to time in regard to the interpretation of the Treaties have arisen in the past between His Majesty's Consuls and the local authorities, and between His Majesty's Legation and the Central Government, but such differences do not appear to me to have recently become more numerous than usual.\n\nIt will, however, be for His Majesty's Government to decide, upon a review of the complaints contained in the Shanghae letter, and of the explanations given in this despatch, whether the state of our present relations renders it necessary to bring special pressure to bear upon the Chinese Government in order to insure the observance of Treaty stipulations.\n\nI have, &c.\n(Signed) **ERNEST SATOW**\n\n## Inclosure 1 in No. 1\n\nMessrs. Jardine, Matheson, and Co., and other British Merchants to the Marquess of Lansdowne,\n\nMy Lord Marquess,\n\nShanghae, June 6, 1905.\n\nWe have the honour to inclose herewith a copy of the cablegram forwarded on the 3rd May, together with a list of the Signatories thereto. The original of this document has been deposited with His Majesty's Consul-General at this port.\n\n[2140 ee-1] \n5 \n243", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-331 - Public Offices - 1905.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 403504, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-331 - Public Offices - 1905", "page_number": 413, "title": "CO129-331 - Public Offices - 1905", "content_text": "# \n\n406\n\nThe Article of the Treaty is thus worded:- \n\"China agrees to take the necessary steps to provide for a uniform national coinage, which shall be legal tender in payment of all duties, taxes, and other obligations throughout the Empire, by British as well as Chinese subjects.\" \n\nAnd the new United States and Japanese Commercial Treaties contain Articles of similar import. \n\nIt is an obvious remark that among the ranks of Chinese officials it will probably be difficult to find any functionary possessing the knowledge of currency facts and theories requisite for dealing with this vast and complicated problem, and that the most effectual means of carrying this Article into effect would be for the Powers interested in the reform of Chinese currency to combine in lending the services of the necessary number of experts to study existing conditions, and to recommend what remedies should be adopted. \n\nI come now to the Article regarding the revision of the Mining Regulations. Your Lordship is in possession of Reports relating to the steps which I have taken, under instructions, with the view of urging the speedy execution of this Article. In my despatch No. 204 of the 12th June, I inclosed a note from the Foreign Board stating that the revised draft (which is probably that referred to in Sir Pelham Warren's despatch inclosed herewith) might be expected to reach Peking in about a month's time, when it would be taken into consideration by the Boards of Foreign Affairs and Commerce. In the meantime, it seems clear that, until the new Regulations come into force, British subjects can carry on mining enterprises in China only under existing Regulations. \n\nThe Shanghae letter states that there is no sign of such Regulations as will conform to the requirements of the Treaty. But I am informed that the gentleman who framed the letter was cognizant of the fact that Mr. Broad had completed the draft of the new Regulations. It goes on to call attention to a letter published in the \"North China Daily News,\" in which the British Consul states that British subjects are only allowed to obtain permits to mine under Regulations issued by the Wai-wu Pu, and reference is made to the inclosure marked A. As this inclosure distinctly states that the Consul in question is His Majesty's Consul at Wuhu, it is right to mention that the British merchant referred to is Mr. E. S. Little, and I inclose copies of the correspondence to complete the extract given in the Shanghae letter. It will be seen that Mr. Ker's letter of the 5th December is not accurately reproduced. A more serious error is the statement in Mr. Little's letter of the 12th December, 1904, to Mr. Ker, that clause IX of the Treaty of 1902 gives foreigners exactly the same right to buy and hold land as the natives anywhere in the interior. China has never conferred such a right on foreigners in general, and there is nothing in the clause in question which could possibly be held to justify such an interpretation. \n\nThe next point treated of in the Shanghae letter is taxation. It is alleged that although it was provided that Article VIII of the Treaty was not to come into force until all the other Treaty Powers had agreed thereto, China nevertheless, recognizing certain \"fundamental principles,\" engaged to reform and systematize her taxation as far as merchandize is concerned. \n\nThis is a complete misrepresentation of the wording and intent of Article VIII. Independently of that Article, China has entered into no \"engagement to reform and systematize her system of taxation as far as merchandize is concerned.\" The \"fundamental principles\" alluded to in it are, firstly, that China would discard completely the system of levying li-kin and other dues on goods at the place of production, in transit, and at destination, with the limitation that she should be at liberty to impose a consumption tax on articles of Chinese origin not intended for export; secondly, that the British Government would in return consent to a surtax on foreign goods imported, and on Chinese produce destined for export abroad or coastwise; thirdly, that no attempt should be made to revive li-kin barriers and other stations for taxing goods in transit, that the surtax should in no case exceed one and a-half times the import duty leviable in terms of the Final Protocol of the 7th September, 1901, that payment of import duty and surtax should secure for foreign imports complete immunity from other taxation, examination, or delay, and that the total amount of taxation on native produce for export abroad should under no circumstances exceed 7 1/4 per cent. ad valorem. \n\n\"Keeping these fundamental principles steadily in view, the High Contracting Parties have agreed upon the following methods of procedure\" is the wording of the Article, and it is plain that neither the methods of procedure nor the fundamental principles on which they are based come into operation or receive application until, as stated in section 15, all the Powers shall have signified their acceptance of the engagements embodied in the Article. \n\nThe cases referred to under Inclosures B, C, D, and E consequently are not violations of the Treaty of 1902, but in so far as the acts complained of are violations of Treaty, they must, as stated in Earl Percy's reply to Sir Gilbert Parker's Parliamentary question of the 19th April, be referred to Treaties concluded with China at an earlier date. \n\nIt may consequently be inferred that, if the signatories of the Shanghae letter had been at leisure to examine into the statements made under this heading and to compare them with the actual wording of Article VIII of the Treaty of 1902, they would have been disinclined to append their signatures. \n\nOf the cases cited, Sir Pelham Warren's despatch reports on three-C, D, and F. B and C are cases in which Messrs. Brunner, Mond, and Co., for whom Mr. E. S. Little is the agent, are concerned. His Majesty's Consul at Chinkiang has been asked to furnish a detailed report on case B. Case E is that of the British merchant Bennertz, on which reports have been furnished to your Lordship in my despatches Nos. 12 of the 10th January, 107 of the 29th March, 113 of the 5th April, 118 of the 11th April, 142 of the 27th April, 183 of the 29th May, and 233 of the 3rd July, 1905, and the question whether the walled city of Changsha forms part of the port of that name is still the subject of discussion between myself and the Chinese Government. Case A comes under the head of mining, and has already been explained. \n\nThe last point is navigation. Mention is made of the fact that as yet no steps have been taken to carry out the promised works for the improvement of the Huangpu River, provided for by Annex 17 to the Final Protocol. The causes which have led to this delay have been fully placed before your Lordship in a long series of despatches, and I will only observe now that this delay is no case of ignoring the Commercial Treaty of 1902. It is further stated that there is also evident a great reluctance on the part of the Chinese officials to allow the free use of inland waters to vessels carrying a foreign flag, and one case (F) is cited. Two other cases in which the Chinese authorities are opposing the issue of inland water certificates have been reported to me, but there is at present no reason to suppose that they will not be satisfactorily disposed of. \n\nThe letter concludes with a statement that the Chinese Government and the officials throughout the Empire are now more obstructive in their treatment of British subjects and trade than formerly, and that there is no evidence of any endeavour to carry out either the spirit or the letter of the Treaty. I think it my duty to say that I do not share this view. Differences of opinion from time to time in regard to the interpretation of the Treaties have arisen in the past between His Majesty's Consuls and the local authorities, and between His Majesty's Legation and the Central Government, but such differences do not appear to me to have recently become more numerous than usual. \n\nIt will, however, be for His Majesty's Government to decide, upon a review of the complaints contained in the Shanghae letter, and of the explanations given in this despatch, whether the state of our present relations renders it necessary to bring special pressure to bear upon the Chinese Government in order to insure the observance of Treaty stipulations. \n\nI have, &c. \n\nERNEST SATOW, \n\n(Signed) \n\n## Inclosure 1 in No. 1 \n\nMessrs. Jardine, Matheson, and Co. and other British Merchants to the Marquess of Lansdowne. \n\nMy Lord Marquess, \n\nShanghae, June 6, 1905. \n\nWE have the honour to inclose herewith a copy of the cablegram forwarded on the 3rd May, together with a list of the Signatories thereto. The original of this document has been deposited with His Majesty's Consul-General at this port.", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-331 - Public Offices - 1905.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 403590, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-331 - Public Offices - 1905", "page_number": 499, "title": "CO129-331 - Public Offices - 1905", "content_text": "## \npointing out the danger of the depreciation of the new coin. His Majesty's Minister reports that to this letter a reply has been sent asking for further and more precise details, and it is probable that when the desired information is received a representation on the subject will be addressed to the Chinese Government by the Diplomatic Body. It is also reported that the Board of Revenue is alive to the necessity of controlling the issues of the provincial mints, and the Memorial issued by the Board on this subject (a translation of which is inclosed),* though not going as far as could be desired in the direction of supervision and control, is still a considerable step in advance.\n\nHis Majesty's Minister has more than once reminded the Chinese Government of the provisions of Article II of the Treaty of 1902, and he has recently been requested to urge the Wai-wu Pu to take steps for the fulfilment of the obligations incurred by the Chinese Government under that Article, by instituting the coinage of a silver dollar of uniform weight and fineness.\n\nHe was at the same time instructed to point out that such a measure need not necessarily interfere with the proposal to proceed concurrently with the reform of the copper currency to which the Chinese authorities incline; that the question whether coinage is to be carried out at one central mint or by the existing provincial mints must be determined by local considerations, but that if the provincial mints are to operate it is essential that they should do so uniformly under central control. No progress towards a settlement could be made while independent action was possible like that of the Wuchang Viceroy in the issue of the new Hupeh tael, which appeared to be inconsistent with the undertaking given on the subject by the Chinese Government.\n\n### (b.) With regard to mining, \nHis Majesty's Government have lost no opportunity of bringing to the notice of the Chinese Government their failure to carry out the undertaking given by them in Article IX of the Treaty of 1902, in which they promised to revise the Mining Regulations in such a manner as to remove impediments to the employment of foreign capital and to afford to foreign capitalists opportunities equal to those which they would enjoy under generally accepted foreign Regulations.\n\nOn sending home a translation of the new Mining Regulations, issued by the Foreign Board and communicated to him, Sir E. Satow reported that he had pointed out to the Chinese Government that they were not in accordance with Article IX of the Treaty, and that he had expressed a hope that advantage would be taken of the preparation of the Mining Code referred to in these Regulations to provide for mining operations being carried on by foreign capitalists. He added at the same time that the Regulations applied only to prospecting or mining permits granted to Chinese subjects working either alone or in partnership with foreigners, and that he was given to understand that Regulations for permits to foreigners were being drafted.\n\nIn a subsequent Report Sir E. Satow stated that Mining Regulations had been drawn up, but that before the final arrangements could be settled the Chinese Government considered it necessary to consult the provincial authorities in the matter.\n\nOn the 5th June last Sir E. Satow complained to Natung, a member of the Foreign Board, of the neglect of the Chinese Government to give effect to Article IX, and reminded him that there was no excuse for the inaction of the Wuchang Viceroy, who was known for some months past to have been in possession of the draft of the Mining Regulations which had been drawn up by Mr. Broad, a mining expert in the employ of the Chinese Government, who, it appears, has been occupied for more than twelve months in framing these Regulations. As a result of Sir E. Satow's remonstrance, a note was received from the Chinese Government, stating that, in reply to inquiries on the subject, the Wuchang Viceroy had reported that Mr. Broad's proposals had been submitted for examination and amendment to other representatives, both Chinese and foreign, and that their detailed report was being awaited. As soon as it was received the Viceroy would embody it in a Memorial, for the consideration of the Boards of Foreign Affairs and Commerce.\n\nFor the present, therefore, British subjects can only carry on mining enterprises in China under existing Regulations, and there are good grounds for complaining of the dilatory proceedings of the Chinese authorities with regard to this question.\n\nIn the inclosure to the letter from the Shanghae merchants, marked (A),\n\n* `Inclosure 3 in Sir E. Satow's No. 242, July 11, 1905.`\n\n## \nreference is made to a letter written by His Majesty's Consul at Wuhu to a British merchant at Shanghae, relative to the mining rights of foreigners in China. In order to complete the extract given in the Shanghae letter, copies of the correspondence referred to are inclosed herewith,* from which it will be observed that Mr. Consul Kerr's letter to Mr. Little of the 5th December, 1904, is not accurately reproduced. A more serious error is, however, to be found in Mr. Little's letter to Mr. Kerr of the 12th December, 1904, to the effect that Clause IX of the Treaty of 1902 gives foreigners exactly the same right to buy and to hold land as the natives anywhere in the interior. China has never conferred such a right on foreigners in general, and there is nothing in the clause in question which could possibly be held to justify such an interpretation.\n\n### (c.) Taxation.\nIt is alleged in the Shanghae letter that, although it was provided that Article VIII of the Treaty was not to come into force until all the other Treaty Powers had agreed thereto, China nevertheless, recognizing certain \"fundamental principles,\" engaged to reform and systematize her taxation as far as merchandize is concerned.\n\nThis is an incorrect description of the wording and intent of Article VIII. Independently of that, Article China has entered into no \"engagement to reform and systematize her system of taxation as far as merchandize is concerned,”\n\nThe \"fundamental principles\" alluded to in the Article are, firstly, that China would discard completely the system of levying li-kin and other dues on goods at the place of production, in transit, and at destination, with the limitation that she should be at liberty to impose a consumption tax on articles of Chinese origin not intended for export; secondly, that the British Government would, in return, consent to a surtax on foreign goods imported, and on Chinese produce destined for export abroad or coastwise; thirdly, that no attempt should be made to revive li-kin barriers and other stations for taxing goods in transit; that the surtax should in no case exceed one and a-half times the import duty leviable in terms of the Final Protocol of the 7th September, 1901; that payment of import duty and surtax should secure for foreign imports complete immunity from other taxation, examination, or delay; and that the total amount of taxation on native produce for export abroad should under no circumstances exceed 7 per cent. ad valorem.\n\nIt is stated in the Article that, \"keeping these fundamental principles steadily in view, the High Contracting Parties have agreed upon the following methods of procedure.\"\n\nIt is plain, however, that neither the methods of procedure nor the fundamental principles on which they are based can come into operation or receive application until, in accordance with section 15, all the Powers shall have signified their acceptance of the engagements embodied in the Article.\n\nThe cases referred to under Inclosures (B), (C), (D), and (E) consequently are not violations of the Treaty of 1902, but, in so far as the acts complained of are violations of Treaty, they must, as stated in Earl Percy's reply to Sir Gilbert Parker in the House of Commons on the 19th April last (of which a copy is inclosed),† be referred to Treaties concluded with China at an earlier date.\n\nSir P. Warren, His Majesty's Consul-General at Shanghae, has reported that there is an apparent tendency on the part of local officials in the district of Shanghae to levy li-kin under other names. Since his return to Shanghae in October 1903 three cases of the kind have been brought to his notice. In the first case a lengthy correspondence with the Governor of Chekiang led to the officer in fault being superseded, and to a promise from the Governor that the levy en route of destination tax should not be permitted in future.\n\nThe second case is that of Messrs. Ilbert and Co., given in Inclosure (D) of the letter to Lord Lansdowne from the Shanghae merchants.\n\nAs no definite reply was received to the representations made to the Officer Administering the Government of Soochow, a Consular officer proceeded to Haimen to inquire into the case. It was fully established that the li-kin officials were in the wrong, and Sir P. Warren has reported that the only point in question is the amount of compensation to be paid to Messrs. Ilbert and Co.\n\nThe third case is that of Messrs. Brunner, Mond, and Co. (Limited), forming Inclosure (C) in the letter to Lord Lansdowne from the Shanghae merchants.\n\nIn this case, as in the other two, Sir P. Warren hopes to arrive at a settlement locally.\n\n* `Inclosure 23 in Sir E. Satow's No. 242, July 11, 1905.`\n† `P.Q., Sir G. Parker, April 19, 1905`\n\nPage 492", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-331 - Public Offices - 1905.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 403591, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-331 - Public Offices - 1905", "page_number": 500, "title": "CO129-331 - Public Offices - 1905", "content_text": "## 5 \n\n493 \n\n4 \n\nWith regard to Inclosure (B) in the Shanghae letter, concerning the levy of li-kin on certain goods belonging to Messrs. Brunner, Mond, and Co. (Limited), a detailed Report on the subject has been called for from His Majesty's Consul at Chinkiang.\n\nCase (E) relates to the difficulties experienced by Mr. Bennertz at Changsha. Prolonged correspondence has taken place between His Majesty's Minister and the Chinese authorities on this subject, which, together with the question whether the walled city of Changsha forms part of the port of that name, is still under discussion between Sir E. Satow and the Chinese Government.\n\n(d) Navigation. The only case to which special reference is made under this heading is the li-kin case which forms the subject of Inclosure (F). As there stated, this case has given rise to a prolonged correspondence with the Taotai and Viceroy. Sir P. Warren reports that he is still engaged in discussing the question with the Viceroy of Nanking, and there is reason to hope that this matter and another of a similar nature may be satisfactorily settled.\n\nUnder the heading \"Navigation,\" mention is also made in the Shanghae letter of the fact that, as yet, no steps have been taken to carry out the promised works for the improvement of the Huangpu River, provided for by Annex 17 to the Final Protocol of September 1901. This is, of course, not a case of an evasion by China of the Treaty of 1902, but it is true that considerable delay has taken place in the commencement of the works in question.\n\nNot only were the provisions of the original scheme distasteful to the Chinese authorities, but they did not meet with the approval of a large section of the British and other foreign residents of Shanghae.\n\nWhen, therefore, the Chinese Government drew up new proposals for a conservancy scheme, those proposals were, at the end of last year, considered by the Diplomatic Representatives of the Powers who were parties to the Protocol of the 7th September, 1901. A Committee, consisting of the British, American, French, and German Ministers was appointed, and in due course prepared a counter-draft to the Chinese proposals.\n\nThis draft has been accepted by all the foreign Representatives, subject to the approval of their Governments, and was approved by His Majesty's Government in March last.\n\nTelegraphic inquiries addressed to His Majesty's Minister on the subject on the 26th July last, elicited the reply that one minor point still remains unsettled, but that the foreign Representatives were endeavouring to induce the Wai-wu Pu to meet their wishes in that respect.\n\nThe Chinese Government cannot, therefore, be considered wholly responsible for the delay which has taken place, and which has now been terminated by the signature of the new Arrangement. That delay was partly due to the necessity for a careful examination of the fresh scheme put forward and for the consultation in regard to that scheme of the Powers signatories of the Final Protocol.\n\nHaving now discussed seriatim the various general headings and the specific instances of complaint contained in the Shanghae letter, it is necessary to turn to the general statement in the original telegram, to the effect that \"China ignores the Mackay Treaty, rendering the same ineffective,\" and to the statement contained in the letter that none of the important provisions of the Treaty are effective or, so far as can be judged, are likely to become effective, within any reasonable time.\n\nOf the fourteen Articles which the Commercial Treaty with China of 1902 contains, the following have been fulfilled since the exchange of ratifications on the 28th July, 1903, or are in process of fulfilment:\n\n### Article I. Drawback certificates.\n\nIn regard to this Article, a difference of opinion occurred between the Taotai and His Majesty's Consul-General at Shanghae, but representations were made to the Chinese Government by His Majesty's Legation, which resulted in an understanding being arrived at, and no further complaint has been received.\n\n### Article V. Removal of artificial obstructions to navigation in the Canton River.\n\n| Barrier | Status |\n| --- | --- |\n| Iron barrier | Removed, channel of 570 feet wide now open to navigation |\n| \"Bridge\" or \"wooden barrier\" | Entirely removed |\n| Taishek Barrier | Channel widened to 400 feet, 12 feet of water on northern side and 10 feet on southern side at low water |\n| Cambridge barrier | Channel now has a width of 450 feet, with a minimum depth of 16 feet at low water |\n\nThe last report received from Canton on the subject contained the information that the programme of work drawn up by the Imperial Maritime Customs had now been completed.\n\n### Article VI. Bonded warehouses.\n\nIn December 1903, the Commissioner of Customs communicated to His Majesty's Consul-General at that post copies of the \"Bonded Warehouse Proprietors' Bond\" then in use. The latter then stated that he had received no applications to bond more warehouses, and that the only ones covered at that time were three in number, all belonging to the China Merchants' Steam Navigation Company.\n\nCommenting on the steps taken to fulfil this Article, Sir E. Satow stated that Shanghae appeared to be the only port where bonded warehouses were required, but he added that there would presumably be no difficulty in extending the existing system, which appeared to meet all practical requirements.\n\n### VII. Trade-marks.\n\nOn the 18th August, 1904, Sir E. Satow forwarded to the Foreign Office a translation of the Provisional Regulations for the registration of trade-marks in China, drawn up by the Board of Commerce in accordance with Article VII of the Commercial Treaty of 1902.\n\nAs these Regulations were not found to be satisfactory, the foreign Representatives made representations to the Chinese Government, who undertook that no trade-marks should be registered until an agreement had been arrived at as to the amendments to be introduced.\n\nNegotiations are still proceeding on the subject, and it cannot be fairly alleged that China has ignored this question or neglected to make proposals for the enactment of a trade-mark law.\n\n### Article X. Inland navigation rules and opening of Kongmoon.\n\nCircular instructions with regard to the rules for inland navigation were issued by the Director-General of Imperial Maritime Customs on the 16th September, 1904. Provisional Regulations for carrying out the final clause of Article 8 of the Rules approved by the Wai-wu Pu were issued on the 28th December of the same year.\n\nThe final clause provides that a registered steamer \"may, on making due report to the Customs, land or ship passengers, or cargo at any recognised places of trade passed in the course of the voyage; but may not ply between inland places exclusively except with the consent of the Chinese Government.\"\n\nThe ports of call and passenger stations mentioned in this Article were all opened by the 1st March, 1904, and Kongmoon was opened as a Treaty port on the 7th of that month.\n\nThe question of licensing launches to run to Nanning and Posé is still a subject of discussion with the Canton Viceroy.\n\n### Article XIV. Interport transport of rice.\n\nAfter some correspondence with the Chinese authorities, the export of rice was allowed from Chinkiang under certain limitations, which, though contrary to Treaty, were accepted by British merchants.\n\nThe inclosed extract,* from a Report by His Majesty's Consul at Chinkiang, gives the facts of the case.\n\nOn the 23rd September, 1903, the Governor of Hunan was informed by the Acting British Consul-General at Hankow that a limited permission to Messrs. Jardine, Matheson and Co. and to Messrs. Butterfield and Swire to export rice from Changsha would be accepted as a temporary measure only, and that His Majesty's Government would insist on their Treaty rights.\n\nIt should be added that, with regard to the movement of grain and rice, His Majesty's Consular officers in China have standing instructions to report any evasion of the existing prohibitions of the export of rice and grain from their Consular districts, and in the event of any fresh prohibitions being imposed to warn the ... \n* Qy. not printed.", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-331 - Public Offices - 1905.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 406906, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-337 - Public Offices & Foreign Office - 1906", "page_number": 202, "title": "CO129-337 - Public Offices & Foreign Office - 1906", "content_text": "the foreign Representatives in Peking? Further, if such consent is necessary, will it be accorded in the present instance? It is on these two points that I have the honour to ask for your instructions.\n\nAs regards the first, I have been unable to find in the archives of this Consulate any definite ruling on the subject. Article 6 of the Revised Yang-tsze Regulations says, \"Native craft owned or chartered by British merchants on entry into any port will pay port dues according to Chinese tariff,\" while the Chungking Agreement (Article 4) differentiates between foreign-owned and chartered junks, the former to pay tonnage dues according to Treaty, the latter port dues, as above stipulated. (I should here mention that there are at present no foreign-owned vessels plying between this port and Chungking.)\n\nThe Commissioner of Customs, with whom I have discussed the matter, is of opinion that the levy in question need not, and should not, be regarded as an increase in the port dues; that it should be considered as a special contribution made by all vessels using the upper river to an object in which they are directly interested; and that as long as a sufficient portion of the revenue derived from the Native Customs is devoted, in the terms of the Final Protocol, to the payment of the indemnity, no objection can be taken to the Chinese authorities levying an extra tax in the manner and for the purpose indicated.\n\nHis argument appears to me to be eminently reasonable, but, as a question of principle and of precedent, I venture to think that your consent is necessary to these fees being levied on vessels chartered by British firms at Ichang and Chungking.\n\nAssuming this view to be correct, I would submit that, with certain reservations, the scheme proposed by the Chinese authorities might well be given a trial. It should be distinctly understood that, as the collection is to be in the hands of the Maritime Customs, that Department must have some, if not the whole, control over the expenditure. One might even go a step further and suggest that the Commissioner of Customs at Ichang, with the expert assistance at his disposal in the Coast Department, should direct the operations of the Pao Lu Chu. This arrangement was recommended by Lieutenant-Commander Watson, of His Majesty's ship Woodcock, in December 1901. (Hydrographic Department Reports No. 181, Yang-taze No. 2.)\n\nIt is, I venture to think, necessary to guard against the Chinese authorities prejudicing, by ill-considered and imperfect attempts at bridling the rapids of the Upper Yang-tsze, the Treaty right of foreign shipping firms to effect the necessary improvements themselves. On the other hand, we should, perhaps, do well not to discourage the somewhat new and unusual interest now being displayed by the local authorities in this important question.\n\nI have briefly replied to the Taotai (copy and translation of my despatch inclosed) intimating that your approval is necessary before I can agree to any further fees being levied on chartered junks, and in conversation with Mr. Chang, the new Deputy, who has called on me, I have assured him that any practical scheme for the improvement of the waterways above Ichang will most certainly have the sympathy and support of the British Government.\n\nDr. Müller, the German Consul, has written to the Taotai in a similar sense.\n\nI have, &c.\n\n(Signed) HARRY H. FOX.\n\nThe special rate, if levied impartially, on native junks would appear to be within the province of the Chinese authorities.\n\nE. H. FRASER.\n\nHankow, November 24, 1905.\n\n(Translation.)\n\nSir,\n\n(Signed)\n\nInclosure 2 in No. 1.\n\nChin Taotai to Acting Consul Ottewill.\n\nKuang Hsü, 31st year, 10th moon, 2nd day\n\n(October 29, 1905).\n\nTHE rapid flow of the waters of the upper river is a constant source of danger to life, and, accordingly, vessels greatly dread the journey, owing to the fact that, the banks on both sides being precipitous, there is no room for a proper tracking path, so that trackers have the greatest difficulty in passing the dangerous places. Last year my predecessor, Yü Taotai, obtained permission from the high authorities to raise a fund (for the purpose of constructing a road), and, in conjunction with the Provincial Treasurer Li and a gentleman of Chiang Hsia, named Han, collected the money required. They appointed Chang Te Ping, late Department Magistrate of Kuei Chou, and others to place in thorough repair the tracking paths through the gorges. A year was spent in completing this work.\n\nIt is obvious that work of this kind, to be of any real value, must be continued and not allowed to drop; if these paths are not kept in good repair they will certainly not last, and the labour spent on them will be in vain.\n\nMr. Chang has therefore, in accordance with his instructions, drawn up a set of proposed Regulations, ten in number, whereby an Office, to be called Pao Lu Chu, is established at Ichang, and all vessels proceeding up-river, whether chartered by foreigners or native-owned, shall pay a fee based on the amount of their freight—viz., 2 cash per 1,000 (tiao) to be paid by the shipper, and 2 cash per 1,000 by the junk-master, the proceeds to be devoted to the annual upkeep of the tracking paths. As this proposal will affect chartered junks, he asks me to request the Consul to be good enough to instruct all owners of British chartered junks to pay in accordance with the above Regulations.\n\nI am\n\nI have the honour to observe that a levy of this kind is a worthy undertaking for the benefit of merchants, and, moreover, the subscription of 2 cash on every 1,000 cash worth of freight is extremely light. Knowing well the great interest you take in commercial matters, I am sure (the proposal) will meet with your approval. Addressing a similar despatch to the German Consul and the Commissioner of Customs, and I beg to inclose, for your information, a copy of the Regulations referred to.\n\nI have, &c.\n\n(Seal of Taotai.)\n\nSir,\n\nInclosure 3 in No. 1.\n\nConsul Fox to Chin Taotai.\n\nKuang Hsü, 31st year, 10th moon, 20th day\n\n(November 16, 1905).\n\nI HAVE the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your despatch addressed to my predecessor, Mr. Ottewill, dated the 29th October, in which you state that, in order to maintain in good repair the tracking path through the gorges constructed last year, it is proposed to levy a small fee on all vessels, both foreign-chartered and native-owned, proceeding up-river. You add that for this purpose an Office named Pao Lu Chü will be established at Ichang, and you ask me to instruct British owners of chartered junks to subscribe in accordance with the Regulations, copy of which is inclosed.\n\nI have the honour to observe that, all dues paid by foreign-owned and chartered vessels being regulated by Treaty and Agreements concluded between our respective Governments, I myself have not the power to consent or to withhold my consent to any additional levy being made; this is a matter for settlement between the Wai-wu Pu and the British Minister in Peking.\n\nI am accordingly forwarding copy of your despatch and the proposed Regulations for the consideration of the Minister, and on the receipt of his reply I will again communicate with you on the subject.\n\nThe scheme of maintaining in good repair the tracking path through the gorges and providing capstans and hawsers at the most difficult points for the assistance of ascending vessels is undoubtedly a most excellent one, benefiting alike native and foreign merchants and travellers. If hereafter it is mutually agreed to raise funds for the purpose, the simplest way, in my opinion, would be for the Foreign Customs at Ichang to undertake the collection of subscriptions, on behalf of the Pao Lu Chu, as a temporary measure.\n\nThe Foreign Customs have for some years past collected all dues on both foreign and native shipping at this port, so that their so doing in the present case would on the one hand save expenses, and on the other be more likely to meet with the approval of the merchants concerned.\n\n(Signed)\n\nI have, &c.\n\nHARRY H. FOX.\n\nPage 199", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-337 - Public Offices & Foreign Office - 1906.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 407397, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-337 - Public Offices & Foreign Office - 1906", "page_number": 693, "title": "CO129-337 - Public Offices & Foreign Office - 1906", "content_text": "12\n\nWogack of financial assistance from the Tien-tsin Provisional Government on the condition that the commercial interests concerned would raise funds on their side also.\n\nSir E. Satow, in reply, on the 29th June, asked for a schedule of the proposed dues, and said that it would be necessary for him to issue a Regulation provisionally under Articles 9 and 11 of the Order in Council of the 25th October, 1881, making the payment of the wharfage dues as municipal taxes binding on British subjects; and on the 8th July Sir E. Satow forwarded, for perusal and comment, a draft Regulation providing for the imposition of the tax. This Regulation would be inserted in the Tien-tsin Land Regulations next after Regulation 7.\n\nOn the 15th July Mr. Hopkins returned the draft Regulations, expressing his concurrence, and later in the same month Sir E. Satow forwarded the Regulation, with instructions that it should be printed and made known to the British community in Tien-tsin.\n\nIt should be mentioned that, by Article 11 of the Final Protocol of the 7th September, 1901, the Chinese Government undertook to be represented on the International Commission for improving the Pei Ho, and to pay the sum of 60,000 Haikwan taels each year for this purpose. This undertaking has been carried out since 1902.\n\nThe Conservancy Board have effected three cuttings in the river between 1902 and 1904, and many other works of improvement have been carried out; the sums spent were raised by loans secured by taxes known as \"river dues,\" but it was felt that the deplorable condition of the bar was a perpetual hindrance to commercial interests.\n\nIn April 1903, at a general meeting of Landrenters, a Resolution was passed providing for a further tax of 1 per cent. of the duties to be devoted to the improvement of the Taku Bar, and in July 1903 Mr. Hopkins informed the Tien-tsin Municipal Council that the consent of the Ministers in Peking had been received to the levy of additional river dues for the bar purposes, but the shipping Companies did not see their way to co-operate and nothing was done.\n\nMeanwhile a bar improvement scheme had been devised by the Conservancy Commission, and only funds were lacking to carry it out.\n\nOn the 30th May, 1905, the Chairman of the Tien-tsin Municipal Council was informed by the German Minister that the Council might be assured that the Hamburg-America line would fall into line with any scheme that commended itself to the Steamer Companies.\n\nMr. Dickinson informed Sir E. Satow that the extra 1 per cent. was still in suspense pending a contribution from the Steam-ship Companies.\n\nAt an extraordinary general meeting of the Landrenters of the 14th June, 1905, the Municipal Council proposed a Resolution asking to be authorized to convey an offer to the Hai Ho Conservancy Commission to provide the necessary sum of 450,000 taels on and subject to certain conditions:--\n\n(1.) No part of the loan to be redeemed until the amortization of existing river loans.\n\n(2.) Loan of 250,000 taels at 7 per cent., payable by Hai Ho Conservancy Commission.\n\n(3.) The tax of per mille authorized in 1903 shall be levied in addition to the existing dues.\n\n(4.) Shipping Companies shall pay tax.\n\n(5.) Taxes and dues provided for in (3) and (4) shall continue to be levied until the amortization of loan and interest.\n\n(6.) On final amortization of river loans, taxes and dues devoted to service of these river loans to be continued, and with taxes and dues under (3) and (4) be devoted to payment of interest on 250,000 taels and accumulated interest on balance of 200,000 taels to bar works, and to amortization of principal sum.\n\nAll this was, of course, dependent on the sanction of the Diplomatic Body and payment by the Shipping Companies. The latter finally agreed to pay 1 mace per registered ton per trip from the time of issue to the final amortization of the loan subject to certain conditions, one of which is that ships unable to cross the bar shall pay 5 candareens per ton per trip on their net registered tonnage, with the option of paying 1 mace per ton on cargo discharged and loaded.\n\nOn the 8th March, 1906, M. Rocher, Consul-General for France, resigned his position as Delegate of the Consular Body on the Conservancy Board, and Mr. Hopkins was selected to take his place.\n\nIn June 1905 the Landrenters put forward a scheme for providing the necessary funds for the improvement of the bar in its final form, and requested the sanction of the Diplomatic Body.\n\n13\n\nWhat the Diplomatic Body was requested to sanction were-\n\n(1.) A continuation of the existing taxes and dues until the amortization of the loan of 425,000 taels, the initial expenditure for the bar improvement scheme.\n\n(2.) Now that an agreement with the Shipping Companies had been arrived at, it was necessary to have a reaffirmation of the sanction given by the Diplomatic Body to the Resolutions of the 6th April, 1903, to levy the additional tax of per mille on the value of all goods on which duty has been paid or may become payable, which with the shipping tax is to meet the service of the loan and the necessary maintenance expenses of the river.\n\nAs regards the tax on shipping, it would appear that the bond to be signed by the Shipping Companies is to be considered sufficient guarantee for payment, and the Council lays down that it will agree with the signatories to the bond to use every means in their power in conjunction with the General Chamber of Commerce to prevent any ship-owners from taking advantage of the terms of the bond to the detriment of the signatories thereto, the Council and the General Chamber of Commerce recognizing the shipping levy as a general port charge to be paid by all ships coming to the bar.\n\nPeking, May 26, 1906.\n\nInclosure 13 in No. 1.\n\nTien-tsin Land Regulations.\n\n[Not printed.]\n\n0\n\n684", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-337 - Public Offices & Foreign Office - 1906.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 407628, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-338 - Public Offices & Others - 1906", "page_number": 92, "title": "CO129-338 - Public Offices & Others - 1906", "content_text": "-12 \n\nWogack of financial assistance from the Tien-tsin Provisional Government on the condition that the commercial interests concerned would raise funds on their side also.\n\nSir E. Satow, in reply, on the 29th June, asked for a schedule of the proposed dues, and said that it would be necessary for him to issue a Regulation provisionally under Articles 9 and 11 of the Order in Council of the 25th October, 1881, making the payment of the wharfage dues as municipal taxes binding on British subjects; and on the 8th July Sir E. Satow forwarded, for perusal and comment, a draft Regulation providing for the imposition of the tax. This Regulation would be inserted in the Tien-tsin Land Regulations next after Regulation 7.\n\nOn the 15th July Mr. Hopkins returned the draft Regulations, expressing his concurrence, and later in the same month Sir E. Satow forwarded the Regulation, with instructions that it should be printed and made known to the British community in Tien-tsin.\n\nIt should be mentioned that, by Article 11 of the Final Protocol of the 7th September, 1901, the Chinese Government undertook to be represented on the International Commission for improving the Pei Ho, and to pay the sum of 60,000 Haikwan taels each year for this purpose. This undertaking has been carried out since 1902.\n\nThe Conservancy Board have effected three cuttings in the river between 1902 and 1904, and many other works of improvement have been carried out; the sums spent were raised by loans secured by taxes known as \"river dues,\" but it was felt that the deplorable condition of the bar was a perpetual hindrance to commercial interests.\n\nIn April 1903, at a general meeting of Landrenters, a Resolution was passed providing for a further tax of 1 per cent. of the duties to be devoted to the improvement of the Taku Bar, and in July 1903 Mr. Hopkins informed the Tien-tsin Municipal Council that the consent of the Ministers in Peking had been received to the levy of additional river dues for the bar purposes, but the shipping Companies did not see their way to co-operate and nothing was done.\n\nMeanwhile a bar improvement scheme had been devised by the Conservancy Commission, and only funds were lacking to carry it out.\n\nOn the 8th May, 1905, the Chairman of the Tien-tsin Municipal Council was informed by the German Minister that the Council might be assured that the Hamburg-America line would fall into line with any scheme that commended itself to the Steamer Companies.\n\nMr. Dickinson informed Sir E. Satow that the extra 1 per cent. was still in suspense pending a contribution from the Steam-ship Companies.\n\nAt an extraordinary general meeting of the Landrenters of the 14th June, 1905, the Municipal Council proposed a Resolution asking to be authorized to convey an offer to the Hai Ho Conservancy Commission to provide the necessary sum of 450,000 taels on and subject to certain conditions:\n\n(1) No part of the loan to be redeemed until the amortization of existing river loans.\n(2) Loan of 250,000 taels at 7 per cent., payable by Hai Ho Conservancy Commission.\n(3) The tax of per mille authorized in 1903 shall be levied in addition to the existing dues.\n(4) Shipping Companies shall pay tax.\n(5) Taxes and dues provided for in (3) and (4) shall continue to be levied until the amortization of loan and interest.\n(6) On final amortization of river loans, taxes and dues devoted to service of these river loans to be continued, and with taxes and dues under (3) and (4) be devoted to payment of interest on 250,000 taels and accumulated interest on balance of 200,000 taels to bar works, and to amortization of principal sum.\n\nAll this was, of course, dependent on the sanction of the Diplomatic Body and payment by the Shipping Companies. The latter finally agreed to pay 1 mace per registered ton per trip from the time of issue to the final amortization of the loan subject to certain conditions, one of which is that ships unable to cross the bar shall pay 5 candareens per ton per trip on their net registered tonnage, with the option of paying 1 mace per ton on cargo discharged and loaded.\n\nOn the 8th March, 1906, M. Rocher, Consul-General for France, resigned his position as Delegate of the Consular Body on the Conservancy Board, and Mr. Hopkins was selected to take his place.\n\nIn June 1905 the Landrenters put forward a scheme for providing the necessary funds for the improvement of the bar in its final form, and requested the sanction of the Diplomatic Body.\n\nWhat the Diplomatic Body was requested to sanction were--\n\n(1) A continuation of the existing taxes and dues until the amortization of the loan of 425,000 taels, the initial expenditure for the bar improvement scheme.\n(2) Now that an agreement with the Shipping Companies had been arrived at, it was necessary to have a reaffirmation of the sanction given by the Diplomatic Body to the Resolutions of the 6th April, 1903, to levy the additional tax of per mille on the value of all goods on which duty has been paid or may become payable, which with the shipping tax is to meet the service of the loan and the necessary maintenance expenses of the river.\n\nAs regards the tax on shipping, it would appear that the bond to be signed by the Shipping Companies is to be considered sufficient guarantee for payment, and the Council lays down that it will agree with the signatories to the bond to use every means in their power in conjunction with the General Chamber of Commerce to prevent any ship-owners from taking advantage of the terms of the bond to the detriment of the signatories thereto, the Council and the General Chamber of Commerce recognizing the shipping levy as a general port charge to be paid by all ships coming to the bar.\n\nPeking, May 26, 1906.\n\n## Inclosure 13 in No. 1\n\n### Tien-tsin Land Regulations\n\n[Not printed.]", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-338 - Public Offices & Others - 1906.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 407651, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-338 - Public Offices & Others - 1906", "page_number": 115, "title": "CO129-338 - Public Offices & Others - 1906", "content_text": "## The American Minister tells me that, under instructions from his Government, he made representations in the same sense verbally to the Wai-wu Pu, and that he had received a reply similar to the one sent to me. I have also been informed by my Russian colleagues that he has recommended his Government to agree to the immediate establishment of customs stations in North Manchuria at the places mentioned by the Wai-wu Pu in their note to me. He is now awaiting instructions, but he thinks that his Government will raise no difficulties, provided that a satisfactory arrangement is made for the free admission of military supplies for the Russian troops still in operation.\n\nA copy of this despatch has been sent to Tôkiô.\n\nI have, &c. \n(Signed) **LANCELOT D. CARNEGIE**\n\n## Inclosure 1 in No. 1\n\n### Agreement between Chinese Government and Russo-Chinese Bank\n\nHSU-KING-CHEN, Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary of His Majesty the Emperor of China at St. Petersburgh, acting in virtue of the Imperial Edict of the 20th day of the 7th moon of the 22nd year of Kuang Hsü (16th (28th) August, 1896), and the Russo-Chinese Bank, have, for the purpose of entering into partnership, agreed to the following stipulations :-\n\n#### Article 1\nThe Chinese Government engage to enter into partnership with the Russo-Chinese Bank with the capital of 5,000,000 Kuping taels, and to share pro ratá, from the date of the investment of the fund to the said Bank, all profits realized as well as all losses sustained.\n\n#### Art. 2\nOn the 1st day of January of each year (Russian Calendar) when the annual settlement of all accounts of the Bank is to be made, the proportion of the capitals of the Chinese Government and the Russo-Chinese Bank shall be examined and determined respectively, and according to the basis thus established the amount of the profits or losses to be shared by the Chinese Government shall be fixed in Kuping taels at the end of the year.\n\n#### Art. 3\nIn accordance with the Articles of Association of the Bank, a certain per cent. of the net profit annually realized shall be set aside to be allowed to the Directors of the Bank as bonus. The profits remaining after such deduction shall be divided pro ratá between the Chinese Government and the Russo-Chinese Bank, each of whom is to contribute towards the reserve fund 10 per cent. of the amount so divided; and, if the rest still exceed 6 per cent. of the whole amount of each capital, 20 per cent. of such surplus, after deduction of the said 6 per cent., shall be distributed among the employés of the Bank as gratuity. In case of a loss, the portion to be borne by the Chinese Government shall, in the first instance, be supplied from the reserve fund on their account.\n\n#### Art. 4\nThe monthly and annual balance sheets of the accounts of the Bank shall, after examination and approval by the general meeting of shareholders, be transmitted by the agent of the Bank in China to the President of the Eastern China Railway appointed by China, for final submission after his examination to the proper quarters.\n\n#### Art. 5\nIn case of dissolution of the Bank on account of losses or some other causes, the portion of losses to be borne pro rata by the Chinese Government for the liquidation shall be duly determined, and the remaining amount of the capital invested by the said Government shall be refunded.\n\nThis 2nd day of the 8th moon of the 22nd year of Kuang Hsü. (The 27th August (8th September), 1896.)\n\n## Inclosure 2 in No. 1\n\n### Supplementary Agreement between China and Eastern China Railway Company\n\nHSU-KING-CHENG, Ambassador Extraordinary of His Majesty the Emperor of China, and Yang-yu, His Imperial Chinese Majesty's Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary to the Court of St. Petersburgh, acting in virtue of the Imperial Edict of the 7th day of the 5th moon of the 24th year of Kuang Hsü (13th (25th) June, 1898), and the Eastern China Railway Company, in conformity to the Agreement between Russia and China, signed at Peking on the 15th (27th) March, 1898, and of the Additional Protocol, signed at St. Petersburgh on the 25th April, 1898, by which documents it has been stipulated that \"the Chinese Government agree to extend, from the date of the signature of the Agreement, the terms of the Agreement concluded with the Eastern China Railway Company on the 27th August (8th September), 1896, concerning the construction and exploitation of a branch line starting from one of the stations on the main line of the Eastern China Railway and reaching the ports of Talienwan and Port Arthur, on the coast of the Liaotung Peninsula\"; that \"all the stipulations of the Agreement concluded between the Chinese Government and the Russo-Chinese Bank on the 27th August, 1896, shall apply with equal strength to this branch line\"; and that the tracks, as well as the points where this line will pass, shall be determined by Ambassador Hsu-king-cheng in common accord with the Eastern China Railway Company\"; have, for the purpose of completing the Agreement for the construction and exploitation of the Eastern China Railway, agreed to the following stipulations :--\n\n#### Article 1\nThis branch line of the Eastern China Railway shall reach the seaports of Port Arthur and Talienwan, and shall thus be called the South Manchurian branch line of the Eastern China Railway.\n\n#### Art. 2\nIt being understood, according to Article 4 of the Agreement of the 27th August, 1896, that the Chinese Government are to take measures, whenever circumstances require, to facilitate the transportation, by land and water, of materials required for the construction of the line, the said Government authorize the Company's steamers and other boats under the Company's flag to navigate the Liao-ho and its tributaries, as well as to enter and unload materials at, the port of Yingkow and all the ports in the neutral zone, where it is found possible to do so, as well as necessary to accelerate the completion of the construction of the branch line.\n\n#### Art. 3\nEqually, in order to facilitate the transportation of materials and provisions necessary for the construction of the South Manchurian branch line, the Eastern China Railway Company has the right to extend temporary branch lines to Yingkow and to other ports of the neutral zone; but as soon as the line is completed and the traffic is fully opened, the Company shall, on demand from the Chinese Government, demolish those branch lines. This demolition shall, at all events, become obligatory on the Company after the lapse of eight years from the date of the completion of the definitive survey and the assignment of the necessary land required for the construction.\n\n#### Art. 4\nIn virtue of the concession granted to the Company by the Chinese Government in 1895 (November 1897 in French text) concerning timber and coal needed by the railway line, the Company is authorized to fell trees in the State forests and appropriate them, on condition that it shall pay for each tree so felled a price to be fixed in common accord with the Chinese local authorities, not exceeding the current price of the locality. Such forests, however, in Sheng-king Province, as particularly belong to the Imperial domain or represent a great religious importance, and are on that account specially protected by the Central Government of Peking, shall be respected and preserved intact. In the region through which the proposed railway line passes, the Company is also authorized to work coal mines in order to meet the demand required for the construction and exploitation of the branch line, by paying a certain price calculated by weight of the coal extracted. The price shall be determined by the Chief Superintendent of the Company or his deputy in common accord with the Chinese local authorities, and it shall not exceed the current price of the locality paid by other persons for the right of working coal mines.\n\n#### Art. 5\nThe Russian Government, having the right to establish such custom Tariff as they may deem suitable for that region of Liaotung Peninsula, which is ceded to them in usufruct, the Chinese Government shall, on their part, levy the custom duties at the frontier on goods imported into, or exported from, the above-mentioned region of the Peninsula. For this purpose the Chinese Government shall, if Russia consents thereto, establish a custom-house at Talienwan from the day of opening of that port for commerce. In case such custom-house is established, the organization and administration thereof shall be intrusted to the Eastern China Railway Company, which shall levy the duties as agent, and for the profit of the Chinese Treasury Department. This custom-house shall be under the direct control of the Central Government.", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-338 - Public Offices & Others - 1906.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 411398, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-343 - Public Offices & Foreign Office - 1907", "page_number": 575, "title": "CO129-343 - Public Offices & Foreign Office - 1907", "content_text": "## No. 1\n\nThe same day the French Minister addressed a note to the doyen of the Diplomatic Body, copy of which is likewise inclosed, formally notifying the adhesion of the French Government to the scheme.\n\nM. l'Ambassadeur,\n\nI have, &c.\n\n(Signed) J. N. JORDAN.\n\n### Inclosure 1 in No. 1\n\nM. Pichon to Mr. MacCormick,\n\nParis, le 8 Novembre, 1906.\n\nPAR une note que vous m'avez transmise le 3 de ce mois, vous avez bien voulu appeler mon attention sur le projet formé par la Chambre de Commerce de Tien-tsin de faire un emprunt en vue d'améliorer la barre à l'entrée du Pei-ho et de solliciter l'assentiment des Puissances étrangères afin d'établir des taxes supplémentaires sur les importations et sur les navires pour faire face à cet emprunt.\n\nLe Gouvernement de la République estime que les travaux d'amélioration de la Barre de Takou ne sont pas seulement utiles au commerce étranger, mais qu'ils sont le complément nécessaire des travaux de rectification du cours du Pei-ho que la Commission Internationale, dont l'existence a été consacrée par l'Article 11 du Protocole Final de Pékin en 1901, a menés à bien jusqu'ici. Aussi le Gouvernement de la République ne voit-il pas de motifs sérieux pour constituer un nouveau Comité qui n'aurait à diriger exclusivement que les travaux d'approfondissement de la barre du fleuve. Pour que ces entreprises d'amélioration donnent tous les résultats que le commerce international, par les sacrifices pécuniaires qu'il a consentis, est en droit d'en attendre, il est essentiel de conserver l'unité de direction et la coordination des efforts. D'autre part, il serait peut-être inopportun au regard des Chinois de paraître retirer à la Commission du Pei-ho, à laquelle les Puissances ont voulu donner un caractère international, la confiance de ces mêmes Puissances au moment où aboutissent ses efforts et de transférer à une autre Commission organisée sur les bases proposées par la Chambre de Commerce de Tien-tsin, dont le projet ne paraît pas résoudre d'une manière complète le problème à envisager, la direction d'un travail qui doit être considéré comme le complément de l'œuvre jusqu'ici conduite par la Commission Internationale à l'entière satisfaction des Puissances Maritimes.\n\nLes instructions données au Ministre de la République à Pékin se sont inspirées des considérations ci-dessus développées et sont une preuve que le Gouvernement Français, bien loin de faire obstacle aux améliorations qu'il y aurait lieu d'apporter à la Barre de Takou, désire, au contraire, voir se réaliser le plein développement de cette entreprise. Je ne puis, en conséquence, que prier votre Excellence de vouloir bien donner connaissance de la présente communication à son Gouvernement. Je ne doute pas que le Département d'Etat ne reconnaisse les avantages qu'il y aurait, tant au point de vue matériel qu'au point de vue moral, à confier l'amélioration de la Barre de Takou à la Commission Internationale qui a en mains les moyens de mener à bien cette œuvre nécessaire.\n\n### Inclosure 2 in No. 1\n\n**Telegraphic Instructions sent by M. Pichon to M. Bapst**\n\nACCORDING to your Commercial despatch No. 94, the International Pei-ho Conservancy Board will play the same part in the execution of the works to be made at the Taku Bar as it does in the mending of the river itself.\n\nIf that principle is recognized, and if the Board of Reference is altered in its composition so that the representatives of the general interests be no longer in minority, you are at liberty to join your colleagues in giving your adhesion to the scheme of the British Municipal Council.\n\nI think, however, it expedient to point out when you will give your assent to the scheme that, according to our opinion, the works intended for the dredging of the Taku Bar should be thoroughly executed for the benefit of the shipping interests at large.\n\n### Inclosure 3 in No. 1\n\nSir J. Jordan to M. Bapst,\n\nMy dear Colleague,\n\nPeking, December 28, 1906.\n\nWHEN we talked over the question of the removal of the Taku Bar the other day you were, I think, under the impression that the Conservancy Board had sufficient funds in hand to carry out at least a portion of the work.\n\nI have asked our Consul at Tien-tsin for information on this point, and he tells me that the funds in hand for possible use on the improvement of the bar are about 65,000 taels, but that it is doubtful whether this sum could be legally used for the purpose. In any case, it would not, he complains, be sufficient for the purchase of the dredger required for the work.\n\nAs to Mr. Dickinson's relations to the Taku Tug and Lighter Company, I have made further inquiries, and beg to repeat the assurance which I gave you verbally. He does not now own, nor has he owned for nearly four years, a single share in the Lighter Company.\n\nThere is every desire to meet the views of the French Government as far as is possible and remove any apprehensions that may be felt on the subject, and I shall be only too happy to do anything I can to secure your friendly co-operation.\n\nI avail, &c.\n\n(Signed) J. N. JORDAN.\n\n### Inclosure 4 in No. 1\n\nM. Bapst to Sir J. Jordan.\n\nDear Sir John,\n\nFrench Legation, December 28, 1906.\n\nI BEG to return herewith to you the copies you kindly lent me. The unconditional power granted by the scheme to the Board of Reference of deciding the continuation or non-continuation of the bar works has given rise to some doubts as to the suitable fulfilment of those works.\n\nThe Chinese Government, which would very much dislike the possibility for foreign gun-boats of coming up to Tien-tsin, and most of the local shipping agencies have no interest for the bar being dredged for more than a few feet. The French interest, on the contrary, is the dredging for 16 feet, or at the least for 14 feet. Therefore, if we have no guarantee that the work will be done to that extent, we have no reason for giving our money.\n\nI should be very happy if you would kindly devise some means which could allow me to give the French Government's assent without referring again the matter to Paris.\n\nYours, &c.\n\n(Signed) EDOUARD BAPST.\n\n### Inclosure in No. 1\n\nM. Claudel to Consul-General Hopkins.\n\nM. le Consul-Général et cher Collègue,\n\nTien-tsin, le 29 Décembre, 1906.\n\nJ'AI été avisé par le Ministre des difficultés que soulèvent, au point de vue de notre Gouvernement, la rédaction et l'application de l'arrangement relatif à la coupure de la Barre de Takou actuellement soumis à l'approbation du Corps Diplomatique. J'ai pensé que des explications données par vous pourraient dissiper les malentendus existants.\n\nComme vous le savez, la principale objection que fait le Gouvernement Français à l'acte dont il s'agit est la crainte de voir substituer à l'autorité de la Commission du Hai-ho établie par le consentement des différentes Puissances, celle d'une Commission nouvelle qui présenterait en fait le caractère d'une organisation étroitement locale.\n\nLes assurances données par vous que la Commission du Hai-ho aura, en ce qui concerne la barre, le même rôle et la même autorité qu'en ce qui concerne la rivière proprement dite, ont déjà éclairé un côté fort important de la question.\n\nPage 569", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-343 - Public Offices & Foreign Office - 1907.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 411626, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-344 - Public Offices & Foreign Office - 1907", "page_number": 126, "title": "CO129-344 - Public Offices & Foreign Office - 1907", "content_text": "# (No. 8.) Sir,\n\n## Inclosure 1 in No. 1.\n\n### Consul-General Fulford to Sir J. Jordan.\n\nMukden, December 22, 1906.\n\nI HAVE the honour to inform you that the British-American Tobacco Company's District Manager in Newchwang, Mr. Henckendorff, has complained to me that the cigarettes of the Company are being taxed in Tiehling, one of the marts in Manchuria opened to foreign trade by the Japan-China Treaty of December 1905. The Chinese agents of the Company have paid a considerable amount in this manner. In informing me of this, Mr. Henckendorff added that Japanese cigarettes were being forced to pay the same duties at Tiehling, but that they were being levied on the Chinese clients of the Japanese importers.\n\nAs nearly all the cigarettes of the British-American Tobacco Company are manufactured in Shanghae and classed and taxed there as \"native goods,\" I am in some doubt as to whether it would be correct to demand for them in Treaty ports exemption from any further taxation beyond that prescribed by the Treaty Tariff as in the case of foreign goods.\n\nI presume that ordinary native goods conveyed from one Treaty port or mart to another by foreigners for local consumption by the Chinese are not entitled to exemption from further taxation beyond that of the Treaty Tariff in the port of destination, at least when they have arrived in Chinese hands.\n\nThe question also of transit taxation on such goods between the Treaty ports connected by railway presents some difficulty. In the case of these cigarettes being sent from Shanghae to Newchwang via Chin Wang Tao, I have ascertained that, in addition to the usual coast trade duty of one and a-half times the export duty, a transit duty of half the export duty has been regularly levied to free them of li-kin along the railway. This duty is levied on the ground that they are native produce. Foreign goods are passed free under exemption certificates.\n\nI should be glad to be instructed as to the claim for exemption from taxation in Treaty marts, as the Company wishes to apply for a refund of the duties paid as above described in Tiehling.\n\nI have, &c.\n(Signed) H. E. FULFORD.\n\n## (No. 2.) Sir,\n\n### Inclosure 2 in No. 1.\n\n#### Mr. Hosie to Sir J. Jordan.\n\nOffice of the Commercial Attaché, Shanghae, January 17, 1907.\n\nI HAVE the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your despatch No. 1 of the 3rd instant, inclosing copy of a despatch from His Majesty's Consul-General at Mukden regarding the taxation of the British-American Tobacco Company's cigarettes in Manchuria, and directing me to inquire into the whole subject of the manufacture of these cigarettes and their treatment by the Imperial Maritime Customs at this port.\n\nThe history of the customs duty on cigarettes at Shanghae dates back to the year 1892, when a small factory called the Commercial Tobacco Company was established in Hongkew and manufactured cigarettes almost entirely for local consumption. There was an insignificant export and on this the Customs levied a duty of 4 m. 5 c. per picul, classing it, as there was no heading \"Cigarettes\" in the Tariff as prepared tobacco, and subjecting it to the same amount of duty.\n\nThe Treaty of Shimonoseki of 1895 authorized Japanese subjects and, by the most-favoured-nation treatment, other foreigners to engage in all kinds of manufacturing industries in the open cities, towns, and ports of China, and many industries, including the manufacture of cigarettes on a large scale, at once began to spring up in Shanghae, and the export duty of 4 m. 5 c. per picul on cigarettes was continued until the 22nd January, 1904, when an Order (No. 601), copy of which I inclose, was posted at the custom-house giving notice that Chinese manufactures of foreign type would from that date be liable to a single 5 per cent. ad valorem duty, and thereafter be free from further taxation. No reference to an export duty on goods manufactured by Japanese in China is made in the Treaty of Shimonoseki, but Article III of the Protocol supplementary to the Japanese Treaty of Commerce and Navigation of the 21st July, 1896, lays down that \"the Government of Japan concedes the right of the Chinese Government to enforce on articles manufactured by Japanese subjects in China such a tax as may seem expedient, provided that the same tax shall not differ from or exceed the tax paid by Chinese subjects,\" and on this Article, which reads more like the imposition of an excise tax than a customs duty, is based the claim of the Imperial Maritime Customs to levy export and coast-trade duties. On receipt of your despatch now under acknowledgment I called upon Mr. Hobson, Commissioner of Customs, who informed me that the amount levied on the cigarettes was the duty on local machine-made goods, and that he would look into the matter and give me details later. The same day he forwarded to me a Memorandum, copy of which I inclose.\n\nAt the time that Customs Order No. 601 was issued the British-American Tobacco Company's factory was undergoing reconstruction, and it was not until July of 1904 that the Company was again prepared to export cigarettes. It then found that the 5 per cent. duty was in force and had to be paid. Against this the Company vigorously protested, and a lengthy but fruitless correspondence took place between its Director and the Commissioner of Customs. The former thereupon forwarded copies of all the correspondence to His Majesty's Consul-General, who referred the matter to the Legation. The case was laid by Sir Ernest Satow before the Wai-wu Pu, and I inclose copy of Prince Ching's final reply of the 26th December, 1904, agreeing to the former's contention that duty should continue to be paid on the cigarettes at the rate of 4 m. 5 c. per picul, but while agreeing the Prince stated that \"the rule applicable to native products must be applied, that if, after payment of export duty, there is a re-entry into another port, coast-trade duty must be paid, and, if there is a further conveyance into the interior, customs dues must be paid at customs stations, and li-kin at li-kin stations.\" I inclose a copy of a letter from the British-American Tobacco Company accepting the above conditions. I take these conditions to mean that when the cigarettes have paid coast trade duty in a port—and coast trade duty is payable only once, however many ports are visited—en route to destination, they are not liable to any further taxation whatsoever in that port. After leaving the port they would of course be subject to such taxes as are legitimately leviable in the interior.\n\nMr. Fulford, in the third paragraph of his despatch, presumes that \"ordinary native goods conveyed from one Treaty port or mart to another by foreigners, for local consumption by the Chinese, are not entitled to exemption from further taxation beyond that of the Treaty Tariff, in the port of destination, at least when they have arrived in Chinese hands\"; but goods manufactured by foreigners in the open ports of China are not ordinary native goods, and the Treaty of Shimonoseki distinctly provides that such manufactured goods shall be treated as regards inland taxation on the same footing as foreign imports. The second paragraph of section 4 of Article VI of that Treaty lays down that \"All articles manufactured by Japanese subjects in China shall, in respect of inland transit and internal taxes, duties, charges, and exactions of all kinds, and also in respect of warehousing and storage facilities in the interior of China, stand upon the same footing and enjoy the same privileges and exemptions as merchandize imported by Japanese subjects into China.\" Foreign goods, no matter whether in the hands of foreigners or Chinese, are exempt from taxation in a port after payment of Tariff import duty, and the above section of the Shimonoseki Treaty places goods manufactured by foreigners in the open ports of China on the same footing. The framers of the Shimonoseki Treaty do not appear to have contemplated that goods manufactured by foreigners in China would be, as they are, exported to foreign countries and other Chinese ports; but when, in the latter case, they have satisfied the Imperial Maritime Customs by payment of export and coast trade duty, they should be exempt from further taxation in the port of such final duty payment, whether it is a sea, river, or inland port, and if inland and the goods have to be conveyed to it from another port by rail, there should be no railway transit taxes, for it may be taken for granted that the Chinese authorities are quite capable of exercising control over goods unloaded at stations between ports.\n\nI may add that I visited the factory of the British Cigarette Company in November last where cigarettes of pure American leaf were being turned out at the rate of 8,000,000 a day; that no suitable blend of American and Chinese tobaccos...", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-344 - Public Offices & Foreign Office - 1907.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 412507, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-345 - Public Offices & Foreign Office - 1907", "page_number": 267, "title": "CO129-345 - Public Offices & Foreign Office - 1907", "content_text": "## Inclosure 1 in No. 1\n\ninterest in the question and gave evidence of a lively desire to further the negotiations. His Excellency was, however, dominated by his fear of the literati of the three provinces, who, if the wishes of the more reasonable and representative among them were not taken into account, would cause the people under their influence to obstruct land purchase and construction work. The Government of China was at this moment not in a position to withstand this pressure. It was therefore necessary to steer a middle course between the foreign claims based on the Preliminary Agreement and the demands of the gentry. Only thus could anything beneficial accrue from the undertaking. His Excellency promised to bring all his influence to bear on the literati if Mr. Cordes would lend his assistance in that sense. Towards the end of the interview, during which Mr. Cordes confined himself to an explanation of the draft Agreements, the Viceroy noted down fifteen points which seemed to his Excellency to embody the essentials of a satisfactory solution. A copy of them was supplied to Mr. Cordes for communication to Mr. Liang. These fifteen points were not to be considered as unalterable demands on the part of the Viceroy, but merely contained the expression of his Excellency's view of what was required, according to his knowledge of the conditions as above expressed, to direct the negotiations into the proper channel.\n\nThe points were as follows:-\n\n| Point | Description |\n| --- | --- |\n| 1 | Loan not to exceed 5,000,000%. (China only took up 5,000,000l. for the Lu-Han line; the most economical arrangements possible in the circumstances must be made.) |\n| 2 | A single track to be laid first of all. (The Viceroy added verbally that it would be well to buy in advance the land for a double track.) |\n| 3 | The whole line to be completed in three years' time. |\n| 4 | The Yellow River bridge at Lao K'ou (Lokow) to be likewise completed within that period. (Verbally. An effort should at any rate be made--the time limit might be extended.) |\n| 5 | Loan to be at 94. Interest 5 per cent. per annum. |\n| 6 | Interest only payable for first ten years. Amortization to begin from eleventh year. If funds allow the loan can be paid off in full in the eleventh year, or the instalments can be increased. |\n| 7 | If the capital sum should be repaid in the eleventh year, no premium of 2 per cent. to be paid. |\n| 8 | The line shall not be pledged as security for the loan, but certain revenues of the three provinces will be pledged. Yüan Shih-kai will decide which. |\n| 9 | A German engineer will be engaged for the northern section, and a British engineer for the southern. Both will be independently selected and appointed by the high Chinese authorities intrusted with the management of the line. These engineers will be under the control and orders of the Chinese Directors. |\n| 10 | The British and German engineers have only to concern themselves with the work of construction and may not interfere in other matters. |\n| 11 | It has hitherto been stipulated that the Syndicate (and) the engineers shall receive 20 per cent. of the working profits. This must be renounced in order to prevent delay in amortization. Mr. Liang will discuss means to concede an extra bonus in commutation. |\n| 12 | The arrangements regarding the amount of commission accruing to the banks on purchase of material, or in the event of a different solution of this question (by commutation) shall be made by Mr. Liang. (The Viceroy explained that a sum as commutation might be computed on the lines of the 35,000l. allowed by the Canton-Kowloon Agreement.) |\n| 13 | Work must be simultaneously begun on the northern section from Tien-tsin and on the southern section from Pukow, as well as on the central section north and south from Chinan. (This means no delay.) |\n| 14 | Germany shall construct no competing line in Shantung. |\n| 15 | If, when the construction nears completion, the amount of the loan does not suffice, the Deutsch-Asiatische Bank and Hong Kong and Shanghae Banking Corporation can negotiate a supplementary loan.\n\nJuly 2, 1907.\n\n(Translation.)\n\nPage 3\n\n## Inclosure 2 in No. 1\n\nNotes on Mr. Cordes' Interview with Mr. Liang, July 12, 1907.\n\nCHANG CHIH-TUNG'S fifteen points were discussed with Liang. Mr. Cordes declared that the finding of a good security was the most important point, and urged Liang to ask the Viceroy Yüan, in whose hands the decision lay, at Chang Chih-tung's own suggestion, what provincial revenues he had in mind, and whether the salt revenues of the three provinces could be earmarked; or, failing that, the li-kin of Chihli, Shangtung, and Kiangsu. This did not commend itself to Liang. He was doubtful how the Viceroy would take such a question, even if asked verbally. Liang personally would prefer the Maritime Customs revenue to be pledged. He did not care to deal with the provincial Governments, which were entirely in the hands of the unreasonable gentry. He had that day received a most unreasonable telegram from the Shantung Governor regarding the Shantung portion of the security for the railway loan. The obligations arising from the Preliminary Agreement were Chinese Imperial ones, and the provinces should have no more to do with the unravelling of the affair than was absolutely necessary. Liang then wrote to Sir Robert Bredon asking the amounts of customs receipts in recent years and the total sum hypothecated for foreign loans. Later, Sir Robert Bredon called on Mr. Cordes in the bank and stated that he estimated about 15,000,000 taels were not hypothecated to the service of foreign loans. But according to the Protocol of 1901 the indemnity of 450,000,000 taels was secured on the customs.\n\n[Protocol to that effect quoted.]\n\nPeking, July 12, 1907.\n\n## Inclosure 3 in No. 1\n\n(Signed)\n\nH. CORDES.\n\n## Draft Tien-tsin-Yang-tsze Final Agreement: Chinese Offer\n\n**ARTICLE 1**. The Imperial Government of China authorizes the Syndicate banks to issue a 5 per Cent. Gold Loan for an amount of 5,000,000l. and called \"the Imperial Chinese 5 per Cent. Tien-tsin-Yang-tsze Railway Loan.\"\n\n**Art. 2**. The loan is designed to provide the capital for the construction of a Government Railway line from a point connecting the Imperial Railways of North China at or near Tien-tsin through Techon and Tsinanfu to Theien, near the southern frontier of Shantung, hereinafter known as the northern section of the Tien-tsin-Yang-tsze Railway line, and from Ihsien to Pukou (opposite Nanking, on the Yang-tsze-kiang), hereinafter known as the southern section of the Tien-tsin-Yang-tsze Railway line, the total length of these two sections being about 1,085 kilom., equal to about 2,170 Chinese *li* (Roughly 700 miles). The survey line shall be open to revision by the Director-General.\n\n**Art. 3**. The capital so provided will be solely devoted to the construction of the above railway line, and will include the funds required for the purchase of land, rolling-stock, and other equipment and for working the line, together with interest on the loan during the period of construction, which should not exceed three years from the actual beginning of the works, the commencement of the works not to be delayed beyond six months after this Agreement has been signed, within which period the sum of 500,000l. shall be placed at the disposal of the Director-General, in China or Europe as he may direct, as a first instalment on account of the proceeds of the loan. This amount of 500,000l., together with interest thereon not exceeding a charge of 6 per cent. per annum, shall be deducted from the proceeds of the first sale of the bonds.\n\n**Art. 4**. The rate of interest for the loan shall be 5 per cent. per annum on the nominal principal, and shall be paid for account of the Imperial Chinese Government during the time of the construction out of the proceeds of the loan and afterwards out of...", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-345 - Public Offices & Foreign Office - 1907.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 412746, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-345 - Public Offices & Foreign Office - 1907", "page_number": 506, "title": "CO129-345 - Public Offices & Foreign Office - 1907", "content_text": "# 503\n\n2\n\nCorroborating this is the protest addressed by the then Manager of the Company, Mr. Dugan, to the French Admiral dated the 27th October, 1901, and his reply dated the 1st December, 1901, expressing himself unable to deal with the matter and referring the former to the French Minister in Peking.\n\nM. Dubail, the French Minister, withdrew all claim to these lands and caused the French boundary posts to be removed and the lands returned to the Company. After a period of eighteen months' undisturbed occupation by the Company of the same, the land was again forcibly seized by the French Government. The justification advanced in the French Memorandum is to be found on pp. 11 and 12, and reads as follows:\n\n\"En fait, la situation de la France à Ts'in-ouang-tao est nette et son droit sur les terrains qu'elle occupe fort bien établi; d'accord avec les autres Puissances, elle détient en vertu du droit de guerre et en exécution de l'Article 9 du Protocole de 1901 relatif à l'occupation des points nécessaires pour assurer les libres communications entre Pékin et la mer en toute saison, une partie des terrains de Ts'in-ouang-tao, au même titre que divers autres emplacements situés sur les lignes d'étapes entre Pékin et la mer, et nul ne peut légalement l'en déposséder.\"\n\nThe \"droit de guerre\" could give no right to the French Government to seize the private property of the subjects of a friendly Power six weeks after the Final Peace Protocol with the Chinese Government has been signed.\n\nArticle 9 of the Protocol confirms to the use of the Powers certain lands the occupation of which had been ceded by the previous Protocol of the 16th February, 1901, for the purpose of maintaining free communication between the capital and the sea. It affords no justification for the subsequent seizure of private property.\n\nExcept for the alleged \"droit de guerre,\" no justification is offered by the French Memorandum beyond occasional references to the Tien-tsin Treaty of 1858, and an argument that the possession by this Company of its land constitutes a breach of that Treaty.\n\n31\n\nMy Directors cannot understand how clause 14 of the Treaty of 1858 forbidding \"toute coalition organisée dans le but d'exercer un monopole sur le commerce\" have any bearing on the case, or how, if a right were accorded to the French Government to lease a small portion of land at Chin Wang Tao to private individuals for commercial or industrial purposes, it could remedy a breach of this clause. The ownership of the land by this Company gives no monopoly of commerce, nor does the Company claim any. What gives this Company a special position at Chin Wang Tao (apart from its legal title) is the fact that the port has been created by the Company, that no natural port whatsoever existed there, but an artificial harbour has been created as the result of the expenditure of large sums of money by this Company in the construction of a pier and breakwater, &c. But for this expenditure the land would be worthless, as it was when first acquired by the Company.\n\nNo commercial monopoly is sought or exercised by this Company at Chin Wang Tao. The Agreement made with M. Dubail accorded to French nationals and shippers the same facilities at moderate rates as to those of any other Power, the same Agreement having been entered into with the German and Japanese Governments. In proof of this we need only mention that half-a-dozen different shipping lines, including the French \"Chargeurs Réunis,\" are running to the port. The Company is, moreover, quite prepared to sell to French nationals as much land as they may require on exactly the same terms as are accorded to any others.\n\nAs regards the rights of this Company to its property at Chin Wang Tao under the Agreement of Purchase with the old Chinese Engineering and Mining Company my Directors do not consider that they are called upon to enter into any discussion, but I am to point out that Chang Yen Mao, in entering into the Agreement, acted not only as Director-General of the old Chinese Engineering and Mining Company, but also as Director-General of Mines of the Province of Chili, in which capacity he was second only to the Viceroy in rank and power.\n\nOn pp. 6 and 7, however, a definite pretext is assigned for taking the view that the Company's rights are open to question. It runs as follows:\n\n\"La date seule du 30 Juillet, 1900, fait d'ailleurs tomber le contrat sous le coup d'une décision du Corps Diplomatique de Pékin (procès-verbal de la quatrième séance, le 5 Novembre, 1900), d'après laquelle aucun achat de terrains aux Chinois depuis le commencement de siège ne saurait être valable sans l'assentiment des Ministres étrangers. Cette mesure, qui visait spécialement les spéculations dolosives dans l'enceinte du quartier des Légations de Pékin, répondait à la préoccupation générale d'empêcher les ventes fictives ou léonines. Ainsi le contrat provisoire du 30 Juillet, 1900, conclu sans titres suffisants, est des plus contestables en raison de sa date, qui le rend légalement sans valeur.\"\n\nIn reply, it is only necessary to point out that this decision of the Diplomatic Corps referred exclusively to land at Peking, as is well known to all concerned.\n\nThe fact remains that this British Company has twice been forcibly dispossessed, while in actual possession and occupation of certain lands, by the French Government without any warrant or justification, and that no satisfactory explanation is as yet advanced.\n\nThe French Government, in trying to prove that the position of this Company is not correct, is taking up a question which it is not in its province to adjudicate upon. This Company's contentions as to its rights are incontestable from the point of view of international law, and the action of the French Government can only be considered as an act of aggression against British-owned property.\n\nIt is not, however, only because of the very material loss which acceptance of the French proposals would entail that the Company finds itself unable to accede to the French demands; it is because this Company is pledged to the British, Japanese, and German Governments to equality of treatment in all respects for their respective nationals, and is therefore unable to come to an agreement with the French Government by which French citizens would be placed at an advantage over those of any other Power.\n\nThat is the reason why this Company cannot consent to the transfer of further lands to the French Government beyond those near the railway station of which it already has the use, nor to the use of those lands for private and commercial purposes.\n\nMy Directors therefore beg to request that His Majesty's Government should urge upon the French Ministry for Foreign Affairs the acceptance of a similar arrangement to that made with the Governments of Japan and Germany.\n\nI have, &c.\n\nThe Chinese Engineering and Mining Company (Limited),\n\n**(Signed) ALFRED W. BERRY, Secretary**", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-345 - Public Offices & Foreign Office - 1907.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 412775, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-345 - Public Offices & Foreign Office - 1907", "page_number": 535, "title": "CO129-345 - Public Offices & Foreign Office - 1907", "content_text": "## Inclosure 2 in No. 1.\n\n## Statement by Chinese Engineering and Mining Company.\n\nM. Pichon's letter might give the impression that this Company has adopted an unconciliatory attitude in dealing with the question of the French occupation. So far from this being the case, the Company has throughout expressed its willingness to concede to the French Government exactly the same advantages which have been accepted by the German and Japanese Governments. The Company, in fact, expressed its willingness to meet the demands made by the French Minister for land for naval, military, and Government purposes, although these demands exceeded those of either the Japanese or the German Governments. Moreover, the Company's proposals were accepted as satisfactory by M. Dubail, the former Minister at Peking, who concluded an Agreement accordingly on the 5th October, 1904. It was only after a lapse of eighteen months that the Company received information that this Agreement was rejected by the French Foreign Office.\n\nM. Pichon's letter proposes as an equitable compromise the very conditions which from the first have been rejected as unacceptable to this Company.\n\nThe French Memorandum may be divided into four sections:--\n\n1. The justification of the French action and position.\n2. The alleged history of the port and the Company, and a discussion of its rights.\n3. An announcement of possible action with the Chinese Government hostile to the Company.\n4. A reiteration of proposals for a settlement, which from the first have been rejected by this Company.\n\nThe French Government are at present in occupation--\n\n(a) Of certain lands near the railway station.\n\nThese lands were occupied by the French Government at the end of 1900 or the beginning of 1901, simultaneously with the temporary occupation of land at Chin Wang Tao, effected by the other Powers. This area of ground, in the occupation of the French authorities, is far greater than that occupied by the other Power, and only a small portion of it is actually required for their naval and military depôts. The Company has always expressed its willingness to its retention of this extended area by the French Government for Government purposes.\n\nThe only issue with respect to these lands, therefore, is their assignment by the French Government to their nationals for private or trading purposes. This is dealt with later, where it is shown that the Protocol of the 7th September, 1901, Article IX, on which the French Government's claim is based, expressly recognizes \"le droit d'occuper certains points pour maintenir les communications libres entre la capitale et la mer,\" but only for that special purpose.\n\n(b) Of certain lands on the Bluff, at Chin Wang Tao.\n\nThese lands were forcibly seized by the French Government in October 1901, at a time when they were indisputably in the possession of this Company, and some time subsequent to the signing of the Peace Protocol of the 7th September, 1901. It is surprising that the French Memorandum makes no reference to this nor affords any justification of their action.\n\nCompletely independent and reliable evidence of this seizure and its date is to be found in the Report of Captain H. W. Cruddas, Officer Commanding Chin Wang Tao, addressed on the 20th October, 1901, to the Chief Staff Officer of the British China field force in Tien-tsin.\n\nCorroborating this is the protest addressed by the then Manager of the Company, Mr. Dugan, to the French Admiral, dated the 27th October, 1901, and his reply dated the 1st December, 1901, expressing himself unable to deal with the matter, and referring the former to the French Minister in Peking.\n\nM. Dubail, the French Minister, withdrew all claim to these lands, and caused the French boundary-posts to be removed and the lands returned to the Company. After a period of eighteen months' undisturbed occupation by the Company of the same, the land was again forcibly seized by the French Government. The justification advanced in the French Memorandum is to be found on pp. 11 and 12, and reads as follows:-\n\n\"En fait, la situation de la France à Ts'in-ouang-tao est nette et son droit sur les terrains qu'elle occupe fort bien établi; d'accord avec les autres Puissances, elle détient, en vertu du droit de guerre et en exécution de l'Article IX du Protocole de 1901 relatif à l'occupation des points nécessaires pour assurer les libres communications entre Pekin et la mer en toute saison, une partie des terrains de Ts'in-ouang-tao, au même titre que divers autres emplacements situés sur les lignes d'étapes entre Pekin et la mer, et nul ne peut légalement l'en déposséder.”\n\nThe \"droit de guerre\" could give no right to the French Government to seize the private property of the subjects of a friendly Power six weeks after the final Peace Protocol with the Chinese Government has been signed.\n\nArticle IX of the Protocol confirms to the use of the Powers certain lands, the occupation of which had been ceded by the previous Protocol of the 16th February, 1901, for the purpose of maintaining free communication between the capital and the sea. It affords no justification for the subsequent seizure of private property.\n\nExcept for the alleged \"droit de guerre\" no justification is offered by the French Memorandum beyond occasional references to the Tien-tsin Treaty of 1858, and an argument that the possession by this Company of its land constitutes a breach of that Treaty.\n\nThe Directors of the Company cannot understand how Clause No. XIV of the Treaty of 1858 forbidding \"toute coalition organisée dans le but d'exercer un monopole sur le commerce\" can have any bearing on the case, or how, if a right were accorded to the French Government to lease a small portion of land at Chin Wang Tao to private individuals for commercial or industrial purposes, it could remedy a breach of this clause. The ownership of the land by this Company gives no monopoly of commerce, nor does the Company claim any. What gives this Company a special position at Chin Wang Tao (apart from its legal title) is the fact that the port has been created by the Company, that no natural port whatsoever existed there, but an artificial harbour has been created as the result of the expenditure of large sums of money by this Company in the construction of a pier and breakwater, &c. But for this expenditure the land would be worthless, as it was when first acquired by the Company.\n\nNo commercial monopoly is sought or exercised by this Company at Chin Wang Tao. The Agreement made with M. Dubail accorded to French nationals and shippers the same facilities at moderate rates as to those of any other Power, the same Agreement having been entered into with the German and Japanese Governments. In proof of this we need only mention that half-a-dozen different shipping lines, including the French \"Chargeurs Réunis,\" are now running to the port. The Company is, moreover, quite prepared to sell to French nationals as much land as they may require on exactly the same terms as are accorded to any others.\n\nAs regards the rights of this Company to its property at Chin Wang Tao under the Agreement of Purchase with the old Chinese Engineering and Mining Company, the Directors of the Company do not consider that they are called upon to enter into any discussion, but I am to point out that Chang Yen Mao, in entering into the Agreement, acted, not only as Director-General of the old Chinese Engineering and Mining Company, but also as Director-General of Mines of the Province of Chili, in which capacity he was second only to the Viceroy in rank and power.\n\nOn pp. 6 and 7, however, a definite pretext is assigned for taking the view that the Company's rights are open to question. It runs as follows:-\n\n\"La date seule du 30 Juillet, 1900, fait d'ailleurs tomber le contrat sous le coup d'une décision du Corps Diplomatique de Pékin (procès-verbal de la quatrième séance, le 5 Novembre, 1900), d'après laquelle aucun achat de terrains aux Chinois depuis le commencement du siège ne saurait être valable sans l'assentiment des Ministres étrangers. Cette mesure, qui visait spécialement les spéculations dolosives dans l'enceinte du quartier des Légations de Pékin, répondait à la préoccupation générale d'empêcher les ventes fictives ou léonines. Ainsi le contrat provisoire du 30 Juillet, 1900, conclu sans titres suffisants, est des plus contestables, en raison de sa date, qui le rend légalement sans valeur.\"\n\nIn reply, it is only necessary to point out that this decision of the Diplomatic Corps referred exclusively to land at Peking, as is well known to all concerned.\n\nThe fact remains that this British Company has twice been forcibly dispossessed, while in actual possession and occupation, of certain lands, by the French Government, and that no satisfactory explanation is as yet advanced.\n\nPage 531", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-345 - Public Offices & Foreign Office - 1907.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 416467, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-351 - Public Offices - 1908", "page_number": 632, "title": "CO129-351 - Public Offices - 1908", "content_text": "[This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.]\n\n2000623\n\n# CHINA TRADE\n\n**CONFIDENTIAL**\n\n[13003]\n\n(No. 30.)\n\n(Telegraphic.) P.\n\nNo. 1.\n\n1 JUN 08\n\n[April 14.]\n\n## SECTION 1\n\nSir C. MacDonald to Sir Edward Grey.--(Received April 14.)\n\nSEE my despatch No. 278 of the 21st December. Convention for reciprocal protection of trade-marks.\n\nTokió, April 14, 1908.\n\nThe United States' Ambassador, being anxious to get the question of the Trade-marks Convention between America and Japan settled before the adjournment of Congress, is ready to sign it at once, but I understand that he has not yet received final instructions on the subject of the exclusion from the Convention of patents, designs, and copyrights.\n\nNow, however, China and Corea are brought under one Convention, and the United States' Government have agreed to surrender their extra-territorial jurisdiction in Corea with reference to trade-marks.\n\nThe Japanese Government agree to exclude the three years' proviso, but claim in return that before the Convention comes into force there must be an interval of one year. The Americans are ready to agree to six months,\n\nAlthough \"hong\" or trade names in Article 5 of the American draft may be altered to \"hong marks,\" this Article is still radically different from the corresponding Article of our draft in its present form.\n\nWhile apparently satisfied that Japanese Consular Courts will be competent to deal with any questions which may hereafter arise in regard to the Convention, yet, in order to make doubly certain on this score, the Americans propose to arrange for the conclusion of a Protocol, in which they will stipulate for \"most-favoured-nation treatment\" and demand assurances on certain other points.\n\n[2018 0-1]", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-351 - Public Offices - 1908.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 416468, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-351 - Public Offices - 1908", "page_number": 633, "title": "CO129-351 - Public Offices - 1908", "content_text": "This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government,\n\nCHINA TRADE.\n\n(\n\nCONFIDENTIAL.\n\n[16109]\n\nNo. 1.\n\n626\n\n[May 11.]\n\n1 JUN 08\n\nSECTION 1.\n\nSir C. MacDonald to Sir Edward Grey.-(Received May 11.)\n\n(No. 95. Confidential.) Sir,\n\nTokió, April 15, 1908. WITH reference to my despatch No. 278 of the 21st December, 1907, and my telegram No. 30 of yesterday's date, I have the honour to transmit herewith a copy of the draft Convention relating to the mutual protection of Japanese, American, and Corean trade-marks, in its latest form, which has been communicated to me confidentially by my American colleague.\n\nI understand that the Americans are very anxious to sign the Convention as soon as possible in order that it may reach Washington before Congress adjourns, and that the Ambassador is now only awaiting final instructions from his Government before proceeding to sign the Convention. These instructions relate to the omission throughout the Convention of the words \"copyright,” “patent,\" and \"design.\"\n\nThe American Ambassador expects that with the omission of these words and the following alterations, the draft which is inclosed herewith will be accepted.\n\nThe alterations are as follows:--\n\n(a.) Addition to Article IV.-\" And, correspondingly, registration in the United States of such rights of Japanese or Corean subjects shall have the same effect in Corea as if originally made in respect to that country and American citizens in Corea.\" (b.) Article V.\" Hong' or trade names may be altered to hong marks.'\" (c.) Article X.-The Treaty shall come into force six months after the date of the exchange of ratifications.\n\n(a.) The addition to Article IV seems a very natural one, as without it marks registered in Japan would be on a different footing to marks registered in the United States. This addition was provisionally inserted in the United States' Department draft which formed Inclosure 4 to my despatch No. 278.\n\n(b.) The alteration in Article V will probably be made at the request of the Japanese authorities, who consider that the present wording is not clear.\n\n(c.) The Japanese authorities are anxious that the Convention should not come into force until one year after exchange of ratifications, in consideration of their with-drawing their proviso to Article I of their draft with regard to the three-year limit. The Americans will not grant this, but are prepared to meet them half-way and make it six months.\n\nIt will be noticed that with the exception of the amalgamation of the two separate Conventions relating to China and Corea respectively into one joint Convention and the probable omission of patents, designs, and copyright, the position remains much the same as it did in December last, that is to say, the Americans have waived extraterritorial jurisdiction in Corea with regard to trade-mark cases; they are prepared to treat \"hong marks\" as trade-marks, which means that they must be registered before they are entitled to protection; while in the one solitary instance where they have obtained a concession from the Japanese they have diminished the value of the concession by proposing to allow the Japanese pirates a period of six months in which to clear off their stocks.\n\nAt the same time, although gaining little by the Convention in return for what they have not concede, they hope to derive some further benefits by means of a Protocol. I have not yet seen the draft of the Protocol, but I understand that it will contain some provisions with regard to the authorization of Japanese extraterritorial Courts to deal with matters arising out of the Convention, as well as an assurance to the effect that Japan will do all in her power by administrative measures to prevent and correct fraudulent registrations of trade-marks.\n\nThe Protocol will also probably contain a clause stipulating for most-favoured-nation treatment.\n\n[2967 1-1]\n\nB", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-351 - Public Offices - 1908.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 417418, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-353 - Public Offices - 1908", "page_number": 130, "title": "CO129-353 - Public Offices - 1908", "content_text": "126\n\nSir II. MacDonell, No. 57,\n\n14, 1901.\n\n2\n\nPeking, as the Central Government is largely composed of Cantonese who are intimately acquainted with the conditions obtaining in Macao.\n\nIt has been suggested that, just as Japan started her campaign for the abolition of exterritoriality by denouncing the Treaty with Portugal, so now China is making a similar experiment with the same Power, but so far the parallel seems scarcely justified.\n\nI have, &c. (Signed) J. N. JORDAN,\n\nInclosure 1 in No. 1.\n\nPortuguese Government to Portuguese Chargé d'Affaires.-(Communicated by M. Brederode, August 18, 1908.)\n\n(Télégraphique.)\n\nVEUILLEZ soutenir nos droits, vous appuyant pour cela sur le Traité et réclamant contre la violation du statu quo,\n\nDans ce sens veuillez vous diriger au Gouvernement Chinois, insistant pour la nomination immédiate de la Commission Mixte pour traiter la question des limites. Nous nommerons de suite nos Délégués, qui seront l'antérieur Gouverneur (encore en fonctions), le Directeur des Travaux Publics, et le Chef des Sinologues. Les pouvoirs de la Commission pourraient être les suivants: Etudier la question et négocier le projet de délimitation ad referendum des deux Gouvernements. Quant au local de la réunion de la Commission, veuillez me dire quel point semble plus convénient à la Légation, Macao, Canton, ou Shanghai. Je vous recommande d'insister pour que la Chine retire ses troupes, parce qu'il n'est point admissible l'occupation par une seule des Puissances des points en litige, même avec le prétexte de la répression de la contrebande, répression à laquelle notre coopération est assurée, et point admissible aussi dans le moment où une occupation est chargée de résoudre les doutes de la question. Dans tous ces points vous procéderez d'accord avec le Représentant d'Angleterre, lui demandant ses bons offices en vue d'obtenir une rapide et favorable réponse du Gouvernement Chinois et les noms de ses Commissaires délimitation, &c.\n\nInclosure 2 in No. 1.\n\nMemorandum.\n\nIN a Memorandum dated the 10th September, 1901, the Portuguese Minister for Foreign Affairs informed Sir H. MacDonell, His Majesty's Minister at Lisbon, that the Portuguese Government for many reasons considered the moment opportune for the settlement of outstanding difficulties between Portugal and China.\n\nIf the Chinese Government would agree to carry out Article 2 of the Treaty of the 1st December, 1887, respecting the delimitation of the boundaries of Macao and its dependencies—the provisions of which had, the Minister stated, been persistently disregarded hitherto—and would award compensation in a sum of 1,500,000l. for the losses incurred by the Portuguese Government and its subjects during the recent upheaval in China, Portugal for her part was prepared to extend her co-operation in the suppression of the opium traffic to the suppression of all contraband goods by the establishment of a Portuguese custom-house at Macao, to consent to the proposal to raise the maritime duties in China, and to maintain for a stipulated period the prohibition for the introduction of arms and ammunition through her possession of Macao.\n\nForeign Office telegram, No. 310, October 14, 1901.\n\nCanton, No. 47, December 12, 1901.\n\nThe Memorandum suggested that the islands of Lappa, Mut Wan San, Mala Chao, D. Joao, and Vongkam, as well as the isthmus which joins Macao to the Island of Heung Shan, should be included under Portuguese sovereignty.\n\nTo discuss these questions with Sir E. Satow, Senhor Jose de Azevedo Castello Branco, Governor of Lisbon, was directed to proceed to Peking as Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary to China.\n\nSenhor Branco arrived at Macao in December 1901, the special objects of his mission, as announced at an official reception, being to obtain the delimitation of the boundaries of the Colony and to acquire additional territory in the adjoining district of Heung Shan, and more particularly the long-coveted Island of Lappa, which, the Portuguese alleged, dominated their territory.\n\nSenhor Branco informed Sir E. Satow that he proposed to ask the Chinese Government for the cession of Lappa, Don Juan, and a third island, without which no improvement in the port of Macao could be effected. He offered in return to assist in the collection of the revenue from boiled opium, which was smuggled in large quantities to Canton, and to give up all claim to the hinterland of Macao.\n\nSir E. Satow desired to know what measure of support should be accorded by him to these projects, and he was informed on the 22nd January that His Majesty's Government strongly deprecated any attempt which they feared would be contagious to obtain fresh concessions of Chinese territory, but authorized support of the Portuguese demands provided they were presented in a form which showed the absolute necessity for control of the islands in order to suppress smuggling and to improve the port. A request for a Railway Concession might also be supported.\n\nMr. Scott had reported on the 14th January that the demand for the extension of the area of the Colony had been abandoned, and that the efforts of the envoy would be solely directed to securing Commercial and Mining Concessions, and more especially the right to construct a railway from Macao to Heung Shan city and Shek-ki.\n\nOn the 24th January Senhor Branco informed Sir E. Satow that he proposed to endeavour to obtain from China the execution of Article 2 of the Treaty of 1837, which provided for the delimitation of the boundaries of Macao \"and its dependencies\" by a Commission. The dependencies, he stated, had for centuries been Macarira (Don Juan), Taipa, Koho, and Wungkum; the island of Lappa had been included in them up to about 1860, but had then been abandoned. These demands were more moderate than those mentioned in the Memorandum inclosed in Sir H. MacDonell's despatch No. 57 of the 14th September, 1901, and Senhor Branco had, he said, no intention of claiming Heung Shan. Portugal had actually had possession of or exercised jurisdiction over the four islands claimed. Sir E. Satow had, however, seen a Portuguese map in which the southern half of Wungkum was coloured as belonging to China.\n\nInstead of a lease of Heung Shan, which Senhor Branco saw the impossibility of obtaining, he proposed to ask the right to construct a railway from Macao to Canton and Samshui. The most difficult point in the negotiations would be Lappa, on which the Imperial Maritime Customs had a station, but it was impossible to carry out port works without control over its eastern shore, which formed one side of the harbour of Macao.\n\nThe negotiations were delayed by the discussion over the Convention for the evacuation of Manchuria, but in a note of the 21st February, Senhor Branco represented to Prince Ching that, for the security and prosperity of the Colony, the possession of the surrounding islands, natural dependencies conceded by the Treaty of 1887, was indispensable. He proposed the appointment of Delegates to discuss the interests of the two countries and to decide the basis for a limitation Convention.\n\nPrince Ch'ing replied that the Chinese Government could not consent to any \"addition, diminution, or alteration\" of the boundaries, but were ready to appoint a Delegate to delimit the frontier.\n\nPrince Ching to Senhor Branco, March 12, 1902.\n\nSenhor Branco reminded his Highness that, by Article 12 of the Treaty of 1887, Portuguese subjects were still entitled to import goods at the rates fixed by the Tariff of 1858, as Portugal had not yet declared her adhesion to the Final Protocol of September 1901.\n\nSenhor Branco to Prince Ch'ing, March 17, 1902.\n\nPrince Ch'ing considered that the mere nomination of Delegates to delimit the frontier, without previous agreement as to a basis of delimitation, would not help towards a solution of the question. It was necessary first to define the respective rights of the two countries, as expressed in Article 2 of the Protocol of Lisbon, by a special Convention before nominating Delegates to delimit the actual frontier.\n\nSenhor Branco to Prince Ching, March 19, 1902.\n\nSenhor Branco had been given confidentially to understand that the Chinese Government would be willing to make some slight territorial concession in return for the adhesion of Portugal to the Final Protocol. He was consequently the more disappointed at the receipt of a reply to the effect that the \"dependencies\" were only the territory actually governed by Macao, and there was therefore no need of a delimitation Convention, but merely of actual demarcation, and he accordingly informed the Prince.\n\nPrince Ching to Senhor Branco, April 17, 1902.\n\n[1982 c-5]\n\nB 2\n\nSenhor", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-353 - Public Offices - 1908.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 417419, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-353 - Public Offices - 1908", "page_number": 131, "title": "CO129-353 - Public Offices - 1908", "content_text": "127\n\nBranco. April 4, 1902.\n\nSir E. Satow,\n\nNo. 102, April 17, 1902.\n\nSir E. Satow,\n\nNo. 207, July 23, 1902.\n\nSir E. Satow, September 23, 1902.\n\nSir E. Satow,\n\nTelegraphic, No. 282. October 2, 1902.\n\n4\n\nthat he must decline to pursue the subject of delimitation of Macao until he had received further instructions from his Government, to whom he had referred the matter by post. He proposed, however, to take up the question of the modifications which would have to be introduced into the Portuguese Treaty of Commerce in order that China might obtain the right of levying a full 5 per cent. duty on goods imported by Portuguese subjects.\n\nSenhor Branco intended to offer to the Chinese Government—\n\n1. His adhesion to the Protocol.\n\n2. Permission to establish custom-house at Macao to collect duties and li-kin on all imported goods destined for the interior.\n\n3. Additional facilities for collection of the import duty and li-kin on opium.\n\n4. Co-operation in the suppression of piracy on the West River.\n\nIn return for these advantages he would ask for—\n\n1. A lease of the Island of Lappa, subject to payment to the Viceroy of Canton of the annual revenue hitherto collected by him in that island.\n\n2. A Concession for a railway from Macao to Canton and Samshui.\n\nOn the 23rd July Sir E. Satow wrote that he had been informed by his Portuguese colleague that he had come to an understanding with the Commissioners Na Tung and Juiliang, who had been appointed by the Chinese Government to negotiate with him as regards two points of a draft Convention:—\n\n1. A Concession for a railway from Macao to Canton. 2. Macao to become an \"open port\" with a branch of the Imperial Maritime Customs established there.\n\nArticle 3 of this proposed Convention provided that, until the delimitation stipulated for in Article 2 of the Treaty of 1887 was carried out, Portugal should be free to execute within a zone marked on a map to be attached to the Convention such works as might be considered necessary for the improvement, defence, and prosperity of Macao. This zone included all the islands over which Portugal exercised any degree of control.\n\nArticle 4 stated that Portugal would co-operate with China in the policing of the mouths of the West River, would maintain in the above-mentioned zone the means necessary for that purpose, and would extend to the Chinese authorities all the help of which they might stand in need for the protection of commerce and navigation.\n\nSenhor Branco subsequently informed Sir E. Satow that he had been unable to obtain acceptance of the Article which stipulated that Portugal should be allowed to execute port works within a limited zone, in consequence of the opposition of the Viceroy at Canton. He had therefore decided to abandon it, and had proposed instead that a Commission should be appointed to proceed to the delimitation of the dependencies of Macao, in accordance with Article 2, with a proviso that resort should be had to arbitration in case the Commission could not agree. This proposal had likewise been rejected by the Chinese negotiators, and the Minister appealed to Sir E. Satow for his assistance.\n\nOn the following day Sir E. Satow accordingly advised the Wai-wu Pu to accept Senhor Branco's conditions, in order to secure Portugal's adhesion to the 5 per cent. Tariff. The Ministers replied that Portugal had no ground for complaint, as the Treaty of 1887 mentioned no limit of time for the appointment of a Delimitation Commission. They urged Sir Ernest to press Senhor Azevedo to content himself with the two Concessions he had already obtained, namely, the Macao-Canton Railway and the establishment of a branch of the Imperial Maritime Customs in the Colony.\n\nIt was eventually agreed that no mention of delimitation should be made in the new Treaty, but that the question should be consigned to an exchange of notes. This arrangement was, however, shortly afterwards repudiated. At a further Conference it was decided that an Article should be inserted declaring that the Treaty of 1887 remained binding, and on the 20th September the basis of a draft Treaty was agreed to by the Portuguese Minister, the principal items of which were:—\n\n1. Portuguese adhesion to the 5 per cent. ad valorem duties of Protocol.\n\n2. Establishment of Chinese Customs at Macao.\n\n3. Concession for the Macao-Canton Railway.\n\nThe 30th September was fixed for the signature of the Treaty, but in consequence of objections raised by the Japanese Tariff Commissioner and the United States' Consul-General at Shanghae, the Chinese declared that the Concession Article must be excised. Sir E. Satow informed his Japanese and American colleagues that the Treaty would have no injurious effect on their interests.\n\nThe instrument was eventually signed on the 15th October. Article 1 simply confirmed the Treaty of 1887. Article 2 provided for the acceptance by Portugal of the increase of the import Tariff stipulated for by Article 6 of the Final Protocol of the 7th September, 1901.\n\nArticles 3-6 provided for the establishment at Macao of a branch of the Imperial Maritime Customs, which should function as at a Treaty port.\n\nSir E. Satow, No. 300, October 22, 1902.\n\nSenhor Branco informed Sir E. Satow that he had signed an exchange of notes by which China undertook to accord to Portugal the Concession for a railway between Macao and Canton.\n\nThe Envoy returned to Lisbon in December 1902.\n\nSir M. Gosselin, December 16, 1902.\n\nOpposition was raised in the Cortes to Article 3, which provided for the establishment of a delegation of the Imperial Maritime Customs to control the opium trade, which the Opposition chose to denounce as derogatory to Portuguese sovereignty, and the Treaty was not ratified.\n\nSenhor Branco accordingly returned to China, and in November 1904 signed at Shanghae a new Treaty, by which Portugal conceded to China certain facilities for suppressing the contraband trade in opium, and in return was accorded trading rights on the West River. This instrument did not apparently differ materially from the previous Treaty, as Senhor Villaga, who with his colleagues had, when in opposition, brought about the rejection of the earlier Convention, expressed to Sir M. Gosselin the difficulty which the Government experienced in sanctioning in 1905 an Agreement which they had so severely criticized in 1903.\n\nThe Treaty has never been ratified.\n\n(Initialled) P. G. J. December 21, 1904.", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-353 - Public Offices - 1908.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 417965, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-353 - Public Offices - 1908", "page_number": 677, "title": "CO129-353 - Public Offices - 1908", "content_text": "# AFFAIRS OF CHINA\n## CONFIDENTIAL\n\n47047\n\nReceived 23 DEC 08, November 23-\n\n### SECTION 3\n\nNo. 1.\n\n**(No. 492.)**\nSir J. Jordan to Sir Edward Grey.--(Received November 23.)\n\nPeking, October 28, 1908.\n\nIN confirmation of my telegram No. 168 of to-day's date, I have the honour to transmit to you herewith copy of the letter which the Russian Minister has addressed to the doyen of the Diplomatic Corps, inclosing translation of M. Korostovetz' note to Prince Ching, announcing the intention of the Russian Government to withdraw the detachments of their troops at present stationed at Peking and Tien-tsin.\n\nIt will be observed that, both in his note to the Wai-wu Pu and in his letter to the doyen, M. Korostovetz emphasizes his Government's reservation of the right to recall their troops should a change of circumstances render such a step necessary.\n\nI have, &c.\n(Signed) **J. N. JORDAN**\n\n#### Inclosure 1 in No. 1.\n\nRussian Minister to Doyen of Diplomatic Body.\n\nM. le Doyen et cher Collègue,\n\nPékin, le 27 Octobre, 1908.\n\nJ'AI l'honneur de faire parvenir ci-près à votre Excellence la traduction de la communication adressée d'ordre de mon Gouvernement en date de ce jour au Quai-ou-Pou relativement au retrait des détachements Russes stationnés à Pékin et à Tien-tsin. Je crois devoir ajouter que le Gouvernement Impérial se réserve le droit, si les circonstances l'y obligeaient ultérieurement, de faire rappeler les détachements en question, et que, par conséquent, cette mesure, dictée par considérations d'ordre tant moral que pratique, ne saurait porter atteinte à la solidarité établie entre les Puissances Signataires du Protocole Final de 1901.\n\nVeuillez, &c.\n(Signé) **KOROSTOVETZ**\n\n#### Inclosure 2 in No. 1.\n\nRussian Minister to Wai-wu Pu.\n\nAltesse et Excellences,\n\nLe 27 Octobre, 1908.\n\nLE Ministère des Affaires Étrangères vient de me communiquer par télégraphe que Sa Majesté Impériale a daigné ordonner l'évacuation complète du restant des détachements Russes à Pékin et à Tien-tsin.\n\nJe suis heureux de pouvoir porter à la connaissance du Gouvernement Chinois la décision de mon Auguste Maître, qui confirme d'une manière évidente les relations amicales qui ont existé de tout temps entre nos deux Empires.\n\nEn même temps je crois de mon devoir d'informer votre Altesse et vos Excellences que le Gouvernement Impérial se réserve le droit de protéger sa Légation à Pékin dans le cas où un changement de circonstances le rendrait indispensable.\n\n[2029 x-3]", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-353 - Public Offices - 1908.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 422181, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-361 - Public Offices - 1909", "page_number": 210, "title": "CO129-361 - Public Offices - 1909", "content_text": "# TO \n## 2\n\nthere may have been, the German Group were under the belief that they had informed Mr. Addis by telegram that they were only prepared to withdraw their offer to the Chinese if an arrangement was arrived at between the three groups, and that the German Group considered themselves to have a free hand to negotiate with the Chinese until such agreement between the groups was arrived at. To the question put by Mr. Addis, Mr. Urbig stated that his group could not be brought into the position of having it said by the Chinese about them that the Germans could not fulfil their engagements. He said that the contract with the Chinese had been made by the German Group in good faith; that the terms known as Tientsin Pookow had worked smoothly so far as the experience of the German Group was concerned, but there could be no question of telling the Chinese that the German Group had entered into a contract which they were no longer prepared to carry. He suggested that the Hankow business should be excluded altogether, and a mutual arrangement made for the future as to other concerns, but he definitely stated that the German Group could not, in the event of their not being able to secure better terms, bind themselves to withdraw from their contract with the Chinese.\n\n## cont.\n\nIn the general discussion which ensued Mr. Rehders and Mr. Erich confirmed this last statement by Mr. Urbig. Objection was taken by the German Group to the alleged statement by Mr. Bland, on behalf of the British Group, to the Chinese that the German Group were incapable of carrying out their contract. Mr. Keswick, on behalf of the British Group, stated that Mr. Bland had categorically denied having made any such statement as alleged, and repudiated any knowledge or responsibility for any cable sent through Reuter's Agency.\n\nMr. Carl Meyer proposed, on behalf of the British Group, that the German Group should alone sign the final Agreement with the Chinese for the Hankow-Canton Railway, and then allow the two other groups to participate, in return for which Concession the German Group should agree to withdraw from their contract with the Chinese in the event of the terms described as \"Canton-Kowloon\" terms not being obtained. The German Group did not accept this proposal. As a last resource it was proposed by the German Group that they should cable to-day to their Agent in Peking, Mr. Cordes, and ascertain whether the Chinese would consent to the addition of the following words to their Loan Agreement, viz., \"and counter-signed by the Chief Engineer,\" so as to insure that all requisitions on the loan funds should, in addition to being signed by the Managing Director of the railway or his duly authorized representative, be countersigned by the Engineer and so controlled or vetoed by the lender's nominee.\n\n\"Canton-Kowloon\" terms, as was agreed, mean in the above discussion terms which give the lenders the right of control or veto over expenditure before the withdrawal of the money takes place.\n\nThe meeting then adjourned until 3 P.M.\n\n(Signed) S. SIMON.\n\n## 3\n\nMinutes of Meeting, April 3, 1909.\n\nParties present as before except Mr. Rolders.\n\nThe German Group reported that no telegram had been received by them from Mr. Cordes.\n\nMr. Simon and Mr. Addis then stated that they considered that the French and British Groups were no longer bound to maintain the status quo. Mr. Urbig agreed that this was so.\n\nMr. Addis then explained some of his observations of yesterday relating to the negotiations between the groups, and maintained that the French and British Groups had been placed in an unfair position, and suggested that the German Group, if they could not withdraw from their offer themselves, could perhaps induce the Chinese to withdraw from their acceptance of it. He stated that it might be of some assistance to them in this direction if, as was intended, the French and British Groups were to submit a formal protest to the Chinese through the British Minister at Peking against the Chinese concluding the Hankow-Canton Railway Loan business without submitting the same to the British Group in accordance with the Convention of 1905, and that he desired the German Group to know what the intention of the British Group was.\n\nMr. Urbig, in reply, again stated his view as to the negotiations between the Groups, and repeated that the German Group relied upon telegrams exchanged, as having given the British Group notice of the intentions of the German Group. He stated that, in his opinion, it would be as impossible for the German Group to get the Chinese to withdraw from the Contract as for the German Group themselves to withdraw. He further stated that the German Group would have no complaint if by reason of the protest at Peking the Chinese were to determine the contract themselves.\n\nMr. Addis then, on behalf of the French and British Groups, read the following protest to the meeting :-\n\n\"The British and French Groups beg to place on record their deep regret at the decision arrived at by the German Group, in consequence of which they are unable to continue these negotiations any longer, but having laid down the principle that some reasonable measure of control over the expenditure of the loan funds is absolutely necessary as a safeguard to the European bondholders-they have no alternative but to part company with their German friends. They wish also to state that they now hold themselves at liberty to take whatever steps they may deem necessary in their own interests, relieved of any obligation under the Protocol.\"\n\nThe above Minutes having been read and confirmed, the proceedings then terminated.\n\n(Signed) S. SIMON.\n\nAt 3 P.M. The Minutes of the meeting held this morning were read over and approved.\n\nThe German Group reported that they had cabled to Mr. Cordes.\n\nMr. Simon and Mr. Addis stated that if Mr. Cordes' reply was unsatisfactory the French and British Groups would again ask the German Group whether they would now withdraw from their Agreement with the Chinese.\n\nMr. Urbig stated that in such event the German Group would decline to withdraw.\n\nThe meeting adjourned until to-morrow at 11 A.M. to await Mr. Cordes' reply.\n\n(Signed) S. SIMON.\n\nPage 208\nPage 210\nPage 211", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-361 - Public Offices - 1909.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 422303, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-361 - Public Offices - 1909", "page_number": 332, "title": "CO129-361 - Public Offices - 1909", "content_text": "## Instructions to Counsel to Advise in re the Hankow-Canton Railway\n\nHEREWITH are sent :-\n\n* Prints of the two draft Agreements recently settled by counsel.\n* Prints of the Minutes of meetings held between the various groups held in London on the 12th and 13th March, 1909.\n* Prints of the Minutes of further meetings held between the various groups at Paris on the 2nd and 3rd April, 1909.\n* Copy cablegram received by the Hong Kong and Shanghae Banking Corporation in London from their agent, Mr. Hillier, in Peking, dated the 16th April, 1909.\n* Print of the Addis Memorandum.\n* Print of the Tien-tsin-Pukow Railway Loan Agreement.\n\nAs will be seen from the Minutes sent herewith, the meetings between the various groups proved abortive. This was due to the fact that the German group, prior to the meetings and in defiance of the terms of the Memorandum and Protocol by Mr. C. S. Addis, dated the 26th February, 1909, concluded with the Chinese a Preliminary Agreement for the loan in question, upon terms which were referred to at the various meetings as Tien-tsin-Pukow terms. The terms in question appear from the Tien-tsin-Pukow Railway Loan Agreement sent herewith.\n\nThe objection to these terms is that they allow the Chinese a free hand in the spending of the loan funds, and that the only protection which the bondholders receive is that after the money is spent the accounts are audited by an auditor who is appointed and paid by the lenders. See the last paragraph of `Article 14` of the Tien-tsin-Pukow Railway Loan Agreement.\n\nAt the conference in Paris, the British and French groups stated clearly their determination not, for the future, to join in loans to the Chinese which did not provide for a check or control or veto over the power of the Chinese to obtain the loan funds. The German group in Paris protested that they could not withdraw from the Preliminary Agreement if the Chinese insisted upon holding them to it without modification, but as will be seen from the Minutes of the meetings, they did telegraph to their agent in China with a view to adding the words \"and countersigned by the Chief Engineer,\" to the last sentence in paragraph 1 of `Article 14` of the Tien-tsin-Pukow Railway Agreement. If the Chinese had accepted this modification the British and French groups were prepared to have come to terms and to have settled all outstanding points on the draft Agreement sent herewith, but unfortunately the German group were unable to obtain any reply from their agent, and the conference broke off.\n\nNegotiations have been going on since, and it is, we believe, the fact that the final Loan Agreement has not yet been signed by the Chinese.\n\n## Letter\n\ndes divergences d'opinion se sont produites lors des conférences tenues à Londres et à Paris.\n\nJe vous suis très reconnaissant des explications détaillées contenues dans votre lettre, et qui confirment, en les développant, les arguments que vos représentants, MM. Urlig et Erich, ont déjà fait valoir dans les conversations que j'ai eu le plaisir d'avoir avec eux.\n\nJ'ai le vif regret, cependant, de ne pouvoir me rallier à votre manière de voir, et je crois de mon devoir, en raison même des anciennes et amicales relations qui existent entre nous, de préciser, à mon tour, notre point de vue.\n\nCroyez bien, d'ailleurs, que les observations qui vont suivre n'ont nullement pour objet de rappeler inutilement les griefs des groupes anglo-français contre l'action du groupe allemand, mais plutôt de chercher, par une explication franche, à préparer le terrain, en vue d'une entente ultérieure que je ne désespère pas de voir intervenir.\n\nL'argument principal sur lequel le groupe allemand s'appuie repose sur le fait que l'adhésion donnée le 1 mars au Mémorandum Addis - et approuvée le 3 mars par le Consortium - ne liait pas votre groupe, tant que l'accord de principe n'était pas complété par l'entente définitive sur tous les points que la conférence des trois groupes devait discuter.\n\nSur ce point essentiel notre manière de voir diffère de la vôtre.\n\nL'adhésion du groupe allemand donnée le 1er mars engageait-elle sa responsabilité au moins morale ? Je ne puis pas un seul instant le mettre en doute. Cette adhésion signifiait la signature de préliminaires de paix, après une guerre reconnue nuisible par tous les intéressés.\n\nOr, pouvait-il entrer dans l'esprit des contractants qu'après la signature de ces préliminaires et avant la conclusion définitive du traité de paix, les hostilités continuassent ?\n\nEn ce qui concerne le groupe anglo-français la cessation de toute action en dehors de l'entente générale a été absolue. Vous en avez été informés, et la prière instante vous a été adressée de suivre la même voie.\n\nIl est certain - et personne ne le met en doute - que le groupe allemand en attendant le résultat de la conférence a cru, de bonne foi, pouvoir maintenir les propositions faites au Gouvernement chinois, bien que l'`Article 6` du Mémorandum Addis comportât expressément le retrait de ces propositions.\n\nMais si l'attitude du groupe allemand peut, au point de vue juridique, ne pas être contraire à la lettre des engagements, sa politique contradictoire devait fatalement placer ce groupe dans une situation fausse soit vis-à-vis du Gouvernement chinois, soit vis-à-vis des autres groupes.\n\nSon offre du 3 mars - d'apporter, le cas échéant, l'affaire obtenue par lui seul aux trois groupes réunis - n'atténue nullement les difficultés de cette situation, puisque vous étiez prévenus d'avance que les autres groupes n'accepteraient pas la formule de Tientsin-Pookow que l'entente générale avait précisément pour objet d'écarter.\n\nC'est cette politique contradictoire du groupe allemand, continuant la concurrence sur des bases reconnues inacceptables dans les préliminaires d'entente, qui, à notre avis, justifie les critiques que les autres groupes lui ont adressées.\n\nVous faites valoir que l'abandon de vos propositions aux Chinois vous eût placés dans cette situation inadmissible que, la conférence repoussant vos demandes, vous eussiez sacrifié sans compensation le fruit de vos efforts.\n\nCette crainte, permettez-moi de la dire, me paraît exagérée. En effet, vous étiez assurés d'avance de l'entente sur les points essentiels : l'entrée du groupe allemand dans la Chinese Central, le système de la désignation alternative de l'Ingénieur en chef, et le partage par tiers des commandes et autres avantages.\n\nPour ce qui est de l'internationalisation des emprunts, vous saviez certainement que la solution ne dépendait pas de la conférence, mais des autorités compétentes.\n\nQuant à la désignation d'un Ingénieur allemand pour tout le chemin de fer du Sze-Chouen, je pense bien que vous n'aviez pas sérieusement l'intention d'écarter de cette affaire l'influence française, ce qui aurait rendu toute entente impossible. Vos représentants n'ont d'ailleurs pas insisté sur ce point lors de la conférence.\n\nLe risque de vous asseoir entre deux chaises, comme vous le dites, n'existait donc pas. Cependant, pour employer la même image, le groupe allemand, en vue d'éviter ce danger, paraît avoir voulu occuper les deux chaises à la fois.\n\nPermettez-moi donc de vous demander quelle eût été notre situation respective si, comme il avait été proposé, la conférence se fût réunie avant l'acceptation de vos propositions par le Gouvernement chinois ?\n\nJe ne doute pas que l'accord définitif n'eût été facilement établi, et si, faute d'instructions contraires de votre part à votre représentant en Chine, vos propositions, toujours valables, avaient été acceptées simultanément par le Gouvernement chinois, vous vous seriez trouvés dans la nécessité de manquer à des engagements définitifs, et non seulement préliminaires - vos engagements envers le Gouvernement ne pouvant se concilier avec ceux contractés envers vos associés.\n\nJe connais trop bien la correction de vos procédés pour croire que vous vous seriez exposés volontairement à une difficulté de cette nature. Je crois ne pas me tromper en supposant que l'acceptation de vos propositions par les Chinois a été une surprise pour vous. Mais c'est précisément sur ce point, et non pas sur la légitimité de votre action, que les autres groupes sont en droit de se plaindre de la politique suivie par vous et qui a rendu cette surprise possible.\n\nVoilà, chers Messieurs, dans quels sentiments nous envisageons cette question. Ai-je besoin d'ajouter que je suis personnellement très affligé d'un différend qu'il n'a pas dépendu de nous d'éviter ?\n\nCe différend, j'en ai la ferme conviction, pourra avec de la bonne volonté réciproque être aplani dans la suite pour le mieux de nos intérêts communs, et je puis vous assurer que je serai très heureux de pouvoir contribuer à rétablir l'entente.\n\nVeuillez, &c.\n\n(Signé) E. ULLMANN.\n\nInclosure 4 in No. 1. \nPage 4\nPage 5", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-361 - Public Offices - 1909.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 422514, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-361 - Public Offices - 1909", "page_number": 543, "title": "CO129-361 - Public Offices - 1909", "content_text": "## TABLE OF CONTENTS\n\n| No. | Name | No. | Date | SUBJECT | Page |\n| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |\n| 58 | Sir E. Satow | 351 | Oct. 17, 1903 | Anti-Catholic outbreak at Ning-hai hsien. Transmits copy of a despatch from Consul Mortimore reporting (see No. 67) | 74 |\n| 59 | Sir E. Satow | 356 | Oct. 22, | Gold-mining rights in Shantung. Transmits copy of a despatch from Mr. Townley of the 2nd July reporting circumstances which led to a rupture of negotiations for an Agreement about to be concluded between His Majesty's Commissioner at Wei-hai Wei and Governor-General of Shantung (see Nos. 47, 68, 69, and 73) | 55 |\n| 60 | To Mr. Buchanan | 274 | Dec. 9, | Railway Lands Commission. Transmits copy of a Protocol reporting conclusion of proceedings in; also copy of a note transmitting above Protocol to Chinese Government | 66 |\n| 61 | To Sir E. Satow | 209 Tel | Dec. 22, 1903 | French Concession for a railway starting at Ichang. Refers to No. 54. Proposes to send Royal Engineer officer and two Indian surveyors to ascertain whether railway proposed (see No. 75) | 75 |\n| 62 | To Colonial Office | 9, | Gold-mining rights in Shantung. Refers to Colonial Office letter of the 3rd September. Transmits No. 47. Proposes to approve language of Sir E. Satow to German Minister (see No. 50) | 78 |\n| 63 | To Sir E. Satow | 212 Tel. | Oct. 25, | Chinese indemnity. Refers to No. 66. Instructs him to act on instructions conveyed in despatch No. 281 of the 21st September | 53 |\n| 64 | Sir E. Satow | 266 Tel. | Nov. 10, | Railway indemnity. Refers to No. 51. Interest paid by British Delegate | 79 |\n| 65 | To Sir E. Satow | 379 | Nov. 12, | \"Supao\" case. Refers to No. 57. Approves language held at meeting of Diplomatic Body | 58 |\n| 66 | Sir E. Satow | 280 Tel. | Oct. 28, | Whangpoo Conservancy. Refers to Foreign Office telegram No. 207. Time must elapse before French Minister can receive his instructions | 59 |\n| 67 | Sir E. Satow | 269 Tel: | Nov. 14, | Legation guard. A guard to be attached to Belgian Legation | 59 |\n| 68 | To Sir E. Satow | 358 | Oct. 18, | Anti-Catholic outbreak at Ninghai. Refers to No. 68. Transmits copy of a further despatch from Mr. Mortimore on subject | 69 |\n| 69 | Sir E. Satow | 360 | Oct. 29, | Gold-mining rights in Shantung. Refers to No. 47. Transmits translation of the final clause in the German Agreement, with map (see Nos. 60 and 69) | 70 |\n| 70 | Sir E. Satow | 361 | Oct. 29, | Gold-mining rights in Shantung. Refers to Nos. 47 and 60. Requests that representations may be made to German Government (see No. 68) | 71 |\n| 71 | Sir E. Satow | 370 | Oct. 31 | Yunnan-fu Railway. Reports interview with French Minister, who stated management to be entirely in hands of French Company. Proposed railway to Szechuen. Refers to No. 261 to Sir E. Satow of 31st August. Transmits Memorandum by Mr. Townley containing observations on Mr. Hillier's letter of the 30th June to Sir Ewen Cameron | 72 |\n| 72 | Sir E. Satow | 373 | Nov. 3, | Construction of a railway from Kai-feng fu to Ho-nan fu. Reports that M. Rouffart, representing Belgian Compagnie Générale, signed an Agreement for | 72 |\n| 73 | Mr. Jamieson | 16 | | Wei-hai Wei Mining Agreement. Refers to No. 60. Transmits copy of Note addressed to Imperial Government | 65 |\n| | Mr. Buchanan | 255 | Dec. 12, | Tien-tsin Railway Lands Arbitration. Refers to No. 32. Requests that a summary of Mr. Hopkins' Report may be telegraphed | |", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-361 - Public Offices - 1909.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 422523, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-361 - Public Offices - 1909", "page_number": 552, "title": "CO129-361 - Public Offices - 1909", "content_text": "# No. 21.\n\nSir E. Satow to the Marquess of Lansdowne—(Received October 26.)\n\n**(No. 243.) (Telegraphic.) P.**\n\nPeking, October 26, 1903.\n\n**INDEMNITIES**. With the exception of the Russian Government, which has sent no instructions as yet, all the Powers have concurred in the proposal mentioned in your Lordship's telegram No. 163.\n\nI have been informed, in confidence, by M. Dubail, that the French Government has sanctioned the remission of the interest on the difference (see my telegram No. 230, fourth paragraph), but such a concession has, up to the present, been strenuously combatted by the German Government.\n\nDoes your Lordship sanction my taking sides with my French colleague?\n\n## No. 24.\n\nSir E. Monson to the Marquess of Lansdowne.—(Received October 28.)\n\n**(No. 561.)**\n\nParis, October 27, 1903.\n\nI HAVE the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your Lordship's despatch No. 520 of the 21st October, and to inclose copy of a note which, in accordance with your Lordship's instructions, I have addressed to M. Delcassé with regard to the respective jurisdictions of the Mixed Courts of the International and French Settlements at Shanghae.\n\nI have, &c.\n\n(Signed) \n**EDMUND MONSON**.\n\n### No. 22.\n\nThe Marquess of Lansdowne to Sir E. Satow.\n\n**(No. 174.) (Telegraphic.) P.**\n\nForeign Office, October 26, 1903.\n\n**TIEN-TSIN-CHINKIANG Railway**. British and Chinese Corporation express surprise at the alleged desire of the German group to separate their interests from those of the British group, as reported in your telegram No. 239 of the 20th October.\n\nThe Corporation have promised us an early statement of their views which we are now awaiting.\n\nThey have had no communication from the German group since the Conference held in Berlin in March last when it was arranged to continue the partnership.\n\n**(Confidential.)**\n\n### No. 23.\n\nForeign Office to Treasury.\n\nForeign Office, October 27, 1903.\n\nWITH reference to your letter of the 3rd instant, I am directed by the Marquess of Lansdowne to transmit to you copy of a telegram which has been received from His Majesty's Minister at Peking, in which Sir E. Satow requests permission to act with his French colleague who has been authorized, in the event of the proposal put forward by the Belgian Minister with regard to the Chinese indemnity being accepted by the Powers, to forego the interest on the difference between gold and silver payments.\n\nIt will be remembered that the Lords Commissioners of the Treasury sanctioned the remission of interest on annual differences between the sums paid by the Chinese Government and those properly due by them under the Protocol in connection with the proposal that the payment of the British instalments of the indemnity should be accepted on a silver basis up to 1910.\n\nLord Lansdowne proposes, if the Lords Commissioners concur, to approve Sir E. Satow's acting with the French Minister in the matter, and he would be glad if he could be favoured with their Lordship's views on the subject at the earliest possible date.\n\nI am, &c. \n(Signed) \n**F. A. CAMPBELL**.\n\n**M. le Ministre,**\n\n### Inclosure in No. 24.\n\nSir E. Monson to M. Delcassé.\n\nParis, October 26, 1903.\n\nI AM in receipt of a despatch from His Majesty's Principal Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs calling my attention to the fact that the Provisional Rules which were drawn up in the summer of 1902 by the British, French, and German Consular officers at Shanghae for defining the respective jurisdictions of the Mixed Courts of the International and French Settlements at that port, have remained in force up to the present time, but that they have never been considered satisfactory, and that they were accepted, as their title implies, only as a modus vivendi until a definite arrangement could be arrived at.\n\nAs matters now stand, the British Minister at Peking reports that the French Consul-General at Shanghae has declared himself unable to send an Assessor to the Mixed Court in the International Settlement, and denies the right of other nationalities to send Assessors to the Mixed Court in the French Settlement, in which only the French Assessor sits with the Chinese Magistrate.\n\nSince the Provisional Rules with regard to the jurisdiction of the two Courts were agreed to, a Committee consisting of the British, German, and United States' Ministers at Peking, have been intrusted by the Diplomatic Body in that capital with the task of preparing a draft of amendments to the Rules of Procedure of the Mixed Court in the International Settlement, and the final draft prepared by this Committee was presented to the Diplomatic Representatives for their approval, and accepted by all except the French Minister, who stated that he had asked his Government for instructions in the matter.\n\nIn June last Mr. Townley, His Majesty's Chargé d'Affaires, reported that M. Dubail was still without instructions.\n\nM. Dubail expressed to Mr. Townley the opinion that the present arrangement would work very well if properly applied. Experience has, however, shown that difficulties have frequently arisen, and in the opinion of His Majesty's Acting Consul-General at Shanghae, friction between the authorities of the two Settlements is certain to occur as long as the present conditions continue.\n\nI am accordingly instructed to state to your Excellency that, although it would no doubt be advisable that all details with regard to procedure should be settled locally, His Majesty's Government trust that the French Government will see their way to send instructions to the effect that the two Courts in the Settlements should be placed on an equal footing, that when a Frenchman is concerned in a case in the International Settlement a French Assessor should be present, and that, similarly, when a foreigner of any other nationality is interested in a case in the French Settlement, an Assessor of that nationality should be present, all cases being tried in the Court of the Settlement in which the defendant resides.\n\nI am at the same time to point out that the Provisional Regulations now being acted upon at Shanghae were, as already stated, only adopted as a temporary measure pending a definite Settlement.\n\nI have, &c. \n(Signed) \n**EDMUND MONSON**.\n\nPage 550 \n[1688]", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-361 - Public Offices - 1909.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 422661, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-362 - Public Offices - 1909", "page_number": 64, "title": "CO129-362 - Public Offices - 1909", "content_text": "## CONFIDENTIAL\n### Telegram from Peking to Mr. Addis\n(Communicated by Mr. Addis, June 26, 1909.)\n\n(Corrected copy.)\n\nPeking, June 25, 1909. REFERRING to your wire of 23rd, in order to eliminate political significance Chang Chih Tung is very anxious that any American participation should be effected by separate protocol between banks concerned. This can be communicated by Anglo-French-German banks to Chang Chih Tung, who will refer to same when memorialising with regard to initialled final agreement. Imperial Edict can be communicated to United States Minister Plenipotentiary, Peking. With a view to avoid complications on this side, we strongly recommend endeavour to secure adherence to foregoing procedure.\n\n52 \nC.O. \n24967 \nThis Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.\n26 JUL 08 \n## CHINA RAILWAYS\n### No. 1\n#### SECTION 3\n[24126] \n[June 26. \n\nPage 52 \n[2317 CC-3]", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-362 - Public Offices - 1909.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 422916, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-362 - Public Offices - 1909", "page_number": 319, "title": "CO129-362 - Public Offices - 1909", "content_text": "# AFFAIRS OF CHINA\n## CONFIDENTIAL\n\nNo. 1.\n\n### (No. 257.) Sir J. Jordan to Sir Edward Grey.--(Received August 9.)\n\nPeking, July 15, 1909.\n\nSOME eight months have passed since the simultaneous deaths of the Emperor and Empress-Dowager placed the Government of China in the hands of the Prince Regent, and although mourning ceremonies have filled a great part of the time, the events which have occurred, although not sufficient to justify any final judgment, have at least furnished indications of the character of the ruler and of the régime which may be expected to last for the next fifteen years.\n\nThe Prince Regent entered upon his high office with much in his favour. The Emperor, his brother, had been a ruler merely in name, while the Empress-Dowager, with all her strong qualities, had seen nothing of the outer world, had little real sympathy with the innovations and changes which closer contact with the West had forced upon China, and had in her later years laboured under the disadvantage of being the usurper rather than the recognised holder of sovereign power.\n\nThe Regent, a man of about twenty-eight, had mixed freely amongst his fellow men; had seen something of the world outside China; and had experienced in person bitter results of reactionary methods. His assumption of power coincided with what might perhaps be regarded as the high watermark of Chinese progress. A year or so before, the Hunan party had been removed from the councils of the empire and their place had been taken by Yuan Shih Kai and his Cantonese foreign-educated protégés, whose services were at last being utilised by the Central Government after some twenty years of studied neglect. Yuan, it is now known, came here by his own desire, in the hope of carrying on at the centre the programme of reforms which he had inaugurated at Tien-tsin. Any hopes which he cherished in this direction must have largely disappeared before his dismissal put an end to them. Yuan's removal from public life, we were assured at the time, would have no effect upon the course of reforms, but the assurance has been falsified by subsequent events. It has marked, so far as can be seen at present, the first retrograde step in the steady deterioration of the administration under the Regency. Tong and others who were associated with Yuan have lost all semblance of influence, and those that remain admit that they hold office without power.\n\nThe result has been a decided weakening of the central authority, amounting almost to a paralysis of government in all matters where the provinces are concerned. This is especially noticeable in the Wai-wu Pu, whose inefficiency during the Regency has been so marked as to suggest that it is part of a deliberate policy. Na Tung, who had just returned to the board after a lengthy absence through illness, has been transferred to Tien-tsin with what appears to be almost a cynical disregard for foreign relations, and Prince Ch'ing continues to make his age and frail health a pretext for neglecting the duties assigned to him by the Protocol. The remaining Ministers often admit the justice of the requests which are made by the foreign representatives, but say that they are powerless to give effect to them, and privately suggest that, in order to strengthen their hands in dealing with refractory provinces, means should be found to bring pressure upon Prince Ch'ing or the Regent. This is a state of things which has never before existed, or at least been openly acknowledged, in my experience in China, and if allowed to continue it must inevitably lead to serious trouble.\n\nThe tendency to uphold Manchu ascendency in the vicinity of the capital, to which I referred in a previous despatch, has been accentuated by two recent appointments—that of Hsi Liang to the Manchurian viceroyalty, and the transfer of Tuan Fang to the viceroyship at Tien-tsin. The latter post has generally in the past been held by the most prominent Chinese official in the Empire, Tseng Kuo-fan, \n\nPage 317\nGP 31 AUG 09\n[2391-3]", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-362 - Public Offices - 1909.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 423241, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-362 - Public Offices - 1909", "page_number": 644, "title": "CO129-362 - Public Offices - 1909", "content_text": "**(This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government)**\n\n## AFFAIRS OF CHINA\n\n**CONFIDENTIAL**\n\n[35407]\n\n### No. 1\n\n#### [September 16]\n\n## SECTION 3\n\nQuestion asked in the House of Commons, September 16, 1909.\n\nMr. Ginnell,-To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what British force was specified by the protocol, signed by the Powers after the Boxer outbreak in 1900, to remain in North China for the preservation of order, and for how long; what is the entire strength of the British forces maintained there now; whether they are maintained there at China's expense; how many of those troops are white men, and how many are men of colour; and whether he is aware that the maintenance of troops of an inferior race in this country is resented by the Chinese.\n\n### Answer\n\nThe Final Peace Protocol of 1901 provided that each Power had the right to maintain a permanent guard in its legation quarter and to occupy certain points between Peking and the sea. Under this agreement a total of about 8,000 troops was maintained in North China for several years, about 2,000 of whom were British. These troops are maintained at the expense of the country to which they belong, and not of China.\n\nNo time-limit was specified in the protocol of 1901, but the question of their reduction has been, and still is, under consideration. The latest information I have shows that there are 64 British officers and 1,025 European British troops, 17 Indian officers and 805 Indian troops in North China. I have no reason to suppose that the presence of the latter is in any way resented by the Chinese, nor are they of inferior race, and I repudiate entirely the description of them given in the question.\n\n[2418--3]", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-362 - Public Offices - 1909.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 423390, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-362 - Public Offices - 1909", "page_number": 793, "title": "CO129-362 - Public Offices - 1909", "content_text": "## CONFIDENTIAL\n\n[30157]\nNo. 1.\n\n**RECE¡Rect 3 NOV 09**\n791\n\n[August 10.]\n\n### SECTION 4.\n\n**Sir J. Jordan to Sir Edward Grey.-(Received August 10.)**\n\n(No. 135.) (Telegraphic.) P.\n\n**CHINCHOW-TAONAN-FU Railway.**\n\nPeking, August 10, 1909.\n\nI have received your telegram No. 131 of yesterday's date, and have discussed the position with Pauling's representative.\n\nLord ffrench is aware that His Majesty's Government are prepared to support him whenever he should desire it, but does not think that the time is yet ripe for requesting our active assistance, as he is of opinion that until the negotiations with the Chinese are in a fairer prospect of settlement it will be useless to approach the Japanese legation on the subject.\n\nIt cannot be said that the discussions with the Chinese have advanced the matter to any great extent, but there seems no reason so far to doubt the genuine intention of the Chinese to construct the railway or the fulfilment of their promise to give Paulings the contract for the same.\n\nC. 0. 36185\n\n[This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.]\n\n**CHINA RAILWAYS.**\n\nPage 6 \n\nof Portsmouth, to the Russian railways in South Manchuria and all the rights pertaining thereto, it became a matter of simple necessity to her that she should arrange with China some definite regulations concerning the working of the mines along the railways, which constituted the principal item of the rights included in the above succession. China shared the same view. And it was agreed in the Peking Conference that the workable regulations shall be arranged in due course.\n\nIn consequence of this agreement, the aforesaid negotiations were opened in 1907. But owing to one or two minor points of detail failing to find complete and final agreement, and, in addition, important changes in the personnel of the Chinese authorities concerned in the meantime, the main agreement remained short of being made definite. Hence, in article 4 above referred to, it has been provided to have the regulations drawn in conformity with the principles which had already undergone full discussion and found general agreement on the whole in the course of the negotiations. It was nothing more than to save both parties from the unnecessary trouble of retracing the same grounds, so exhaustively covered in previous negotiations, which would bring profit to neither party. To a careful and impartial reader of the article in question, it will be but a matter of self-evident clearness that no possible hint as to the existence of any secret agreement on the subject could be derived from it.\n\nIn the second place, along the South Manchurian Railway, there is no mine of special value except those of Fu-hun and Yetai, over which Japan acquired rights as a result of the Treaty of Portsmouth; nor is there much prospect of valuable assets in mines along the Antung-Mukden Railway, except the Pen-hsi-hu coal mine. In the course of settling various matters of common concern to China and Japan in Manchuria, it is only natural that both parties, in conformity to the spirit of the Peking Protocol, should find it necessary to dispose of the question, if only in so far as to lay down the basis as to the drawing up of the regulations for exploiting the mines along the railways.\n\nAs to the Pen-hsi-hu Mine, it was worked solely by the Japanese at the outset, but later, by mutual consent of the two countries, it was made a joint undertaking, and the necessary regulations are now being arranged at Mukden. The negotiations are being conducted in quite an open manner, without the least element of secrecy. That the negotiations in 1907 were also conducted in the like manner, is also a self-evident fact that no person, possessing in any degree information as to the circumstances at the time, will find any room to doubt.\n\nTo re-capitulate: Article 4 in the recent Manchurian Agreement is nothing more or less than a provision for procedure of arranging the regulations for practical working of the mining properties, which is simply an outcome of, and sequel to, the Peking Protocol, and it has given no fresh concession of rights to Japan under whatever cover, nor does it refer to any previous secret concession agreement. Neither can it possibly be construed as tantamount to the nullification of the principle of the \"open door and equal opportunities.\" As to an insinuation that it violates the treaty rights of other Powers, the exaggeration is too plain to need any refutation.", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-362 - Public Offices - 1909.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 423609, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-363 - Public Offices & Others - 1909", "page_number": 213, "title": "CO129-363 - Public Offices & Others - 1909", "content_text": "# Inclosure 3 in No. 1.\n\n## Agreement between Liang Shih-yi and Mr. Bellingham, dated August 19, 1909.\n\nTHE director-general of Imperial Railways of North China (hereinafter called the director-general) agrees to appoint Mr. Augustus William Harvey Bellingham (hereinafter called the said engineer-in-chief) as the engineer-in-chief and general manager of the Imperial Railways of North China, and the said engineer-in-chief agrees to serve the Imperial Railways of North China as engineer-in-chief and general manager.\n\n2. This agreement is for a period of three years commencing from the date at which the said engineer-in-chief joins the railway service, i.e., the day of 190..., subject to the conditions contained in articles 6 and 7.\n\n3. For such service rendered the director-general shall pay the said engineer-in-chief the sum of £2,000 per annum, payable monthly as it becomes due in Tien-tsin at the rate of exchange of the due date, or in London to his credit with the Hong Kong and Shanghae Banking Corporation.\n\n4. In addition to the salary, the said railway shall furnish the said engineer-in-chief the house at Tongshan formerly occupied by his predecessor, Mr. Kinder, and the said house shall be cleaned, painted, and colour-washed, and electric light installed at the said railway's expense.\n\n5. As the said engineer-in-chief receives his salary from the Imperial Railways of North China, he is a subordinate under the director-general, and shall obey the instructions previously issued and (or) issued in the future by the director-general.\n\n6. In the event of any dispute arising between the said engineer-in-chief and the directors, or the traffic manager or the chief accountant of the said railway, the matter in dispute shall be referred to the director-general for decision, whose decision shall be final and binding on both parties. If the said engineer-in-chief shall at any time neglect or refuse to perform or comply with all or any of the articles of this agreement, or any of the duties required of him, or all or any orders of the director-general or duly authorised directors by the director-general in that behalf, or shall be guilty of any misconduct or negligence or of any breach or non-performance of the provisions of these presents, it shall be competent for the director-general to declare the employment of the said engineer-in-chief under this agreement at an end, and in such cases the director-general shall not be under obligation to provide the said engineer-in-chief with a passage to England. Should the said engineer-in-chief be temporarily incapacitated for duty owing to ill-health, his case shall be dealt with under the leave rules. If, however, the Imperial Railways of North China's medical officer certifies that the said engineer-in-chief is unfit for further service in China, he shall forthwith and with all diligence (having regard to the condition of his health) proceed to England. The Imperial Railways of North China's medical officer shall be the sole judge of the said engineer-in-chief's fitness or unfitness to travel, and the director-general shall not recognise that any delay was occasioned by ill-health unless he so certifies.\n\n7. In case of war in China rendering the construction or working on the railway works or line impossible or unsafe, if either party desires to terminate this agreement, the said railway shall pay the said engineer-in-chief one month's pay, but if the said engineer-in-chief is retained by the railway and it is necessary for him to retire to a treaty port for safety, the railway shall pay him the usual salary, and this agreement shall continue in force, and the salaries of the said engineer-in-chief shall be paid in arrear to him when he returns to the railway service. If the said engineer-in-chief does not do any work for the railway, he will not receive any house rent.\n\n8. The said engineer-in-chief shall respect the Chinese officials and work harmoniously with all those Chinese who come in contact with him. The said engineer-in-chief shall report everything concerning railway affairs to the directors and the director-general, and he is forbidden to give any information to outsiders or disclose anything regarding railway business to other people.\n\n9. The said engineer-in-chief shall exert the best of his ability and time as engineer-in-chief and general manager for the railway, and shall not engage himself in any other business and transact any business for other people. He is not allowed to interfere with the work of other railways in China unless he has been instructed by the director-general to do so.\n\n10. After the signing of this agreement, if there is anything the said engineer-in-chief wishes to deal with the local authorities, he shall report the case to the directors, who will communicate the same with the said authorities, and he shall not communicate with the local authorities direct.\n\n11. All the correspondence or documents which the Imperial Railways of North China sends to the said engineer-in-chief will be forwarded to him by the Imperial Railways of North China, or by the duly authorised person of the Imperial Railways of North China, who will deliver them to the house usually or lastly occupied by the said engineer-in-chief, and the said engineer-in-chief shall send his correspondence or documents to the railway office, and obtain a receipt for the same. Correspondence thus delivered shall be considered acknowledgment of receipt.\n\n12. The whole of the said engineer-in-chief's travelling expenses in the interior will be paid if he is required to go from his permanent post on railway service. But while stopping at any open port in China, if on railway business, the said engineer-in-chief shall receive a fixed sum of $7 per diem while he is obliged to stay at an hotel.\n\n13. After the expiration of this agreement, and if it is not renewed, the Imperial Railways of North China shall provide the said engineer-in-chief a first-class passage from Tien-tsin to London, and in addition thereto the said engineer-in-chief will receive a sum of 100 Hongping Hua pao taels to cover all hotel, coolie hire for baggage, and other expenses.\n\n14. The said general manager is specially to control the works, foreign and native workmen, the inspection of machinery, &c.; but in any matter referring to the above, the said general manager shall at first consult with the directors before they could be carried out.\n\nIn witness whereof the contracting parties do hereby subscribe their seal and (or) signature on this 19th day of August, 1909.\n\n**A. W. HARVEY BELLINGHAM.** \n**LIANG.**\n\n## Inclosure 4 in No. 1.\n\n### Mr. Hillier to Liang Shih-yi, September 7, 1909.\n\nREFERRING to my letter of the 1st July last, communicating to you the concurrence of the British and Chinese Corporation with the appointment of Mr. A. W. Harvey Bellingham as engineer-in-chief and general manager of the Imperial Railways of North China, I have now received from Mr. Bellingham the copy of an agreement signed by your Excellency and himself on the 19th August with regard to which I beg to submit to you the following observations upon certain features which must appear to the corporation to be open to objection.\n\n1. The agreement makes no mention of Mr. Bellingham's appointment having been made in consultation with the corporation as called for by the loan agreement, nor of the protocol, by which the post of general manager was created, and in order to give due prominence to these essential conditions of the appointment, I would suggest that clause 1 of Mr. Bellingham's agreement should be amended as follows: \n\"The director-general engages the services of Mr. Bellingham as engineer-in-chief and general manager of the Imperial Railways of North China, the said appointment having been made in consultation with the British and Chinese Corporation in terms of the loan agreement of the 10th October, 1898, and of the protocol dated the 29th April, 1902.”\n\n2. Reference is made throughout the body of the agreement, excepting clause 14, to the engineer-in-chief alone, instead of to the engineer-in-chief and general manager. I would suggest that the double title be adhered to. Article 6 refers to disputes arising between the engineer-in-chief and general manager, on the one hand, and the traffic manager or the chief accountant. As the two latter are technically the subordinates of the former, the language of the clause appears inconsistent, and I would suggest the deletion of the words \"or the traffic manager or the chief accountant,\" and the insertion of the word \"managing\" before \"directors.\"\n\n3. Clause 8 of Mr. Bellingham's appointment, imposing upon him secrecy with regard to the affairs of the railway, appears as it stands to debar him from free exercise of those relations with the corporation which it was the obvious intention of ...", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-363 - Public Offices & Others - 1909.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 423761, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-363 - Public Offices & Others - 1909", "page_number": 365, "title": "CO129-363 - Public Offices & Others - 1909", "content_text": "# 364\n\n## Inclosure 1 in No. 1\n\n### Wai-wu Pu to Dean of Diplomatic Body\n\nTHE Board has the honour to acknowledge the receipt of a memorandum from the doyen of the diplomatic corps on the subject of the Whangpoo conservancy in the following terms ---\n\n\"According to the chief engineer's report discussing ways and means for raising the required amount of money and arranging as to the proportion to be spent annually, it appears that it will take five years to complete the work and that the total cost will amount to 9,360,820 dollars, the dredging at one particular spot not being included in this amount. It is therefore requested that the diplomatic corps be informed how it is proposed to provide the necessary sum.\"\n\nThe Board would submit that the final protocol of 1901, with reference to the Whangpoo conservancy, estimated that the expenses incurred for the works and the general management of the undertaking would reach the annual sum of 460,000 Haikwan taels for twenty years. This sum was to be supplied in equal portions by the Chinese Government and the foreign interests concerned. Later it was arranged with all the Powers that China should undertake the work herself, that she would bear the whole cost, and that the annual expenses as fixed by the protocol of 1901 should remain at 460,000 Haikwan taels during a period of twenty years. By the engineer-in-chief's scheme in 1907 the works were to be finished in four years and the cost would amount to 8,000,000 taels. M. de Rijke being regarded by all the Powers as a man in whom the greatest confidence could be placed, China therefore accepted his scheme. The whole of the work according to the schedule ought to be finished by next year without demanding from the Chinese Government any more money. M. de Rijke ought to complete the work according to the estimate and within the proper time, but to the great surprise of the Chinese Government he suddenly demands more money for the work. This is quite contrary to the stipulations already agreed on.\n\nChina has expended large sums on the opening of the new channel and on the closing of the old channel, and she does not intend to allow the new channel to silt up afresh and thus lose the benefit of all the works already executed.\n\nThe Board has accordingly telegraphed frequently to the Shanghae taotai to take steps to provide the necessary funds, and to urge the engineer-in-chief to carry out the dredging operations, section by section, without any delay. The taotai has also been instructed to telegraph immediately a detailed and comprehensive scheme for the future carrying on of the works in order that the Board might carefully examine the same. As soon as the reply has been received it will be forwarded to you. In the meantime the Board has the honour to forward this memorandum for the information of the doyen, and begs that he will communicate it to his colleagues.\n\nPeking, October 9, 1909.\n\n## Inclosure 2 in No. 1\n\n### Memorial by Wai-wu Pu to Dean of Diplomatic Body\n\nIT is in the records that we have sent a memorial on the 9th October regarding the works for the correction of the Whangpoo River.\n\nNow we are in receipt of the telegraphic answer from the Shanghao taotai, in which he says:--\n\n\"According to the sum fixed, China has provided sufficient funds, and the work hitherto done early has been examined and approved by the officials and merchants of all nationalities. Also all the Ministers residing in Peking say that good results have been obtained. This showing that China, conforming to all articles of the special treaty concerning the correction of the Whangpoo River, acted in full accordance with them and did not delay. The costs for dredging work, amounting to 300,000 taels, are not included by the sum fixed by the special treaty. As this is a work of greatest importance for the future, according to the terms of the tender, a company, who was offering cheapest and in most conforming manner, has been selected already to undertake the work. As the engineer, de Rijke, is sick, he has gone to Japan for treatment. The other works of all kinds, which are executed in the original way, have not been finished yet and still are performed as always. Besides, as the construction of the jetties has not come to an end yet, how could the Li Chi Company (East Asiatic Dredging Company) discontinue the work?\"\n\nOut of this explanation of the Shanghae taotai we find that none of the different works have been suspended. As to the dredging work, likewise sufficient funds have already been prepared and a company has been selected for the execution. This shows sufficiently that China is acting according to the treaties and does not spare efforts. As these affairs are of the greatest importance to the Chinese Government and the views are differing, the Governor of Kiangsu, by Imperial command, has been ordered especially to proceed to Shanghae to direct the Shanghae taotai to inspect in detail and to find reliable methods in order to arrive at a satisfactory result.\n\n## Inclosure 3 in No. 1\n\n### Dean of Diplomatic Body to Prince Ch'ing\n\nAltesse,\n\nPékin, le 18 octobre, 1909.\n\nJ'AI l'honneur d'accuser réception à votre Altesse Impériale de la note qu'elle a bien voulu m'adresser à la date du 16 octobre, concernant les travaux d'amélioration du cours du Whangpoo.\n\nJe constate avec satisfaction que les autorités chinoises ont actuellement à leur disposition une somme suffisante pour permettre la reprise des travaux de dragage et que, par conséquent, cette reprise aurait lieu aussitôt que faire se pourra.\n\nJe me permets, à ce sujet, de faire remarquer à votre Altesse Impériale que l'absence de M. de Rijke au Japon ne semble devoir en rien retarder l'exécution de ce projet, puisque la nature peu compliquée des opérations ne saurait exiger la présence continuelle à Shanghaï de l'ingénieur en chef; et je pense que votre Altesse sera d'accord avec moi pour constater que rien, dans l'espèce, ne s'oppose à une reprise immédiate de ces travaux.\n\nLes représentants des Puissances attachent beaucoup de prix à la continuité dans l'œuvre d'amélioration, sans laquelle le libre accès du port de Shanghai ne saurait être assuré et un préjudice très grave pourrait être causé au commerce tant chinois qu'étranger. C'est pourquoi ils ne manqueront pas d'apprendre avec plaisir la décision prise par le Gouvernement chinois.\n\nJe prie votre Altesse Impériale de bien vouloir m'aviser de la reprise des travaux de dragage dès que celle-ci sera un fait accompli. Je pourrai alors reprendre avec le conseil de votre Altesse l'étude du projet de travaux à exécuter présenté par M. de Rijke et la demande de fonds qui en dépend.\n\n## Inclosure 4 in No. 1\n\n### Official Note addressed by the Wai-wu Pu to Dean of Diplomatic Body\n\n(Translation.)\n\nTHE Chief President of the Wai-wu Pu, &c., and Prince of the First Order Ch'ing sends an official reply.\n\nOn the 6th day of the first year Hsuan Tung (the 19th October) we received a note that the nature of the dredging work for the conservancy of the Whangpoo is not at all difficult, and that it is requested to resume the work quickly. Again, there is said that the Ministers of all nations regard the continuation of the work of the regulation of the Whangpoo as a matter of great importance; it is requested that a letter may be sent at the time when the dredging shall have been resumed in fact; afterwards there could be opened up the projects submitted by the engineer, de Rijke, and the funds in connection therewith.\n\nB 2\n\n`[2546 ƒ-2]`", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-363 - Public Offices & Others - 1909.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 423762, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-363 - Public Offices & Others - 1909", "page_number": 366, "title": "CO129-363 - Public Offices & Others - 1909", "content_text": "## 4\n\nOur Ministry finds that, with regard to the conservancy of the Whangpoo, it is China's concern to raise funds and arrange herself. In spring or summer of next year the work can be finished. China has already done in an exhaustive way all duties arising from the special treaty regarding the conservancy of the Whangpoo; it cannot happen that any country has again a view to the contrary (a different view). As to the dredging, working funds have been provided which are outside the sum fixed originally. We have also received a telegram from the Shanghae taotai that on the 12th instant (the 20th October) Engineer de Rijke has returned to Shanghae from Japan, so the date for starting work can be fixed, and there is nothing which could make it necessary to reopen the negotiations. But as the Chinese Government regard the affair as a very important one, the Governor of Kiangsu has already been ordered specially by the Emperor to proceed to Shanghae and to inspect, and he must be able to find a reliable way to obtain a satisfactory result (reform).\n\nAll matters referred to in M. de Rijke's report, the Governor of Kiangsu also must deliberate one and all, and it is not necessary to open the negotiations. We consider it necessary to communicate this to your Excellency the Dean, that you may take note and inform their Excellencies the Ministers of all countries residing in Peking.\n\n## 5\n\nno longer liable for carrying the work, as originally contemplated, to completion. I hold that China is bound either to provide the funds for the completion of the improvement of the course of the Whangpoo as indicated in the protocol of 1901 or to revert to the principle laid down in that instrument, in accordance with which one half of the necessary funds is to be provided by her and the other half by the foreign interests concerned, whose share in the control of the expenditure of the money naturally revives.\n\nJ. N. JORDAN.\n\n### Inclosure 5 in No. 1\n\n**Dean's Circular of November 6, 1909**\n\nConformément à la décision prise dans la séance du corps diplomatique du 1er courant, le doyen s'est rendu hier à l'Ouaï-ou Pou pour insister afin que le dragage soit recommencé sans retard. Son Excellence Liang Tun-yen a promis de télégraphier à Shanghaï dans le sens de cette demande.\n\nQuant à la signification de la dernière note officielle du Ministère des Affaires Étrangères du 26 écoulé, communiquée au corps diplomatique par la circulaire No. 141, les explications échangées avec Mr. Liang Tun-yen ne laissent plus subsister aucun doute sur ce que le Gouvernement se croit dégagé des obligations résultant du protocole final par rapport à l'amélioration du Whangpoo. Tout de même, le dit Ministère des Affaires Etrangères a reconnu la nécessité et a confirmé l'intention du Gouvernement chinois de continuer les travaux de régularisation, mais de son propre chef et à sa guise.\n\nKUCZYNSKI,\n\n### Inclosure 6 in No. 1\n\n**Minute by Sir J. Jordan on Dean's Circular of November 6, 1909**\n\nI cannot assent to the view that the Chinese Government is released from the obligations of the final protocol of 1901, and is at liberty to continue the conservancy work in its own right and in its own way.\n\nThe protocol of 1901 and the \"règlement\" attached thereto created a mixed Conservancy Board, with jurisdiction on the Whangpoo River from the lower limit of the Kiangnan arsenal to the Yang-tsze. The expenses of improving the course of the river were estimated at 460,000 taels a-year, half of which was to be provided by the Chinese Government and half by the foreign interests concerned. It specified the manner in which the revenue for the work was to be raised and provided that, if it proved insufficient, it could be increased by bringing the respective moieties up to a figure which would be adequate to meet the requirements of the case.\n\nAt the special request of the Chinese Government the protocol of 1905 was substituted for the above, and under this China undertook herself to carry out the conservancy work and to bear the whole expense of it.\n\nThere is nothing to my mind in this protocol, or in the correspondence which passed at the time, to show that there was any intention of reducing the work to be done, and consequently of diminishing the possible expenditure to be incurred. The work has now come to a standstill for want of funds, and the Chinese Government have officially stated that they expect to have it all completed in the spring or summer of next year. This means that a large portion of the river included in the 1901 protocol is regarded as excluded from the 1905 one, and that the Chinese are \n\nPage 365", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-363 - Public Offices & Others - 1909.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 428238, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-371 - Public Offices - 1910", "page_number": 163, "title": "CO129-371 - Public Offices - 1910", "content_text": "2\n\nBy this means the Taotai thinks that his own reputation is safeguarded, while the East Asiatic Company's stipulation for an increase in the price is also complied with.\n\nDredging was recommenced on the 27th ultimo after an interval of just over two months, during which the condition of the Astraea Channel has not appreciably deteriorated. Although slight shoaling took place at both ends of the channel, the scour of the tide acted with greater force than was expected along the Gough Island shore, and kept that portion of the channel at a satisfactory depth.\n\nThe governor, Lui Cheng, arrived from Soochow on the 26th ultimo, and inspected the conservancy works on the 29th ultimo. In the course of conversation a few days later he expressed himself to me as generally satisfied with the progress of the works, and informed me that he had engaged a foreign engineer to make an independent report on them for the Chinese Government.\n\nThe engineer in question is a Swede named Hugo von Heidenstam, of the Swedish-Asiatic Consulting Engineering Company. Little is known of him beyond that he is a friend of Mr. Ku Hung-ming.\n\nI am transmitting under separate cover a copy of the latest survey published by the Conservancy Board.\n\nI have, &c.\n\nPELHAM L. WARREN.\n\n3\n\nnecessary to make the proposed addition with regard to asking for instructions\" Experience shows that it takes several months for the different legations to receive such instructions, and the Chinese would probably regard the intimation as tantamount to shelving the question.\n\nJ. N. JORDAN.\n\nEnclosure 4 in No. 1.\n\nDean's Circular No. 169 of December 18, 1909, respecting the Whangpoo Conservancy,\n\nDANS la circulaire No. 160 ci-jointe le doyen a été autorisé à adresser au Wai-wou Pou, au nom du corps diplomatique, et en réponse à son office du 26 octobre dernier (voir circulaire No. 141), une note constatant l'impossibilité où se trouvent les chefs de mission d'acquiescer aux déclarations du Gouvernement chinois, en vertu desquelles il ne considère comme dégagé des obligations du protocole final afférentes à la ratification du Whangpou.\n\nEn soumettant à ses honorables collègues la minute de cette note, il les prie de vouloir bien lui faire savoir s'ils peuvent l'approuver.\n\nKUCZYNSKI.\n\nEnclosure 2 in No. 1.\n\nDean's Circular No. 160 of November 27, 1909, respecting the Whangpoo Conservancy,\n\nNE sachant lesquels des honorables collègues ont eu sous les yeux les observations notées sur la circulaire No. 147 du 6 novembre, le doyen croit utile de la faire recirculer pour que ceux de ces messieurs qui ne l'ont pas encore fait en puissent prendre connaissance. En même temps il pense que la dernière note officielle du Wai-wou Pou du 26 octobre dernier (circulaire No. 141) exige une réponse, en tant qu'il ne lui paraît pas possible de laisser le Gouvernement chinois sous l'impression que sa communication a pu être considérée comme satisfaisante.\n\nMais étant informé que plusieurs des collègues veulent demander des instructions à leurs Gouvernements, le doyen croit que la seule réponse à donner au Wai-wou Pou en ce moment serait un accusé de réception de la dite note. On ajouterait que, tant que l'œuvre de la régularisation du Whangpou n'est pas achevée dans l'extension et les limites du protocole final, les représentants des Puissances ne sauraient acquiescer à la déclaration du Gouvernement chinois d'être dégagé de ses obligations contractuelles.\n\nLa note se terminerait en disant que le corps diplomatique se réserve de revenir sur le sujet aussitôt que seront arrivées les instructions que plusieurs des représentants ont demandées à leurs Gouvernements.\n\nLe doyen serait reconnaissant à ses honorables collègues de vouloir bien lui faire savoir s'ils acceptent sa proposition ou s'ils préfèrent un autre mode de solution.\n\nEnfin, il a l'honneur de porter à la connaissance de MM. les chefs de mission que, d'après un télégramme reçu le 27 novembre du consul d'Autriche-Hongrie à Shanghai, les travaux de dragage ont été recommencés le même jour.\n\nKUCZYNSKI.\n\nMonseigneur,\n\nEnclosure 5 in No. 1.\n\nDean of Diplomatic Body to Wai-wu Pu.\n\nLe 14 décembre, 1909.\n\nJ'AI l'honneur d'accuser réception à votre Altesse de sa lettre en date du 20 octobre dernier, relative aux travaux de rectification et d'amélioration du Whangpou. Je n'ai pas manqué de la communiquer aux chefs de mission accrédités à Pekin.\n\nCeux-ci n'ont pas cru pouvoir adopter le point de vue exposé, dans la circonstance, par le Gouvernement Impérial. Les représentants des Puissances ont estimé, en effet, que tant que l'œuvre de la régularisation du Whangpou n'aurait pas été achevée dans l'extension et les limites du protocole final de 1901, le Gouvernement chinois ne saurait être considéré comme dégagé des obligations auxquelles il a souscrit.\n\nMes collègues m'ont, en conséquence, prié de faire connaître à votre Altesse l'impossibilité où ils se trouvent d'acquiescer aux déclarations que je leur avais transmises.\n\nJe saisis, &c.\n\nEnclosure 3 in No. 1.\n\nMinute by Sir J. Jordan on Dean's Circular No. 160 of November 27, 1909.\n\nI AGREE with the terms of the reply which the dean proposes to make to the last note from the Wai-wu Pu, as stated in the second paragraph of this circular.\n\nBut if our honourable colleagues accept the dean's suggestion and agree to inform the Wai-wu Pu that they cannot consider the Chinese Government absolved from its obligations so long as the work on the Whangpoo is not completed to the extent and within the limits provided by the final Protocol, that seems to me all that is required to secure unanimity of action, and I venture to hope that it may not be considered\n\n161\n\n17", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-371 - Public Offices - 1910.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 429139, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-372 - Public Offices - 1910", "page_number": 480, "title": "CO129-372 - Public Offices - 1910", "content_text": "This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.\n\nDear Mr. Grenfell,\n\nEnclosure 3 in No. 1.\n\nMr. C. S. Addis to Mr. Grenfell.\n\n31, Lombard Street, London, July 1, 1910.\n\nI HAVE your letter of the 20th June, in which you say you are informing your New York friends that the British, German, and French groups are not in favour of issuing any provincial loans.\n\nThe distinction we make is between loans \"authorised\" or \"sanctioned\" as opposed to loans \"guaranteed\" by the Chinese Government. We have no objection at all to issue provincial loans, the due repayment of which is unconditionally guaranteed by the Imperial Chinese Government.\n\nIt is probably in this sense that you have communicated with your New York friends, in which case this letter requires no reply.\n\nYours truly,\n\nC. S. ADDIS.\n\nEnclosure 4 in No. 1.\n\nMr. Grenfell to Mr. C. S. Addis.\n\nDear Mr. Addis,\n\n22, Old Broad Street, London, July 9, 1910.\n\nREFERRING to your letter of the 1st July, I beg to confirm on behalf of the American group of bankers that they do not care to entertain a proposition for any Chinese provincial loan unless bearing an unconditional Imperial guarantee, and believe it would be prejudicial to the interests of all concerned to have other groups entertain provincial loans unless so secured.\n\nI think this communication should make our action on behalf of the American conform with that which we understand is to be taken by your group and the German and French groups in such matters.\n\nI leave it to you to communicate the contents of this letter to our friends on the continent.\n\nYours faithfully,\n\nE. C. GRENFELL.\n\nEnclosure 5 in No. 1.\n\nDear Mr. Grenfell,\n\nMr. C. S. Addis to Mr. Grenfell.\n\n31, Lombard Street, London, July 11, 1910.\n\nI AM glad to learn from your letter of the 9th instant that your American group is opposed to the issue of Chinese provincial loans except on condition that the repayment is secured by the unconditional guarantee of the Imperial Chinese Government.\n\nThis I believe to be in conformity with the views entertained by ourselves as well as by the French and German groups, to whom I am sending a copy of your letter.\n\nYours truly,\n\nC. S. ADDIS.\n\nAFFAIRS OF CHINA.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL.\n\n[25949]\n\nCO 24838\n\n[July 18.]\n\nSECTION 1.\n\nREC?\n\nREG 12 AUG 10\n\nNo. 1.\n\nMr. Max Müller to Sir Edward Grey.-(Received July 18.)\n\n(No. 212.) Sir,\n\nPeking, June 28, 1910.\n\nIN my despatch No. 98 of the 7th April I said that I had been given to understand that there was little probability of my colleagues taking any action in regard to the works of the Whangpoo Conservancy till after the receipt of the report on M. de Rijke's scheme, which is being drawn up by Sir J. Wolfe-Barry, Sir W. Matthews, and Mr. Lyster.\n\nI found, however, that I had been mistaken, as in the early days of May the Austrian Minister, in his capacity of doyen, informed me that he and the German Minister had now received instructions as to the line they were to pursue in negotiations with the Chinese Government for the completion of the Whangpoo Conservancy work, and enquired whether I was prepared to attend a meeting of the heads of missions principally interested in the question.\n\nAccordingly on the 31st ultimo the German, Japanese, French, and American Ministers and myself met, under the presidency of M. de Kuczynski, to discuss the question.\n\nI need not trouble you with full details of the lengthy discussion, but it soon became apparent that neither the German nor the Austrian Ministers was prepared either to adopt the de Rijke scheme in toto or to request the Chinese Government to complete the conservancy work to the extent and within the limits stated in the final protocol of 1901, which would have been the natural corollary to the note of the diplomatic body of the 14th December last.\n\nCount Rex explained that, in the opinion of his Government, it would not be correct to urge the Chinese Government to provide more funds, seeing that they had already paid the amounts stipulated in the 1905 agreement, but that the proper course to pursue was to endeavour by friendly means to prove to the Chinese that it was in their own interest to complete the works.\n\nM. de Kuczynski said that he had received similar instructions, with this difference, that his Government held that if the friendly representations failed, it would be necessary to request the Chinese Government to return to the conditions of the 1901 protocol and contribute to the carrying on of the works until their final completion.\n\nCount Rex then admitted that his instructions also authorised him to join in such action, if absolutely necessary and as a last resort.\n\nAll the representatives appeared to agree that, in the present state of the works, it was impossible to consider the Whangpoo Conservancy as completed, and it was, therefore, decided that the first thing to do was to ascertain from the Chinese Government (1) whether they regarded the works as completed or not; and (2) if not, what works they considered must still be executed. This would be done by requesting the Chinese Government to communicate to us officially the report of the Chinese commissioner, to whom I referred in the last paragraph of my despatch No. 98 of the 7th April.\n\nI pointed out, however, that this report, if received, would probably be of a technical nature, and deal with subjects on which we should be incompetent to pass judgment without further expert advice, and it appeared to me that we might equally well wait for the report of the three great English authorities at present under preparation.\n\nIt then appeared that my German and Austrian colleagues were not prepared to attach much weight to this report, for the absurd reason that it would not be the result of international collaboration, and had not been drawn up at the request of either the diplomatic or consular body or of the conservancy board.\n\nThe German Minister held that, if necessary, the Chinese report should be submitted to an international expert commission on which Germany would insist on having a delegate, and this delegate was evidently to be the technical attaché to the German Consulate-General, who has, I believe, been the prime mover in all the German...\n\n* Not printed.\n\n[2827 »-1]\n\n476\n\nPage 480\n\nPage 481", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-372 - Public Offices - 1910.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 429540, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-373 - Public Offices - 1910", "page_number": 277, "title": "CO129-373 - Public Offices - 1910", "content_text": "administration concerned, and shall have legal force after the approval by the respective Governments.\n\nIf within three months from the date of the dispatch by the board managing the through-traffic affairs of the report, together with the protocol, no replies should come forward from the administrations concerned, or in case of a protest being lodged within the said period against any of the resolutions of the conference, without mentioning the reasons for such protest, the execution of the resolutions passed by the conference shall not be suspended as a consequence of it.\n\n9. The protocols of each conference shall be drawn up in Russian and in English, printed by order of the board managing the through-traffic affairs, and forwarded by the said board, in the required number of copies, to each of the administrations concerned.\n\nARTICLE 4.\n\nThe conveyance of the correspondence, forms, documents relating to accounts, as well as of the articles forwarded by the board managing the through-traffic affairs in connection with this traffic, shall be effected free of charge along the lines of all the carriers participating in the traffic.\n\nARTICLE 5.\n\n1. The accounts relating to the through traffic in question are settled by the Returns Department of the Chinese Eastern Railway at Harbin.\n\n2. The materials necessary for the preparation of the account must be forwarded to the said Returns Department by the carriers, who have sold coupon-books, not later than the thirtieth day, according to the new calendar, of the month following the one during which the coupon-books were sold.\n\nThese materials must contain following particulars:—\n\n(a) The No. No., the number and the classes of the coupon-books sold by each tariff station, also the route for which the said coupon-books were available, and the amount of money realised from the sale of coupon-books.\n\n(b) The No. No., and the date of issue by each tariff station of registered baggage receipts, showing the routes by which the baggage was forwarded, the gross weight, as well as the weight (above the amount allowed free) for which freight was paid, and the amount of freight realised for the conveyance of baggage.\n\nIf no coupon-books were sold during a certain month the carriers concerned should forward \"nil\" returns to the Returns Department of the Chinese Eastern Railway at Harbin.\n\n3. Wrongly stamped coupon-books, control-coupons of children tickets and spoiled baggage receipts should be properly grouped together, appended to the monthly account returns and forwarded to the Returns Department of the Chinese Eastern Railway.\n\n4. The Returns Department of the Chinese Eastern Railway determines the amounts received and shares of the carriers who participated in the conveyance, and prepares a general abstract account, showing the debit and the credit totals of each administration separately.\n\nExtracts from the general abstract account and from the return showing the distribution of shares must be forwarded to each of the administrations concerned.\n\n5. Should discrepancies be discovered during the checking of the accounts by the controlling departments of the carriers concerned, these should be adjusted by means of written communication with the carrier who sold the coupon-book, as well as with the Returns Department of the Chinese Eastern Railway at Harbin.\n\nThe claims to regulate discrepancies must be made before the expiration of the two years' term, counting the same from the date of the dispatch of the materials relating to the accounts by the above said Returns Department.\n\nARTICLE 6.\n\n1. The passenger fares and the rates for the conveyance of baggage are indicated in the tariff for the whole distance—\n\nFor the traffic from the stations of the Chinese Eastern and the Ussuri Railways to Japan—in roubles;\n\n5\n\nFor the traffic from Japan to the stations of the Chinese Eastern and the Ussuri Railways—in yen.\n\nIn view of the above, the necessary conversions for the tariff tables of roubles into yen or yen into roubles shall be made according to the fixed rates of: 100 roubles = 96 roubles 62 copees, and 100 yen = 105 yen.\n\n2. The settlement of the amounts of balance shall be effected by the Returns Department of the Chinese Eastern Railway according to the following rulings:\n\n(a) All the debit or the credit balances (in yen and roubles) of the Chinese Eastern and the Ussuri Railways and the Russian volunteer fleet are settled in rouble currency, and the respective accounts communicated to the administrations concerned.\n\n(b) All the debit or the credit balances (in yen and in roubles) of the Imperial Japanese and the South Manchuria Railways and the \"Osaka Shosen Kaisha\" Steam Shipping Company are settled in yen currency, and the respective accounts communicated to the administrations concerned.\n\n3. The rates of conversion indicated above in paragraph 1 do not apply where final settlements of accounts are concerned.\n\nThe Russian volunteer fleet pays to the Chinese Eastern Railway the shares of other carriers, and receives from the said railway its own shares in rouble currency through the Russo-Chinese Bank.\n\nThe Japanese carriers receive their own shares from the Chinese Eastern Railway—in yen currency, and pay to the said railway the shares of the other Russian carriers—in rouble currency, in both cases through the Russo-Chinese Bank, whereby the Imperial Japanese railways pay and receive their share through the South Manchuria Railway.\n\nAny possible differences of the rates of exchange resulting from the above-shown manner of settlement of accounts the Chinese Eastern Railway and the Japanese carriers charge to their own accounts.\n\nARTICLE 7.\n\n1. Claims for refund of money received for a coupon-book or for the conveyance of baggage are settled by the railway which has sold the coupon-book, of which no use had been made by the passenger, or which had been used only in part, with the consent, when necessary, of the other participants in the traffic.\n\n2. The liability of the carriers concerned, as well as the amount of the award to be paid for the total or partial loss, damage, or delay of baggage, are determined by the application of tariff rules.\n\n3. Claims relating to the payment of awards are settled either by the departure or by the destination railway, in accordance with the circumstance, to which of the two railways the claim had been presented, and also with the consent of the carriers concerned.\n\n4. When it is impossible to discover the guilty carrier, or when, according to the decision of the court, the fault falls on several carriers participating in the conveyance without indication of the degree of the fault of each of them, the amount of award for the loss or damage of baggage, as well as all other incidental expenses, are divided between the railways (and steamer companies as well) which participated in the conveyance in proportion to the distances from the departure to the destination station.\n\n5. In case of a disagreement between the carriers concerned as to the apportionment of the award, the claim in question shall be submitted to the conference.\n\n6. The Returns Department of the Chinese Eastern Railway shall take every care to see that the amounts advanced by the administration or board settling the claim for awards, interest, incidental and other expenses be refunded during the nearest monthly accounts.\n\nARTICLE 8.\n\n1. The following shall be considered as expenditure to be divided between the carriers participating in this through traffic:—\n\n(a) The expenditure in connection with the printing of tariffs, tables of rates, protocols, conventions, &c., as well as the cost of the transport of the above publications to their destinations.\n\n[2948 c-3]\n\nC\n\n276\n\nVov", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-373 - Public Offices - 1910.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 436162, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-385 - Public Offices - 1911", "page_number": 372, "title": "CO129-385 - Public Offices - 1911", "content_text": "370\n\nadhesion of non-signatory powers.\n\nC. The draft of a \"Final Protocol\" showing certain\n\n\"Voeux\" which the Conference has adopted.\n\nD. The draft of an \"Additional Convention\" containing\n\narticles referring especially to China which it is proposed\n\nshall be signed by the Representatives of those of the\n\nparticipating Powers who have treaty rights in that country.\n\nI am to explain that the proposed Articles of the\n\nConvention have not in every case been accepted without\n\nreserve by all of the Delegates.\n\nWith regard to Article 7 (Document A.) I am to say\n\nthat the second sentence was added to meet the wishes of\n\nthe Portuguese delegates, and the following article was\n\ninserted with special reference to the case of Portugal.\n\nIn addition to the reserve thus made (of which His Majesty's\n\nGovernment would, it is presumed, not take advantage) the\n\ninterests of the British Crown Colonies have been safeguarded\n\nby a declaration by the British delegates worded as\n\nfollows:-\n\n\"The British Delegation......\n\ndesires that its vote\n\nmay", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-385 - Public Offices - 1911.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 440039, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-394 - Governor Sir May & Public Offices - 1912 [12]", "page_number": 531, "title": "CO129-394 - Governor Sir May & Public Offices - 1912 [12]", "content_text": "01).\n\nSir:-\n\n520\n\nTHE HAGUE.\n\nJanuary 22nd. 1912.\n\nCO\n\n2307\n\nprist 24 JAN 12\n\nWe have the honour to transmit to you herewith copies of the Draft International Opium Convention and also of the Protocol de Clôture in the form in which they passed their final reading by the Conference this afternoon.\n\nThe only difference of any importance between this final draft and the draft as enclosed in our despatch No. 12 of the 20th. instant is to be found in Article 11 from which on our suggestion the conditional words \"en tenant compte des différences de leurs conditions\" have been expunged.\n\nThe signature is arranged to take place to-morrow.\n\nIt was agreed this afternoon that the question of communicating the convention to the Press should be left to the discretion of the respective Governments, the delegates meanwhile binding themselves to secrecy as to the conclusion of the Conference.\n\nWe have &c.,\n\n(Signed)\n\nW. S. Meyer.\n\nW. G. Max Muller.\n\nEdward Grey, Bart., M.P.,", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-394 - Governor Sir May & Public Offices - 1912 [12].txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 440040, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-394 - Governor Sir May & Public Offices - 1912 [12]", "page_number": 532, "title": "CO129-394 - Governor Sir May & Public Offices - 1912 [12]", "content_text": "GOLOTE À\n\nD\n\n521\n\nL\n\nDrafts\n\nPRINTED FOR USE OF\n\nMISCELLS.\n\nNo. 279\n\nCOLONIAL\n\noreign\n\nDate.\n\n1912\n\n3\n\n3 Jan\n\nast previous Paper.\n\n22357\n\nOFFICE\n\nHONG KONG\n\nEASTERN\n\n2388\n\n2383\n\nNo 24 JAN 12\n\nAfins Conference\n\nLends copy tel reporting regning of convention, which is being communic to Press by held a fort unmediately\n\nVS Cabin. Si 4. Fidon\n\nStrack. 58 6 Come's. Cylon 98 stating. 68. To R N B Co. cons.\n\n৬ March\n\nmarch.\n\n70\n\n5392 poms\n\ncons & March\n\nMalay States cons 88, 8 March\n\nrown cold. The 7 Mar 1912\n\nto\n\nBong Kory 3.2 Jan 13\n\nalso\n\n2372 2386, 2387\n\n(2387)\n\nConvention\n\nin ito final form contai\n\nara\n\nexplained\n\ninv\n\nproljectional sof\n\nText subsequent Paper\n\n10.\n\nJ391 021308.\n\nco\n\nalterations\n\nletter\n\nprotocol\n\n2372\n\nand\n\ndoes mot\n\nto the\n\nregard\n\n20\n\ncontain\n\nDeclaration\n\namy\n\nAs Pe\n\nto the position of the Domo.\n\nomission\n\nthe $.0.\n\nordiregates by the 2372) while\n\nob 2372)\n\nStefo\n\n9/213/20 Cal\n\nBewe\n\n49,244). Wt.25,016-17. 40,000. 11/11. A.&E.W.\n\nto but the\n\nGrave\n\nwas pointed\n\n(last france.\n\nmo\n\nout to the\n\nlust one\n\ndoubt tähen\n\ndeclaration\n\nBut by\n\nсимо\n\n24\n\non\n\ng\n\nrecord\n\nI suppose", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-394 - Governor Sir May & Public Offices - 1912 [12].txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 440046, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-394 - Governor Sir May & Public Offices - 1912 [12]", "page_number": 538, "title": "CO129-394 - Governor Sir May & Public Offices - 1912 [12]", "content_text": "C. D.\n\nIR..\n\n3\n\nD\n\n20.\n\nA Kons 2388/12 Barten\n\nD\n\n527\n\nDRAFT.\n\nRef 45.\n\n12/2 M7 Stuths 12 Me Colenis 13 In Godder 13 Io J Anderson 14 4 2nd Emmett 14\n\nMisturant of 15.2.1\n\nConson\n\nJu memili\n\nLet we see the draft\n\ncircular to the Colonies when\n\nprepared\n\nThe Opium Convention and the\n\n\"Protocole de Cloture\" were signed on the\n\n23rd of January.\n\nIn the letter was to be\n\nwas appended inserted A Declaration by the British Delegates\n\nafter their signatures to the Convention)\n\nto the effect that the convention, if ratified\n\nby His Majesty's Government, shall apply to\n\nIndia, Ceylon, the Straits Settlements, Hong\n\nKong and Weihaiwei in all respects as to the\n\nUnited Kingdom but that His Majesty's Govern-\n\nment reserve the right of separately signing\n\nor denouncing the convention on behalf of any\n\nother Dominions, Colonies, Protectorates, etc.\n\nThe final \"protocole\" as sent to the Colonial\n\nOffice by the Foreign Office does not contain\n\nthis declaration but it is to be assumed\n\nthat the declaration was added above the\n\nDelegates' signatures at the time of signing.\n\nThe effect of this declaration is\n\ntherefore that if the convention is ratified\n\nthe United Kingdom and the Eastern dependencies\n\nmentioned", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-394 - Governor Sir May & Public Offices - 1912 [12].txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 440104, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-394 - Governor Sir May & Public Offices - 1912 [12]", "page_number": 596, "title": "CO129-394 - Governor Sir May & Public Offices - 1912 [12]", "content_text": "[This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.]\n\nCONFIDENTIAL.\n\nSECTION 1.\n\nNo. 1.\n\nJanuary 22.\n\nBritish Delegates to International Opium Conference to Sir Edward Grey.-(Received January 22.)\n\n(No. 12.) Sir,\n\nThe Hague, January 20, 1912.\n\nIN reply to your despatch No. 18 of the 17th instant, we have the honour to state that the object of paragraph 10 of the clauses in regard to ratification and signature of the Opium Convention was, as you surmised, to give time for the communication by the Netherlands Government to all the Powers affected of the final ratification, and also to afford a short interval during which preliminary steps might be taken to provide for the carrying out of such measures as can be put into effect without the further delay involved by the provisions of paragraphs 11 to 13; for instance, the exchange of statistics, &c., referred to in article 21 of the convention itself (see the latest draft, enclosed herewith*).\n\nFor this reason it would not be feasible to delete paragraph 10 as suggested by the Board of Trade.\n\nThe Board's suggestion that provision should be made to meet the possibility of undue delay in ratification has been met by an amendment to paragraph 13, moved by us yesterday and accepted by the conference, by which that paragraph now provides for a special supplementary conference, if necessary, to deal with questions in connection with ratification also. We consider this preferable to the course of fixing a specific date within which all ratifications must be handed in, for under such a procedure failure to reply by the prescribed date would have to be considered as equivalent to a refusal to ratify, or else the condition would have to be practically set aside. Moreover, it would be practically impossible to fix such a date at present, since it would depend on whether all Powers signed promptly, or whether the conference provided for by paragraph 6 had to meet.\n\nWe did not consider it advisable to press the Board of Trade's suggestion for an inversion of the order of paragraphs 5 and 6. The existing order is the logical one, since it provides first for the hoped-for course of universal adhesion by signature before the end of this year, and then provides an alternative method in case this expectation be not realised. Moreover, if paragraph 6 were to come first, the present paragraph 5 would have to be further amended, since it is quite possible that all Powers would not have signed, but that after the meeting referred to in paragraph 6 ratification by the rest would nevertheless be proceeded with.\n\nWe have, therefore, exercised the discretion vested in us by your despatch, by contenting ourselves with the amendments to paragraph 13 above indicated.\n\nAs matters at present stand, the conference has given a second reading to all the matter in the enclosed draft up to the words \"signature supplémentaire\" on page 8, while the further paragraphs we have been discussing have received a first reading. It now remains to give a first reading to the \"dénonciation\" and \"protocole de clôture\" clauses, and a second reading from the words \"signature supplémentaire\" to the end. Then the entire draft will be once more revised with reference to wording by the comité de rédaction, after which it will be ready for final reading by the conference and signature by the delegates.\n\nWe have, &c. (For British Delegation),\n\nW. S. MEYER.\n\nP.S.-The second reading process was extended this afternoon to all the matter referred to in the preceding paragraph, and no change of any consequence was made. A final reading will be given on Monday, and the convention will be ready for signature by the delegates on Tuesday, the 23rd instant.\n\nW. S. M.\n\n* Not printed.", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-394 - Governor Sir May & Public Offices - 1912 [12].txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 440132, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912", "page_number": 25, "title": "CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912", "content_text": "[This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.]\n\nCONFIDENTIAL.\n\nNo. 1.\n\nCO 4677\n\n[January 23.]\n\nSECTION 5.15 : 12\n\nSir Edward Grey to the British Delegates to International Opium Conference.\n\n(Telegraphic.)\n\nYOUR despatch No. 14 of 22nd January.\n\nForeign Office, January 23, 1912.\n\nWhat steps are you taking regarding the Declaration as to the dominions? It must be made clear from a perusal of the convention and final protocol that you are signing only on behalf of the United Kingdom, India, and the Far Eastern colonies.\n\n[2340%-5]\n\nPage 24\n\n \n[3101]", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 440155, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912", "page_number": 48, "title": "CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912", "content_text": "15392\n\n5392\n\nIn any further communication\n\non this subject, please quote\n\nNo. 5454/12,\n\nand address---\n\nThe Under-Secretary of State,\n\nForeign Office,\n\nLondon,\n\nSir:\n\nFOREIGN OFFICE\n\nFebruary 7th\n\n1912.\n\nI am directed by Secretary Sir E. Grey to transmit to you herewith, to be laid before the Secretary of State for the Colonies, copies of the International Convention which was signed at The Hague on the 23rd ultimo for the purpose of regulating the trade and controlling the use of opium, morphia and cocaine etc., together with copies of the Final Protocol of the Conference.\n\nI am to point out that the declaration as to the adherence of the Colonies was appended by the Delegates as a reservation to their signatures, and to request you to draw the attention of the Marquess of Crewe to the urgency, in view of the terms of Article 23 of the Convention, of obtaining before the end of the year, the adhesion, in the manner provided for, of all of His Majesty's dominions, colonies, dependencies.\n\nThe Under Secretary of State,\n\nColonial Office.\n\n7", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 440332, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912", "page_number": 225, "title": "CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912", "content_text": "[This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.]\n\nCO 1.402\n\n# OPIUM.\n\n## CONFIDENTIAL.\n\nग्रे\n\n[52330]\n\nNo. 1.\n\nForeign Office to Colonial Office.*\n\n## SECTION 1.\n\n[December 30 23 APR 12\n\n223\n\nSir,\n\nForeign Office, December 30, 1911.\n\nWITH reference to previous correspondence on the subject of the International Opium Conference, I am directed by Secretary Sir E. Grey to transmit to you, for the information of Mr. Secretary Harcourt, the following documents received from the British delegates to the conference :-\n\n(A.) A proposed convention in the form adopted by the drafting committee. This convention will be finally considered by the conference when it reassembles on the 8th January, and it is not anticipated that any alterations in substance will be made.\n\n(B.) The draft of articles respecting ratification, adhesion, and denunciation. Further discussion will be required in regard to these articles, the British delegates having submitted a counter-draft, according to which the convention will come into operation independently of the adhesion of non-signatory Powers.\n\n(C.) The draft of a \"final protocol\" showing certain rules which the conference has adopted.\n\n(D.) The draft of an \"additional convention\" containing articles referring especially to China, which it is proposed shall be signed by the representatives of those of the participating Powers who have treaty rights in that country.\n\nI am to explain that the proposed articles of the convention have not in every case been accepted without reserve by all of the delegates.\n\nWith regard to article 7 (document (A)), I am to say that the second sentence was added to meet the wishes of the Portuguese delegates, and the following article was inserted with special reference to the case of Portugal. In addition to the reserve thus made (of which His Majesty's Government would, it is presumed, not take advantage), the interests of the British Crown colonies have been safeguarded by a declaration by the British delegates, worded as follows:--\n\n\"The British delegation desires that its vote may be recorded in the affirmative on the understanding that the resolution does not interfere with the arrangements for the preparation and distribution of opium now in force in the Malay Peninsula or elsewhere in His Majesty's dominions, which are clearly a question of internal, as opposed to international, traffic.\"\n\n## Enclosure in No. 1.\n\n(A.)\n\nI am, &c.\n\nW. LANGLEY.\n\nCONFÉRENCE INTERNATIONALE DE L'OPIUM: COMITÉ DE RÉDACTION.\n\n## Convention internationale de l'Opium.\n\nLES hautes parties contractantes,\n\nDésireuses de marquer un pas de plus dans la voie ouverte par la Commission internationale de Shanghai de 1909;\n\nRésolues à poursuivre la suppression progressive de l'abus de l'opium, de la morphine, de la cocaïne, ainsi que des drogues préparées ou dérivées de ces substances donnant lieu ou pouvant donner lieu à des abus analogues;\n\n* Also to India Office and Board of Trade, mutatis mutandis,\n\n[2297 gg-1]", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 440381, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912", "page_number": 274, "title": "CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912", "content_text": "C. O.\n\n15130\n\nREC?\n\nREGA 16 MAY 12\n\n271\n\nBritish Delegates to International Opium Conference to Sir Edward Grey,\n\n(Confidential.) Sir,\n\nWE, the British delegates plenipotentiary at the recent International Opium Conference at The Hague, have now the honour to submit to you our report on the proceedings and results of the conference. We have already transmitted to you (on the 24th January) the convention and the final protocol in which the labours of the conference resulted, and we now submit two volumes containing respectively (a) minutes of the conference sessions, and (b) memoranda or other papers laid before the conference by the various delegations.\n\n2. The conference was called together at the instance of the American Government, whose object was to give the force of law and international agreement to the proposals contained in the resolutions of the International Opium Commission which assembled at Shanghai in 1899, and to \"the essential corollaries derived therefrom.\" That Government accordingly put forward the following tentative programme for discussion by the conference:\n\n(a.) The advisability of effective national laws and regulations to control the production, manufacture, and distribution of opium, its derivatives and preparations.\n\n(b.) The advisability of restricting the number of ports through which opium may be shipped by opium-producing countries.\n\n(c.) The means to be taken to prevent, at the port of departure, the shipment of opium, its derivatives and preparations, to countries that prohibit, or wish to prohibit or control, their entry.\n\n(d.) The advisability of reciprocal notification of the amount of opium, its derivatives and preparations, shipped from one country to another.\n\n(e.) Regulation by the Universal Postal Union of the transmission of opium, its derivatives and preparations, through the mails.\n\n(f.) The restriction or control of the cultivation of the poppy, so that the production of opium will not be undertaken by countries which at present do not produce it, to compensate for the reduction being made in British India and China.\n\n(g.) The application of the pharmacy laws of the Governments concerned to their subjects in the consular districts, concessions, and settlements in China.\n\n(h.) The propriety of restudying treaty obligations and international agreements under which the opium traffic is at present conducted.\n\n(i.) The advisability of uniform provisions of penal laws concerning offences against any agreements that the Powers may make in regard to opium production and traffic.\n\n(j.) The advisability of uniform marks of identification of packages containing opium in international transit.\n\n(k.) The advisability of permits to be granted to exporters of opium, its derivatives and preparations.\n\n(l.) The advisability of reciprocal right of search of vessels suspected of carrying contraband opium.\n\n(m.) The advisability of measures to prevent the unlawful use of a flag by vessels engaged in the opium traffic.\n\n(n.) The advisability of an International Commission to be entrusted with the carrying out of any international agreement concluded.\n\nPage 373\n\n* Miscellaneous No. 2 (1912).\n\nB", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 440384, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912", "page_number": 277, "title": "CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912", "content_text": "6\n\npackages, the bulk of whose contents often consisted of other matters besides opium. A further Chinese amendment that the total number of packages to be exported should not exceed a monthly limit to be fixed by the conference was rejected as impracticable. The resolution as finally passed forms the basis of article 4 of the convention.\n\n22. The British delegation then proposed a resolution that each participating Government should prohibit the export and import of raw opium save through the agency of specially authorised persons, and this was passed with an amendment suggested by the German delegation substituting the word \"duly\" for \"specially.\" The resolution as thus amended forms the basis of article 5 of the convention.\n\n23. The last resolution we proposed on this subject was that measures should be taken by the Universal Postal Union for regulating the transmission of raw opium through the post. This was carried, but does not find place in the articles of the convention, on the ground that the conference had no power to bind the Postal Union. It figures, therefore, as an expression of opinion (veu) in clause (1) of the final protocol.\n\n24. The report of the Programme Committee on the matters to be discussed under the head of medicinal opium, morphine, and cocaine, &c., was then approved, and some discussion took place in regard to the fourth section of their proposed agenda, which simply specified anti-opium remedies without mentioning points which might be discussed thereunder. The action subsequently taken in regard to this matter will be found stated in paragraph 56, and was in accord with a suggestion made at this stage by Sir W. Collins.\n\n25. At the sixth session (12th December) the Chinese delegation proposed a resolution to the following effect:\n\n\"With a view to assisting China in her efforts to restrict the importation of opium into her dominions, the Governments represented at the conference are prepared to signify their adhesion to the engagement embodied in the agreement between the British and Chinese Governments of the 8th May, 1911, to the effect that chests of Indian opium, unsealed and unaccompanied by the special numbered permits issued by the Indian Government, shall be refused entry into any of the treaty ports of China, and will take the necessary steps to make that engagement binding on their nationals.\n\nFurther, the Governments represented are prepared to signify their adhesion to the terms of prohibition issued by the Chinese Government forbidding the importation of Persian and Turkish opium into the Chinese Empire after the 1st January, 1912, and to take the necessary measures to make such prohibition binding on their nationals.\"\n\nAfter some discussion, in the course of which Mr. Max Müller pointed out that, to the best of his knowledge, all the treaty Powers, with the exception of Portugal, Brazil, and Sweden, had already adhered to the Anglo-Chinese agreement of the 8th May, 1911, the resolution was carried. Later on, when it came before the Drafting Committee, it was held that its appropriate place would be not among the definite articles of the convention, but as a clause in the final protocol, and ultimately (at the seventeenth session) the Chinese delegation proposed that it should be dropped altogether, in view of the objections which the Persian delegate had expressed at the sixteenth session, when he urged that the conference was not called upon to give emphatic approval to measures that had already been taken by the Chinese Government, and which were calculated to cause loss to his country; and this course was taken.\n\n26. A further resolution which was subsequently proposed on the subject, primarily, of raw opium may be conveniently referred to here. This was brought forward by the Persian delegation at the thirteenth session, and was to the effect that there should be a gradual suppression of the production of opium containing less than 9 per cent. of morphine; and that to this end the interested Powers should agree to discourage the production of all opium of this sort by private enterprise, and to stop its production under direct Government control within a period of eight years. He stated that this resolution was justified by the fact that medicinal opium must contain not less than 10 per cent. of morphine, and that it was desirable to confine the consumption of opium to medical purposes.\n\n27. Sir William Meyer replied that the British delegation could not possibly accept this resolution. The great bulk of Indian opium contained less than 9 per cent. of morphine—on the average about 7 per cent. He had already explained (vide Appendix I) the policy of the Indian Government in regard to raw opium. That Government did not agree that its use should be confined to so-called medical purposes, since they had to take into consideration the usages and needs of a large number of people who could not or would not have recourse to European treatment.\n\n7\n\n274\n\nOn a division the resolution was defeated by 9 votes to 2, the American delegation being the only one which rallied to its support.\n\nIt is tolerably certain that this mischievous resolution, the intention of which was to strike at Indian opium, was due to the suggestion of Dr. Hamilton Wright, since it is within our knowledge that Dr. Wright had himself previously drafted a resolution to the same effect.\n\n28. Reverting now to the proceedings of the sixth session (the 12th December), the conference then took up the subject of prepared opium, and the Netherlands delegation moved a resolution that the participating Powers should prohibit, as a general rule, the importation and exportation of this species of opium, subject to a proviso that, in certain circumstances, it might be allowed on board ship for the personal use of the crew during the voyage.\n\nOn discussion this proviso was withdrawn, and the Portuguese delegation proposed to amend the main clause of the resolution by making the prohibition of export of prepared opium a gradual one, on the ground that there was an export of locally manufactured and prepared opium from Macao into China; that the supply was in the hands of a contractor whose contract had some time to run; and (as explained in the following session) that it was desirable to substitute gradual for immediate reform in order to gain the adhesion of outside Powers. The amendment was lost, and the original resolution was then passed in the following form: Les Gouvernements participants à la conférence s'engagent à prohiber l'importation et l'exportation d'opium préparé. The resolution forms the basis of the first part of article 7 of the convention, and the only vote cast against it was that of Portugal.\n\n29. We, however, recorded our affirmative vote ad referendum, in view of the possibility of the resolution being held to apply to traffic between one British possession and another, and of the fact that an absolute prohibition of such traffic, in respect of prepared opium, might be inconvenient, since, for example, some of the protected Malay States are supplied with prepared opium from Singapore, and a similar course is under consideration as regards the North Borneo Protectorate. On reference to you, we were authorised to accept the resolution on the understanding that the words \"exportation\" and \"importation\" referred merely to foreign trade, and not to traffic between different territories under His Majesty's jurisdiction. A declaration to this effect was accordingly made at the fourteenth session.\n\n30. The American delegation then brought forward a series of further resolutions on the subject of prepared opium. Dr. Hamilton Wright had previously declared that these would not be put if the main part of the Dutch resolution above referred to was passed unanimously; but as Portugal had voted against it, he held himself at liberty to proceed with his resolutions. The first of these was to the effect that such of the participating Powers as had not already prohibited the exportation of prepared opium should do so, or else should restrict the number of places through which prepared opium might be exported. After some amendments moved by ourselves and the Chinese delegation with the object of eliminating Portuguese opposition, the resolution was unanimously passed in the following terms:\n\n\"Il est convenu que les pays représentés qui ne sont pas encore prêts à prohiber l'exportation de l'opium préparé la prohiberont aussitôt que possible, et restreindront en attendant le nombre de localités par lesquelles l'opium préparé pourra être exporté.\"\n\nThis resolution now figures in the convention, partly as a second part of article 7 and partly as clause (a) of article 8; and it may be noted that, with article 7 as thus constituted, the Portuguese objection to the resolution which formed the basis of the first part of the article disappeared.\n\n31. Later on, at the twenty-first session, when article 7 came up for second reading, the Chinese delegation proposed an addition to the effect that in any case there should be prohibition within three years of the convention coming into force. The Portuguese, however, strongly opposed this amendment, and said that if it were carried they could not take part in the further work of the conference.\n\nWe thought the amendment reasonable, but in view of the strong opposition of the Portuguese to reopening the question at this stage, we abstained from voting, as did most of the other delegations, with the result that the amendment was carried by the votes of three delegations only, those of China, the United States, and Persia. In view of the small number of positive votes in its favour, the Chinese delegation thereupon withdrew the amendment.\n\n32. The next American resolution was that the Governments represented should forbid the exportation of prepared opium to such countries as may forbid its entry, and that no prepared opium should be shipped to a country which wishes to restrict the ...", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 440385, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912", "page_number": 278, "title": "CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912", "content_text": "entry of the drug unless in accordance with the regulations of the receiving country. This resolution was carried unanimously and forms the basis of clauses (b) and (c) of article 8 of the convention.\n\n33. Two further resolutions of the American delegation were carried without opposition, and laid down (1) that any prepared opium which might be exported from one of the participating countries should bear a special mark of identification, and (2) that the export of prepared opium should only be allowed to specially authorised persons. These resolutions form the basis of clauses (d) and (e) of article 8 of the convention.\n\n34. The concluding American resolution, brought forward at this session, was that the Universal Postal Union should prohibit the transmission of prepared opium through the post. It was pointed out by Sir Cecil Clementi Smith that the conference had no power to bind the Postal Union in this, and the resolution was consequently carried in the following form:---\n\nQu'il est à désirer que des mesures soient adoptées par l'Union postale universelle pour réglémenter la transmission de l'opium préparé par la poste.\n\nIt now finds place, like the similar resolution on the subject of raw opium, as a vou in the final protocol, clause 1 (3).\n\n35. At the seventh session (13th December) the last American resolution on the subject of prepared opium was brought forward, and passed, with an amendment suggested by the Japanese delegation, in the following form :-\n\nIl est convenu que tous les Gouvernements représentés à la conférence prendront des mesures pour la suppression graduelle et efficace de la fabrication, de la distribution et de l'usage de l'opium préparé, en tenant compte des conditions différentes de chacun des pays en cause.\n\nIt forms the basis of article 6 of the convention.\n\n36. It may be conveniently mentioned here that at the tenth session (18th December), the Persian delegate brought forward a resolution that prepared opium found in transit between one country and another should be considered contraband, and forthwith destroyed. After some discussion as to whether this resolution should be referred to the Programme Committee, or dealt with at once by the conference, the latter course was adopted. It was then pointed out by ourselves and by the French delegation that the proposal was an impracticable one, and that it would involve the right of searching vessels, which was one of the items in the original American programme to which His Majesty's Government had taken exception. Finally the resolution was negatived nem. con., even its sponsor refraining from voting for it.\n\n37. The most important business of the seventh, eighth, and ninth sessions was the carrying by the British delegation of a series of resolutions in respect of morphia and cocaine, and it will be convenient to deal with these together in later paragraphs. The other matters not as yet mentioned at these sessions, were the following:\n\n38. Seventh session (13th December). The first part of this session was of an informal character, and devoted to the reception of the Dutch and British anti-opium societies who had expressed a desire to attend. The Dutch representative spoke very briefly, and Sir Matthew Dodsworth, the president of the British society, delivered an eloquent and tactful speech which produced a very good impression on the conference.\n\n39. During the eighth session (14th December) the Chinese delegation submitted a report on the subject of the measures taken to suppress opium in China. In the course of his introductory remarks, their spokesman, Mr. Tang Kwo-an, referred to the intelligence reported in the \"Times\" that one incident of the revolutionary movement was a revival of opium cultivation in Yünnan and Szechuan. He said that if this had been true, it was only a regrettable incident of the present situation, and that when order was re-established, the Chinese Government would pursue its anti-opium measures with still greater energy than before. Mr. Max Müller pointed out that a number of the figures in regard to reduction of opium cultivation furnished in the Chinese memorandum were reproductions of statistics which Sir Alexander Hosie had shown to be inaccurate at the Shanghai commission; and Mr. Tang admitted that the figures were estimates only.\n\n40. M. Guesde (France) then asked the American delegation (a) which of the countries not represented at the conference had refused an invitation to be present; (b) which States, while not attending the conference, had declared themselves ready to adhere to its proposals; and (c) what States had not been invited at all. M. Guesde pointed out, as justifying these questions, that Peru and Bolivia might quite well set up as cocaine producers, and that Trieste might become a port of transport for the drugs whose abuses the conference wishes to check. These observations were supported by the Russian and Portuguese delegations; and M. Cremer, on behalf of the Dutch delegation, said that his Government was ready to invite the Governments not represented to associate themselves with the proposals of the conference. Dr. Hamilton Wright gave no categorical answer to the questions put, but observed that it would be extraordinary if outside Powers did not adhere to the proposals of the conference. He also stated that he would probably present a resolution to the effect that if countries which produced opium, or were interested in the trade in opium and its various drugs, did not adhere to the convention, their products should be considered as outside the bounds of legitimate commerce. Mr. Max Müller pointed out, in reply, that such action would conflict with the most-favoured-nation clauses of commercial treaties.\n\n41. The Chinese delegation had framed and distributed a number of printed questions addressed to the delegations of Germany, France, Great Britain, Japan, Portugal, and Russia on the subject of opium administration in their Far Eastern possessions. The questions were couched in an inquisitorial style, and assumed the right of the Chinese delegation to investigate the efficacy and sincerity of the internal regulations of other countries.\n\nAt the ninth session (15th December) M. Guesde (France) took exception to these questions, and asked very pertinently whether the delegates were sitting in an international conference, or had become a commission of inquisitorial investigation. He emphatically refused to follow the Chinese delegation in its attempt to make for the latter category; and observed that, if this method was adopted, the Chinese themselves might be subjected to very inconvenient questions as to the resumption of opium cultivation in provinces in which it was alleged to have disappeared, or the extent to which the Chinese Government had facilitated the efforts of the Government of Indo-China to deal with the smuggling of opium, and other such matters.\n\n42. The Russian, Portuguese, and Japanese delegations emphatically supported the French view; and we also opposed any action being taken on the questions, Mr. Max Müller pointing out that in some cases the Chinese already knew the answers to them, while in others they could have obtained information through the ordinary diplomatic channels. Dr. Hamilton Wright alone supported the Chinese view that their questions were proper and relevant. The president, being called on for a ruling, held that only such questions as were germane to the issues immediately before the conference should be proceeded with, but in answer to a suggestion by Mr. Tang declined to take the responsibility of deciding which of the questions came within this category. Finally the Chinese questions were dropped, and nothing more was heard of them.\n\nThe Chinese procedure on this occasion was typical of an attitude often assumed by their delegation. They were constantly endeavouring to pose as the protagonists in the matter of opium reform, and to divert attention from their own shortcomings by endeavouring to cross-question other people, forgetting that this was just the way to provoke retort. As a matter of fact, the Chinese were treated with singular forbearance throughout the conference. The other delegations generously refrained from drawing attention to the possibility of the actions of the Chinese Government of the future being widely divergent from the promises of the Chinese Government of the past; and it was only when the Chinese themselves, by their own action, made it necessary for this matter to be cautiously alluded to that any such doubts were hinted at.\n\n43. We now return to the subject of morphine and cocaine. In view of the fact that it was on the initiative of His Majesty's Government that measures in respect of these drugs had become an integral part of the conference programme, it was obviously for the British delegation to suggest the specific restrictions to be adopted; and in the memorandum referred to in paragraph 7 above we were informed that His Majesty's Government considered that such action might be on the following lines:\n\n(1) All manufacturers of, and dealers in, morphia and cocaine shall be required to take out a licence. Persons manufacturing or dealing in the above articles without licence shall be liable to penalty.\n\n(2) All such manufacturers and dealers will be required to keep a record of all transactions in such drugs, including the names and addresses of all persons from whom they obtain or to whom they sell them, and the quantity involved in each transaction. This record shall be open to inspection and verification by a Government officer.\n\nPage 373", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 440388, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912", "page_number": 281, "title": "CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912", "content_text": "14\n\nso-called anti-opium remedies, which for the most part contained opium, morphine, or cocaine. After some discussion, during which Dr. Wu-Lien-Teh showed, from a series of analyses that had been made in regard to a number of these remedies, that nearly all of them contained opium or morphine, even though in some cases warranted not to do so, the resolution was passed unanimously in the following form:--\n\n\"La conférence, constatant que, dans les pays où des efforts ont été faits pour combattre l'abus de l'opium, on a été amené à faire usage de soi-disant remèdes anti-opium, contenant de l'opium, de la morphine ou de la cocaïne, décide que les Gouvernements participants prendront contre ces remèdes dangereux des mesures analogues à celles qui sont proposées contre l'opium, la morphine, la cocaïne et contre leurs sels respectifs.\"\n\nThe substance of this resolution has been embodied in article 14 (b) of the final convention, which lays down that any preparations, whether styled anti-opium remedies or not, containing more than 2 per cent. of morphine or 1 per cent of cocaine, shall be treated in the same way as those drugs.\n\n57. The Chinese delegation then submitted a series of resolutions having special reference to China, and to the Powers having special treaties with the Chinese Government. These resolutions had been previously discussed with us before they had been presented, and they had been worded in accordance with suggestions we had made.\n\nThe first two resolutions were to the effect that:--\n\n(1) The participating Governments agree to co-operate with the Chinese Government in the prevention of the smuggling of opium, morphine, cocaine, &c., from their colonies in the Far East, or from their leased territories in China into Chinese territory, while the Chinese Government will similarly co-operate towards the prevention of such smuggling from China into the colonies and territories in question.\n\n(2) With a view to giving practical effect to the principle embodied in resolution No. 9 of the Shanghai commission, the Chinese Government will enact pharmaceutical laws for its subjects, regulating the sale and distribution of morphine, cocaine, &c., and will communicate these laws to the treaty Powers represented at the conference. These Powers will, if they find the said laws acceptable, take the necessary steps for applying them to their own nationals in China.\n\nThese two resolutions were carried as they stood.\n\n58. The third resolution was to the effect that the participating Governments would undertake to adopt all necessary measures to restrict and control the smoking of opium in their leased territories, settlements, or concessions in China, and to suppress any opium smoking divans, &c., that might still exist there, as also to prohibit the smoking of opium in places of public amusement and houses of ill-fame.\n\nTo this resolution the German delegation moved an amendment, which was adopted, to the effect that the suppression of opium-smoking divans, &c., should take place pari passu with similar measures adopted by the Chinese Government in its own territories.\n\n59. The fourth resolution, as carried with a verbal amendment suggested by the French delegation, proposed that the participating Powers should take effective measures for the gradual reduction, pari passu with similar measures taken by the Chinese Government, of the number of shops dealing in opium, which may still exist in their leased settlements, territories or concessions, and that they should adopt suitable and effective measures for the restriction and control of the retail trade in opium in these areas.\n\n60. The fifth resolution, after some alteration in the original wording which took place after discussion thereon, was to the following effect:--\n\n\"The participating Governments possessing post offices of their own in China undertake to adopt stringent measures to prevent the illegal importation into China, as well as the transmission from one part of China to another through the agency of their aforesaid post offices, of opium, whether raw or prepared, of morphine, cocaine, and their respective salts, and of the other substances dealt with in the convention.\"\n\n61. All these resolutions, subject to the amendments above indicated, passed without opposition, but Siam and Persia abstained from voting as not having treaties with China. The resolutions were originally embodied, as having special reference to the conditions of China and to circumstances which did not affect some of the conference Powers, in a separate supplementary convention. At the fourteenth session, however,\n\n15\n\n278\n\nwhen the articles came up for discussion in this form, the Chinese delegation proposed that they should figure in the main convention, on the ground that they were of primary importance, and that their relegation to a separate convention would seem to place China on a footing apart from the other conference Powers. After some discussion the matter was referred to the Drafting Committee, which recommended (section II of its report on a variety of matters which had been referred to it, contained in the minutes of the fifteenth session) that to meet the Chinese wish, and with the alteration of \"contracting Powers\" into \"contracting Powers having treaties with China,\" the articles should figure in the main convention. This proposal came up for discussion at the sixteenth session, and was adopted, Persia and Siam alone dissenting. The articles now figure as Nos. 15 to 19 of Chapter IV in the final convention, and in signing the convention the Siamese and Persian delegates indicated that they did so with a reserve on the subject of these articles, since they have no special treaties with China. We could never understand why these delegations, and especially that of Siam, were so tenacious in pressing this point, since obviously the chapter, as now worded, could only refer to the treaty Powers.\n\n62. The Drafting Committee then put before the conference three drafts, comprising:--\n\n(a) Draft articles of a convention embodying the general resolutions already passed on the subject of opium, raw and prepared, morphine, cocaine, &c.\n\n(b) Draft articles on the subject of ratification, adhesion, and denunciation.\n\n(c) A draft final protocol.\n\nA preliminary reading was then given to document (a), and some verbal amendments were introduced.\n\n63. At the twelfth session (20th December) the conference proceeded to the discussion of the first portion of document (b), which dealt with the procedure in regard to ratification coming into force, adhesion coming into force, and denunciation in respect of the convention. The procedure submitted for discussion was as follows:--\n\n(1) There would be a premier dépôt des ratifications at The Hague as soon as several signatory Powers were prepared to ratify.\n\n(2) The remaining participating Powers would ratify subsequently by written notification.\n\n(3) All outside Powers should then be invited to adhere.\n\n(4) The convention would come into force a year after the Netherlands Government had received the ratifications of all the contracting Powers and the adhesion of all the outside Powers above mentioned.\n\n(5) If, however, matters were not so far advanced two years after the signing of the convention, all the Powers that had by that time ratified or adhered were to be invited to send delegates to a fresh conference at The Hague to consider the conditions under which the convention might nevertheless be wholly or partially enforced.\n\n(6) A subsequent denunciation of the convention by any Power would apply only to that Power, and would come into effect a year after notice of denunciation had been given.\n\n6. In regard to the first condition above mentioned, we proposed, to expedite matters, that the convention should in any case be ratified by the participating Powers within six months, and, subject to an American amendment which extended the period to one year, this was carried. As regards the third condition, we also procured an amendment providing that invitation to the outside Powers should take place after the premier dépôt instead of after universal ratification, and that the premier dépôt might have effect as soon as six Powers were ready to ratify.\n\nThe discussion of the draft did not proceed further before our Christmas recess, but at the thirteenth session we tabled an important amendment with reference to the manner in which the convention was to come into force, which is given in paragraph 77 infra.\n\nThis amendment was referred to the Drafting Committee.\n\n65. The Germans had at the same time drawn up an additional draft article on the subject of denunciation to the following effect:--\n\n\"In case a nation which, up to the date of signing the present convention, has not produced opium or manufactured morphine, cocaine, &c., should engage in such production or manufacture, every Power within whose territories opium is produced, or\n\nLy", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 440389, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912", "page_number": 282, "title": "CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912", "content_text": "16\n\nmorphine, cocaine, &c., are manufactured on the date when the present convention shall be signed, shall have the right to denounce the said convention; and such denunciation may take effect a month after it has been communicated to the Netherlands Government.\" \n\nIt will be observed that this proposal aimed not merely at the production of opium, morphine, or cocaine for purposes condemned by the convention, but even at production for legitimate medical purposes, and would in fact have prevented any Power from starting a new internal industry for such purposes. \n\nThe German delegates, in private conversation with us, suggested that we ought to welcome this proposal, since it would permanently establish our practical monopoly in the morphine trade like that of the Germans in cocaine. We replied, of course, that we could not assent to anything of the kind, and that our instructions were simply to obtain measures for confining the use of these drugs to proper medical purposes. The proposal gave us considerable anxiety, since it seemed to us to indicate that the Germans, in spite of the agreement we had come to with them in regard to the morphine and cocaine articles, were casting about for an easy means of withdrawing from the convention. We hoped, however, that this was merely a ballon d'essai, and that the idea would not be pressed. \n\nThe proposal was subsequently withdrawn, in view of the methods finally adopted to secure the adhesion of outside Powers to the convention. \n\n66. At the thirteenth session (21st December) the American delegation also brought forward resolutions on the subject of adhesion to and ratification of the convention, which were to the following effect :-- \n\n(1.)—(a.) Powers not represented at the conference might be allowed to adhere to the convention; but the participating Powers might lay down conditions of adherence. In the absence of such conditions, adherence would imply acceptance of all the obligations required by the convention. \n\n(b.) The interested Governments should agree among themselves as to the steps to be taken to obtain the adhesion of States whose co-operation might be necessary or useful in order to secure complete execution of the convention. \n\n(2.) The convention should be ratified as soon as possible, and in any case within a year. \n\nThis was merely setting forth in other words a matter which had already been agreed to provisionally. \n\n(3.) The convention should come into force in all the dominions of the contracting Powers sixty days after ratification. \n\nThese resolutions were subsequently withdrawn, \n\n67. The powers of the Drafting Committee were, by a resolution passed during this session, extended so as to enable it not merely to put into conventional form the substance of resolutions already accepted by the conference, but to add such additional articles as seemed necessary for the purposes of completing the convention. \n\n68. Reference had been made in more than one of the previous sessions of the conference to the difficulty in regard to dealing with \"Indian hemp.\" The Italian Government had put this subject forward as one of the matters which the conference should consider, but its delegate, M. Santoliquido, having also to attend the International Sanitary Conference in Paris, had only been present at one of our meetings (at the fourth session). The Italian Minister at The Hague had accordingly been communicated with by M. Cremer (Netherlands), as chairman of the Programme Committee; and M. Cremer now put before the conference a letter from the Minister stating that M. Santoliquido had informed him that the Italian delegation had no intention of presenting any specific proposal in regard to hemp drugs, and left it to the conference as a whole to take such measures in regard to these as it might deem expedient. \n\n69. At the urgent request of Dr. Hamilton Wright the subject was referred to the Programme Committee, but that body was of the unanimous opinion that no useful purpose would be served by entering on the discussion of such a question, in which many interests might be involved, without careful study and consideration. M. Cremer, its chairman, therefore announced to the conference that, having regard to these circumstances, and to the facts that--(a) the conference was not in possession of the statistics necessary for adequate treatment of the subject;* (b) it was difficult to obtain a scientific definition of the preparations that would have to be dealt with; (c) the delegates had no instructions in regard to the discussion of this matter; (d) it appeared sufficient for the countries threatened by the abuse of hemp drugs to take internal measures against them--the Programme Committee considered it sufficient to recommend the adoption of the following resolution in the form of a vœu :-- \n\n“Il est à désirer que les Gouvernements participants étudient la question du chanvre indien au point de vue statistique, et scientifique, dans le but de régler éventuellement, par leur législation intérieure ou pour un accord international, les abus de son emploi.” \n\nThis resolution was accordingly introduced by the Netherlands delegation, and was carried, with an amendment proposed by us substituting for the word \"éventuellement\" the words \"si la nécessité s'en fait sentir.\" \n\n70. The Chinese delegation wished the resolution to read as follows :---- \n\n'Il est à désirer que les Gouvernements participants étudient la question du chanvre indien au point de vue statistique et scientifique, dans le but d'en contrôler le commerce, et d'en régler l'usage par leur législation intérieure ou par un accord international, ou par tous les deux. \n\nBut this was objected to on the ground that it was going beyond what the data before us justified. M. Brenier (France) pointed out that the Chinese Government could, if it pleased, take restrictive measures against hemp drugs such as had been already taken in Indo-China, and Sir William Meyer added that similar restrictions had been in force in British India for a good many years. The Chinese amendment was accordingly withdrawn. \n\nDr. Hamilton Wright expressed the hope that the resolution as carried would become a definite article of the convention, but he met with no support in this view, and the resolution remained a vœu, and stands as such in the final protocol (clause I (2)). \n\n71. The next matter for consideration was a resolution by the American delegation which had been brought forward and received some discussion at the twelfth session. This was to the effect that the participating Powers should communicate to one another, through the medium of the Netherlands Government, texts of existing and future laws and regulations bearing on matters dealt with in the convention; as also statistical information in regard to the trade in raw and prepared opium, morphine, and cocaine, and their respective salts, hemp drugs, and any other drugs or preparations dealt with in the convention. \n\nThe mention of hemp drugs was now deleted from the resolution, and, as regards the exchange of statistical information, an amendment, moved by our delegation and accepted by the Americans, to the effect that the statistics should be based, not only on Customs reports, but also on the registers of sale kept by persons licensed to carry on trade in the drugs concerned, was carried with a single negative vote--that of Germany. Our object, as Mr. Max Müller explained, was not in any way to divulge the statistics of individual firms, but, by grouping these together, to obtain information which would be very valuable as a supplement to the Customs returns. \n\nLater on, however (seventeenth session), when article 21 of the convention, which was based on this resolution, came up for consideration, the German delegation pointed out that in some cases, as in regard to heroine, the trade was so largely in the hands of a single firm that to give the statistics proposed would in effect amount to divulging private affairs; and, recognising the justice of this view, the conference brought back the article to the scope of the original resolution by merely prescribing in general terms the submission of statistical information in regard to trade in the drugs mentioned. \n\n72. At the fourteenth session (22nd December) the American delegation brought up a fresh series of resolutions, intended to stiffen the restrictive measures already agreed upon in respect of the drugs dealt with by the convention. The fourth resolution, however, which concerned the protection of aboriginal natives of Pacific islands, was withdrawn, and the remaining three resolutions were referred to the Drafting Committee and subsequently dropped. \n\n73. The conference then proceeded to the discussion in article form, and at this stage in a separate convention, of the special resolutions regarding China referred to in paragraphs 57-61 above, and then adjourned for a Christmas recess. \n\n74. We had now been sitting for about three weeks, and had, as it seemed, come to a final agreement in regard to most of the matters with which we had been called upon to deal. The resolutions covering the ground which forms the basis of the \n\n[878]\n\nF\n\n279\n\ny", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 440391, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912", "page_number": 284, "title": "CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912", "content_text": "21\n\n281\n\n20\n\nof M. Asser, the committee had prepared the following formula, which specifically applied only to raw opium, but would, of course, be equally necessary in regard to importation or exportation of other drugs:—\n\n\"Par importation, on entend l'acte d'introduire de l'étranger en qualité de commerçant en gros, demi-gros ou en détail, de consignataire ou commissionnaire, de l'opium brut.\n\n\"Par exportation, on entend l'acte d'expédier vers l'étranger, en qualité de commerçant en gros, en demi-gros ou en détail, où de commissionnaire, de l'opium brut.”\n\n83. This definition would show that it was only actual traders who required a licence. M. Asser and Sir William Collins had objected to the addition of the words, à l'exclusion des simples transporteurs, expéditeurs ou transitaires, on the ground that the formal exclusion of these persons might constitute indirect encouragement to contraband dealing, and that it was, therefore, better to omit them by implication, in the event of the definition proposed being necessary, rather than explicitly. The committee further pointed out that the question of carriers was specifically raised by the second American resolution brought forward at the fourteenth session and referred to in paragraph 72 above.\n\n84. As Sir William Meyer subsequently pointed out to the conference (twentieth session), we could not accept the definition prepared by the committee, since it omitted two categories of persons, whom experience in India had shown to be very dangerous smugglers of prohibited drugs, i.e.—\n\n(a.) Persons who were not in any way traders by profession, but took advantage of their visit to a prohibiting country to introduce, for their own profit, considerable quantities of the forbidden drugs.\n\n(b.) Go-betweens secretly employed by persons engaged in trade, who were paid to undergo fine or imprisonment, if detected, rather than divulge the names of their real employers.\n\nOur desire was therefore to treat importation and exportation as having the widest possible sense; but this, on the other hand, was not in the least likely to be accepted by the German delegation.\n\n85. The remaining portions of the committee's report dealt mainly with—\n\n(a.) The wording of a number of the articles already agreed on, in regard to which the suggestions of the committee were subsequently in large measure accepted.\n\n(b.) The proposal, already referred to in paragraph 61, for bringing the special Chinese articles into the main convention.\n\n(c) The submission of a fresh draft final protocol.\n\n86. Apart from the important questions which had been thus raised by the report of the Drafting Committee, we were also faced with a very serious difficulty in regard to the morphine and cocaine articles. Although, as previously explained in paragraphs 45 and 46, the resolutions on which these were based had been put forward by us after consultation and agreement with the German delegation, and we had in some cases modified our original proposals in order to bring them along with us, the Germans now informed us, to our great surprise, that they would be obliged to move a series of amendments in regard to articles 10 to 16 of the original draft convention, as quoted in paragraph 48, which would have the result of invalidating the binding character of most of these articles.\n\n87. We had thus, as will be seen, to face problems of a very serious character, and which involved not merely private conference with other delegations, but in some cases references to His Majesty's Government. Unfortunately, too, we were deprived at this juncture of the guidance of Sir Cecil Clementi Smith, whose health had not permitted him to return to The Hague after the Christmas recess. The leadership of the British delegation accordingly passed, during the remainder of the conference, to Sir William Meyer as the next senior delegate.\n\n88. The sixteenth session (10th January) dealt mainly with matters which have already been reported on, such as the transfer of the special Chinese articles to the main convention.\n\n89. At the seventeenth session (11th January) the report of the Drafting Committee on the various \"effectuating\" proposals came up for discussion. Sir William Meyer pointed out that superficially the main cleavage seemed to be between the primary and the British schemes on the one hand, and the German scheme on the other, since the first two followed the usual method of ratification of the contracting Powers preceding the adhesion of others, while the latter put adhesion first. From the practical point of view, however, the primary and the German schemes stood together on one side, and the British on the other, since the former postponed the coming into force of the convention until the adhesion of all the outside Powers had been obtained, while the latter provided that all matters which did not involve special legislation (or its equivalent, as suggested by the French delegation) should come into force on ratification by the Powers represented at the conference.\n\n90. M. Delbrück gave a clear exposition of the circumstances which had led to the propounding of the German scheme, in the course of which he laid stress on the fact (as we have already indicated) that ratification of the convention by the Reichstag would make it an integral part of the German corpus juris; while in the United States, for example, even if the convention were ratified by the Senate, its provisions would remain ineffective until applied by internal legislation.\n\n91. M. Cremer (Netherlands) said that his delegation could not accept the British scheme even if modified by the acceptance of the French amendment, since no Government was likely to put in hand laws or their equivalents without any certainty that these would eventually be applied. It would, in fact, be a case of every country waiting to see what the others would do.\n\n92. Dr. Hamilton Wright objected to waiting for the adhesion of outside Powers, and said that his delegation would like ratification and the coming into force of the convention to be effectuated as soon as possible. Finally, M. Delbrück indicated that it might be possible to proceed without getting the adhesion of all the outside Powers. The debate was then adjourned to the next session.\n\n93. The course of the discussion, however, and exchanges of opinion with other delegations, had already convinced us that the British amendment to the primary scheme was not likely to find acceptance. As we more than once indicated to the conference, our object throughout was to insist on the practical and expeditious enforcement of the measures that had already been agreed to, rather than on questions of form; and as between the primary and the German schemes, the latter had the advantage that the adhesion of outside Powers was to be sought immediately after the signing of the convention, while under the former that process would not be commenced till six at least of the conference Powers had ratified. Accordingly, on the 11th January, we sent you a telegram asking whether we might negotiate on the basis of the German scheme, endeavouring to shorten the periods before which the convention should come into force, and to substitute \"substantial\" for \"unanimous\" adhesion of outside Powers.\n\n94. At the eighteenth session (12th January) the adjourned debate on the subject of the \"effectuation\" procedure was opened by M. Brenier (France), who pointed out that the divergent schemes before the conference arose from a conflict of ideas, typically represented by the German and British delegations respectively. The former, looking to the great difficulties of embarking on the measures approved by the conference without adhesion of outside Powers, held that the obtainment of such adhesion was the first object to be aimed at; the latter, concerned chiefly with getting the convention into force as soon as possible, objected to the delay which the German method would involve. In order to bridge these differences between these divergent ideas, M. Brenier suggested a compromise scheme and proposed that the Drafting Committee should reconsider the subject on the lines he had put forward.\n\nThe American delegation, however, proposed an amendment referring the matter back to the committee without any specific instructions, and this was carried.\n\n95. The Drafting Committee, which had been materially aided in its fresh deliberations by the kind assistance of M. van Swinderen as well as of M. Asser, then agreed to put forward a scheme following in some respects the lines of the German proposal as a basis for further discussion by itself. Sir William Collins, our representative on the committee, thereupon discussed with us the amendments which would be necessary in order to make the scheme a satisfactory one from our point of view, and we reported these to you in our despatch No. 9 of the 14th January. The main lines of the scheme as it was thus to be altered are shown below, the clauses italicised being those which Sir William Collins was to propose:—\n\n(1.) As soon as the convention had been signed, the outside Powers of Europe and America were to be invited to sign it also. No reference was now made to the word adhesion as being an unsuitable term to use in the circumstances proposed.\n\n(2.) As soon as these supplementary signatures had been obtained, ratification would be proceeded with.\n\nPage 373", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 440392, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912", "page_number": 285, "title": "CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912", "content_text": "22\n\n(3.) If, however, all the outside Powers had not signed by the 31st December, 1912, the Powers that had signed, whether originally or by way of supplementary signature, should send representatives to The Hague to consider whether ratification might not nevertheless be proceeded with. Our object here was to cut short the delay which might be caused by refusal to sign, or procrastination in agreeing to sign, on the part of some of the outside Powers.\n\n(4.) The convention was to come into force two months after the completion of the ratification process. (The Drafting Committee's original scheme said six months.)\n\n(5.) Laws, &c., necessary to give effect to the provisions of the convention should be drawn up and presented to the Parliaments concerned within six months of the convention coming into force.\n\n(6.) The date on which such legislation should come into force would, however, be the subject of agreement between the signatory Powers.\n\nWe thus met the point, raised in your telegram of the 12th January, and the Board of Trade letter enclosed in your despatch No. 16 of the 13th idem, that restrictions should not be enforced until each State had had an opportunity of considering the extent to which other Powers were prepared to move in the same direction.\n\n(7.) In the event of grave difficulties arising in regard to the putting into force of the convention as a whole, or of the laws, &c., specifically contemplated thereby, a fresh conference should be summoned to obtain agreement on these matters.\n\n96. We indicated, in addressing you on the subject of these amendments, that we thought the procedure proposed would present material advantages in coping with the difficulties of a situation in which the representatives of only a few Powers were endeavouring to deal with matters some of which were of universal concern. We also observed that M. Brenier, on behalf of France, would, for the reasons stated in paragraph 78, propose to place administrative ordinances on the same footing as laws with reference to conditions (5) to (7), and that we must admit the justice of this proposal.\n\n97. The committee accepted our amendments (with the small change of two months into three in regard to clause 4 above) and also M. Brenier's; and at the nineteenth session (15th January) the latter, as chairman of the Drafting Committee, put the scheme before the conference as the best method of reconciling the differences of view indicated in his speech at the eighteenth session. The scheme was received with general favour, although at this stage several of the delegations, our own included, could not definitely commit themselves to its acceptance pending instructions from their Governments.\n\nOne of\n\n98. In your despatch No. 18 of the 17th January you authorised us to accept the scheme if we thought that certain further amendments which had been suggested by the Board of Trade were not likely to prove acceptable to the conference. Those suggestions was that the provision for a supplementary conference mentioned in clause (7) above should also cover the possibility of undue delay in ratification, and to meet this eventuality we successfully proposed, at the twenty-third session, to amend what is now article 24 of the convention accordingly. We explained in our despatch No. 12 of the 20th January why we had not thought it advisable to press the Board of Trade's other suggestions.\n\n99. It was also agreed at the twenty-third session to amend the conditions of clause (5) above, so as to cover the contingency of a legislature not being in session at the date on which the six months' delay allowed expired. In that case laws not already put before such a Parliament were to be submitted to it on its reassembly.\n\n100. The other delegations which had reserved their acceptance of the scheme when first put forward, also in due course received the assent of their Governments to its adoption, and the scheme has formed the basis, with some verbal modifications, of articles 22-24 of the convention.\n\n101. At the nineteenth session the final protocol as revised by the Drafting Committee, was also accepted on first reading.\n\n102. At the twentieth session (16th January) the German delegation brought forward the amendments to the morphine and cocaine articles of which preliminary mention has been made in paragraph 86 above.\n\nThe extent to which these amendments, as they were first drawn up and communicated to us, altered the provisions of the original articles 10 to 16, as exhibited in paragraph 48 above, will be best seen from the statement below, which puts the original articles and the proposed German re-draft in parallel columns.\n\nOriginal Articles. (See paragraph 48 ante).\n\nARTICLE 10.\n\nLes Puissances contractantes limiteront, par des lois, aux seuls établissements et locaux qui auront été désignés à cet effet, la fabrication de la morphine, de la cocaine et de leurs sels respectifs.\n\nARTICLE 11.\n\nLes Puissances contractantes exigeront que tous ceux qui fabriquent, importent, vendent, distribuent et exportent la morphine, la cocaïne et leurs sels respectifs, soient munis d'un permis pour se livrer à ces opérations.\n\nARTICLE 12.\n\nLes Puissances contractantes exigeront des fabricants et commerçants munis de ces permis la consignation sur leurs livres de toutes transactions concernant la fabrication, l'importation, la vente, la distribution et l'exportation de la morphine, de la cocaine et de leurs sels respectifs. Cette règle ne s'appliquera pas forcément aux prescriptions médicales, et faites par des pharmaciens dûment autorisés.\n\nARTICLE 13.\n\n...\n\n23\n\nGerman re-draft.\n\nARTICLE 10 (formerly 13).\n\nLes Puissances contractantes auront soin de faire contrôler, dans la mesure du possible, tous ceux qui fabriquent, importent, vendent, distribuent, et exportent la morphine, la cocaine et leurs sels respectifs, ainsi que les bâtiments où ces fabricants et commerçants exercent cette industrie ou ce commerce.\n\nARTICLE 11 (formerly 10).\n\nLes Puissances contractantes prendront, à cet effet, les mesures nécessaires pour constater dans quels établissements et locaux la morphine, la cocaïne et leurs sels respectifs sont fabriqués.\n\nARTICLE 12 (formerly 11).\n\nLes Puissances contractantes auront soin, dans la mesure du possible, d'exiger que tous ceux qui fabriquent, importent, vendent, distribuent et exportent la morphine, la cocaïne et leurs sels respectifs en avertiront les autorités ou se muniront d'un permis pour se livrer à ces opérations.\n\nARTICLE 13 (formerly 12).\n\nLes Puissances contractantes auront soin, dans la mesure du possible, d'exiger de ces fabricants et commerçants la consignation sur leurs livres des quantités fabriquées, des importations, des ventes, de toute autre cession, et des exportations de morphine, de la cocaïne et de leurs sels respectifs. Cette règle ne s'appliquera pas forcément aux prescriptions, et aux ventes faites par des pharmaciens dûment autorisés.\n\nARTICLE 14.\n\nLes Puissances contractantes prohiberont dans leur commerce intérieur toute cession de morphine, de cocaïne et de leurs sels respectifs, à toutes personnes non autorisées.\n\nARTICLE 15.\n\nLes Puissances contractantes interdiront, en tenant compte des différences de leurs conditions commerciales, l'importation de la morphine, de la cocaïne et de leurs sels respectifs à d'autres qu'à des personnes autorisées.\n\nARTICLE 16.\n\n...\n\n282\n\nARTICLE 14 (old 14).\n\nLes Puissances contractantes prohiberont dans leur commerce intérieur toute cession de morphine, de cocaïne et de leurs sels respectifs, à toutes personnes non autorisées.\n\nARTICLE 15 (old 15).\n\nLes Puissances contractantes, en tenant compte des différences de leurs conditions commerciales, auront soin de restreindre, dans la mesure du possible, l'importation commerciale, de la morphine, de la cocaïne et de leurs sels respectifs aux personnes y autorisées. Les Puissances contractantes s'engagent à prohiber, par des conventions spéciales ou autrement, l'exportation de la morphine, de la cocaïne et de leurs sels respectifs de leurs pays et colonies vers les pays, colonies ou territoires à bail des autres Puissances contractantes, sauf dans le cas où le destinataire aura reçu un permis accordé conformément aux lois du pays.\n\nARTICLE 16 (old 16).\n\nLes Puissances contractantes envisageront...", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 440395, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912", "page_number": 288, "title": "CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912", "content_text": "28\n\n116. The only other business not already referred to, dealt with at the twenty-first session (17th January), was the insertion of a denunciation article (article 25 of the convention) which follows the original scheme of the Drafting Committee, and the commencement of the second reading of the convention as a whole.\n\n117. At the twenty-second session (18th January), as we reported to you at the time (in our despatch No. 11 of the 19th January), Dr. Hamilton Wright, on behalf of the American delegation, suddenly introduced a resolution inviting the Drafting Committee to consider the advisability of preparing an entirely fresh draft of the effectuating clauses, based on the idea that there should be two separate conventions, one principally concerned with the articles relating to opium, and the other containing those relating to morphine, cocaine, &c. The first of these was to be ratified in the usual way, and within a year, by the participating Powers, and the adhesion of outside Powers would be invited. The second would be subject to the special procedure already proposed by the Drafting Committee, and provisionally accepted by the conference, for the convention as a whole, by which preliminary adhesion by outside Powers by way of signature would precede ratification.\n\n118. M. Cremer (Netherlands) pointed out that the adoption of this resolution would involve a breach of the conditions on which His Majesty's Government entered into the conference. Sir William Meyer, speaking for the British delegation, emphasised this point, quoting from your note of the 17th September, 1910, to Mr. Whitelaw Reid, to show that His Majesty's Government had from the outset made their participation in the conference conditional on restrictive measures against morphine and cocaine being taken up pari passu with opium. His Majesty's Government, he said, regarded the consumption of those drugs as being, in present circumstances, a far more serious evil than that of opium, and he could not possibly accept Dr. Hamilton Wright's contention that the primary object of the conference was to conventionalise the opium resolutions of the Shanghai Commission. Opium reform had already advanced very largely, thanks mainly to the generous co-operation, at a material loss to herself, which India had given to the Chinese anti-opium policy, and even if the present conference were to come to nothing the stimulus thus given would continue to act. The proposed measures in respect of morphine and cocaine, on the other hand, required international agreement and co-operation to render them effective, and for this purpose a convention was necessary. Nevertheless, the American delegation now proposed a course which would have the effect of treating the opium articles as of primary importance, and bringing them into effect with comparatively little reference to outside Powers, while the morphine and cocaine articles would take a back place, and be subject to a much longer process before they could come into force. In fact, this procedure might perfectly well lead to their being shelved altogether. Such a course was emphatically opposed to the condition which His Majesty's Government had laid down as indispensable to their taking part in the conference, and Sir William Meyer said that we must, therefore, absolutely oppose the solution proposed by Dr. Hamilton Wright being regarded as even an open question.\n\n119. After some discussion, in which the British point of view was strongly supported by the Siamese, French, and Russian delegations, Dr. Hamilton Wright, perceiving that the sense of the conference was against him, asked leave to withdraw the resolution. The conference, however, decided on its being put to the vote, and it was then rejected by 9 votes to 1 (that of the United States), the German delegation abstaining.\n\n120. We may add that the first intimation we had of this American move was in a private conversation between Bishop Brent and Mr. Max Müller on the 17th January, in which the former broached the matter. Mr. Max Müller replied that the matter was so clearly contrary to the ideas of His Majesty's Government and to the conditions on which they had entered the conference that the British delegates could at once reply that it was, from their point of view, absolutely inadmissible, and we were greatly surprised when the resolution was nevertheless tabled.\n\n121. At the twenty-third session (19th January) the American proposal was once more brought forward, this time as a resolution committing the conference to direct action. We sent you a copy of the resolution in our despatch No. 11 of the 19th January, above quoted.\n\n122. Before, however, this resolution was discussed upon its merits, the chief delegate for Russia raised the point that it involved a departure from the conditions on which Great Britain had entered the conference and which had been accepted by the other Powers represented. He therefore proposed that the first vote to be taken should be as to whether, in these circumstances, the resolution was one suitable for discussion.\n\n20\n\n285\n\nThis proposal was supported by M. Cremer (Netherlands), and on a division it was decided by seven votes to three (Germany and China voting with the United States on this occasion) that the American resolution was not in order; and it was thus finally shelved.\n\n123. The remaining business at this session not already referred to in previous paragraphs—see, for instance, paragraphs 52, 53 and 98, 99—consisted in bringing the second reading of the convention up to article 24. This second reading was extended to the remaining articles at the twenty-fourth session (20th January).\n\n124. At the twenty-fifth session (22nd January) the conference was informed that in consequence of the continued absence of the Italian delegate, M. Santoliquido, the Italian Minister at The Hague had been authorised to sign the convention on behalf of Italy.\n\n125. Mr. Max Müller read the following declaration, in accordance with the instructions conveyed in your despatch No. 19 of 19th January, on the subject of the application of the convention to His Majesty's dominions:—\n\n\"Nous déclarons que les articles de la présente convention, si elle est ratifiée par le Gouvernement de Sa Majesté, s'appliqueront à l'Empire des Indes britanniques, à Ceylan, aux établissements des Détroits, à Hong Kong et à Wei-hai Wei, sous tous les rapports, de la même façon qu'il s'appliqueront au Royaume-Uni de Grande-Bretagne et d'Irlande; mais le Gouvernement de Sa Majesté se réserve le droit de signer ou de dénoncer séparément ladite convention ou nom de toute dominion, colonie, dépendance et protectorat de Sa Majesté outre que ceux qui ont été spécifiés.\"\n\nHe added that this declaration would be appended as a reserve when we signed the convention, and this was accordingly done.\n\n126. The Portuguese delegates also made the declaration that in signing the convention, they desired it to be understood—\n\n(1.) That the stipulations of the convention would not affect those of existing treaties, conventions, or agreements to which Portugal was a party, or any advantages which she obtained by most-favoured-nation clauses.\n\n(2.) That further action in regard to the limitation of the number of ports from which raw and prepared opium could be exported, with reference to articles 2 and 8 (a), could not be undertaken by Portugal, since Macao was already the only Portuguese port of export in the Far East.\n\n(3.) That as regard the provisions of articles 4 and 8 (d), in regard to marking exported packages of raw or prepared opium so as to indicate the nature of their contents, the Portuguese Government reserved to itself the right of placing special marks on such packages in addition to any uniform marks that might be adopted as of international application.\n\nThe convention and the final protocol were read for the last time this session.\n\n127. At the twenty-sixth and last session (23rd January) M. Brenier (France) notified the conference that he would place against his signature the words:—\n\n“Sous réserve d'une ratification, ou d'une dénonciation, éventuellement séparée et spéciale en ce qui concerne les protectorats français.\"\n\n128. Some discussion had taken place at the two previous sessions in regard to the publication of the convention, and it was now indicated by the Netherlands delegation that his Excellency M. de Marees van Swinderen, as Dutch Foreign Minister and honorary president of the conference, was of opinion that it might be published immediately after signature—a course which was accordingly adopted.\n\nprocess\n\n129. After the minutes of previous sessions which had still to undergo this had been ratified, M. Cremer (Netherlands) proposed a vote of thanks to Bishop Brent, as president of the conference, which was seconded by M. von Müller (Germany) and by M. Sauches de Miranda (Portugal); and after valedictory addresses by the president and honorary president (M. van Swinderen), the conference was then declared closed, and the delegates plenipotentiaries proceeded to sign the convention and the final protocol.\n\n130. In signing the convention reservations were made, as already indicated, by delegation in regard to separate ratification or denunciation in respect of any portion of His Majesty's dominions, colonies, dependencies, or protectorates other than the United Kingdom, India, Ceylon, Straits Settlements, Hong Kong, and Wei-hai Wei; similarly by the French delegation in regard to French protectorates; by the delegates\n\n[878]\n\nour own", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 440408, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912", "page_number": 331, "title": "CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912", "content_text": "At the very beginning of the revolution General Li made it a capital offence in his army for a soldier to be found smoking opium. This is one of the first great evils to be met by the people of a free republic.\n\nChina is oppressed by awful famine, she has been fighting for the liberty of her people against misrule, she is greatly troubled by pillage and robbery, but more than this she realises that the curse of opium has brought ruin and sorrow to her land. They are planning a new and mighty effort to put down speedily this great evil.\n\nHer people and Government are united.\n\nLast year the National Assembly at Peking, voicing the purpose of the nation, voted a memorial against opium, looking to a speedy end of the trade. They were ready to give up all revenue from this drug, that is only a poison to the people. But the Manchu Government shelved the memorial, and, while making efforts against the cultivation, allowed the trade to go on, and increased the revenue on foreign opium to 350 taels per chest. This, with the higher prices prevailing, made a retail cost to China of over 100,000,000 Mexican dollars of foreign opium sold in the Empire during last year.\n\nThis was one result of the new opium agreement arranged by the Manchu dynasty, which, as the last report of the British Anti-Opium Society in London remarked, was more favourable to the opium traders than to the people of China. Can such a condition continue under the Republic of China?\n\nThe people and the Government are working together in this great effort. Officials and the people alike ask, How, then, to free China from the opium evil? First, No is the reply of the republican Government by strong public action, so that the world may know that it is the real desire and determination of the new republic to end this source of weakness and ruin to China. The people will earnestly support this strong moral appeal by the Government, that in the name of humanity this evil trade may stop.\n\nThe people of the republic have a right to ask and expect the freedom of self-preservation. They are doing so now, and a telegram was sent to the Republican Government urging action. A great mass meeting was held in Soochow, and meetings will be held in Shanghai to consider the same question. They will be held in other large cities. It is China's determination that the opium trade and cultivation must stop this year. The Christians of Great Britain will also co-operate in the effort to give freedom to China from opium in this the first year of the republic.\n\nThe new agreement provides that it may be changed at any time. The citizens of this nation feel as never before that the opium habit is a disgrace to the republic and it must go.\n\nPleas by British Missionaries.\n\nAnd I can assure you at this time of a wider national life that there will be strong and earnest British co-operation in this great reform. Let me read some of the opinions expressed by British missionaries in China. And remember also the more than 1,000 appeals from the great British Empire which failed because the weak Manchu Government did not take action.\n\nMr. T. Hudson Taylor said :-\n\n\"Ah! we have given China something besides the Gospel, something that is doing more harm in a week than the united efforts of all our Christians are doing good in a year. Oh, the evils of opium! The slave trade was bad; the drink is bad; the licensing of vice is bad; but the opium traffic is the sum of all villanies. It debauches more families than drink; it makes more slaves directly than the slave trade; and it demoralises more sad lives than all the licensing systems in the world. Will you not pray, my friends?--I entreat you to pray to the Mighty God that He will bring this great evil to an end.\"\n\nDr. Arnold Forster, of Wuchang, said, in closing his appeal against opium \"Ours is the manufactory of the Indian opium that has poured into China a never-ceasing stream of poison all through the Victorian era. Ours have been and are the profits, ours is the sin. As we value the maintenance among us of those principles of righteousness that have made our nation great, as we deprecate all those low-toned pleas for making material wealth the standard of our nation's prosperity, let us exert ourselves, in the cause of this crucial and representative moral question--the maintenance or abandonment of our national opium trade--to show the courage of our convictions. Let us offer the sacrifices of righteousness and put our trust in the Lord, and let us do it at once.\"\n\n(This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.\n\nOPIUM.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL.\n\n[16201]\n\nNo. 1.\n\n327\n\nC. O.\n\n13377\n\n[April 18.]\n\nSECTION 2.13 JUN 12\n\nBritish Delegates to International Opium Conference to Sir Edward Grey.--- (Received April 18.) (Confidential.)\n\nSir,\n\nWE, the British delegates plenipotentiary at the recent International Opium Conference at The Hague, have now the honour to submit to you our report on the proceedings and results of the conference. We have already transmitted to you (on the 24th January)* the convention and the final protocol in which the labours of the conference resulted, and we now submit two volumes containing respectively (a) minutes of the conference sessions, and (b) memoranda or other papers laid before the conference by the various delegations.\n\n2. The conference was called together at the instance of the American Government, whose object was to give the force of law and international agreement to the proposals contained in the resolutions of the International Opium Commission which assembled at Shanghai in 1899, and to \"the essential corollaries derived therefrom.\" That Government accordingly put forward the following tentative programme for discussion by the conference ---\n\n(a.) The advisability of effective national laws and regulations to control the production, manufacture, and distribution of opium, its derivatives and preparations.\n\n(b.) The advisability of restricting the number of ports through which opium may be shipped by opium-producing countries.\n\n(c.) The means to be taken to prevent, at the port of departure, the shipment of opium, its derivatives and preparations, to countries that prohibit, or wish to prohibit or control, their entry.\n\n(d.) The advisability of reciprocal notification of the amount of opium, its derivatives and preparations, shipped from one country to another.\n\n(e.) Regulation by the Universal Postal Union of the transmission of opium, its derivatives and preparations, through the mails.\n\n(f) The restriction or control of the cultivation of the poppy, so that the production of opium will not be undertaken by countries which at present do not produce it, to compensate for the reduction being made in British India and China.\n\n(g.) The application of the pharmacy laws of the Governments concerned to their subjects in the consular districts, concessions, and settlements in China.\n\n(h.) The propriety of restudying treaty obligations and international agreements under which the opium traffic is at present conducted.\n\n(i.) The advisability of uniform provisions of penal laws concerning offences against any agreements that the Powers may make in regard to opium production and traffic.\n\n(j.) The advisability of uniform marks of identification of packages containing opium in international transit.\n\n(k.) The advisability of permits to be granted to exporters of opium, its derivatives and preparations.\n\n(l) The advisability of reciprocal right of search of vessels suspected of carrying contraband opium.\n\n(m.) The advisability of measures to prevent the unlawful use of a flag by vessels engaged in the opium traffic.\n\n(n.) The advisability of an International Commission to be entrusted with the carrying out of any international agreement concluded.\n\nMiscellaneous No. 2 (1912),", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 440411, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912", "page_number": 334, "title": "CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912", "content_text": "330\n\n6\n\npackages, the bulk of whose contents often consisted of other matters besides opium. A further Chinese amendment that the total number of packages to be exported should not exceed a monthly limit to be fixed by the conference was rejected as impracticable. The resolution as finally passed forms the basis of article 4 of the convention.\n\n22. The British delegation then proposed a resolution that each participating Government should prohibit the export and import of raw opium save through the agency of specially authorised persons, and this was passed with an amendment suggested by the German delegation substituting the word \"duly\" for \"specially.\" The resolution as thus amended forms the basis of article 5 of the convention.\n\n23. The last resolution we proposed on this subject was that measures should be taken by the Universal Postal Union for regulating the transmission of raw opium through the post. This was carried, but does not find place in the articles of the convention, on the ground that the conference had no power to bind the Postal Union. It figures, therefore, as an expression of opinion (vou) in clause (1) of the final protocol.\n\n24. The report of the Programme Committee on the matters to be discussed under the head of medicinal opium, morphine, and cocaine, &c., was then approved, and some discussion took place in regard to the fourth section of their proposed agenda, which simply specified anti-opium remedies without mentioning points which might be discussed thereunder. The action subsequently taken in regard to this matter will be found stated in paragraph 56, and was in accord with a suggestion made at this stage by Sir W. Collins.\n\n25. At the sixth session (12th December) the Chinese delegation proposed a resolution to the following effect:\n\n\"With a view to assisting China in her efforts to restrict the importation of opium into her dominions, the Governments represented at the conference are prepared to signify their adhesion to the engagement embodied in the agreement between the British and Chinese Governments of the 8th May, 1911, to the effect that chests of Indian opium, unsealed and unaccompanied by the special numbered permits issued by the Indian Government, shall be refused entry into any of the treaty ports of China, and will take the necessary steps to make that engagement binding on their nationals.\n\nFurther, the Governments represented are prepared to signify their adhesion to the terms of prohibition issued by the Chinese Government forbidding the importation of Persian and Turkish opium into the Chinese Empire after the 1st January, 1912, and to take the necessary measures to make such prohibition binding on their nationals.\"\n\nAfter some discussion, in the course of which Mr. Max Müller pointed out that, to the best of his knowledge, all the treaty Powers, with the exception of Portugal, Brazil, and Sweden, had already adhered to the Anglo-Chinese agreement of the 8th May, 1911, the resolution was carried. Later on, when it came before the Drafting Committee, it was held that its appropriate place would be not among the definite articles of the convention, but as a van in the final protocol, and ultimately (at the seventeenth session) the Chinese delegation proposed that it should be dropped altogether, in view of the objections which the Persian delegate had expressed at the sixteenth session, when he urged that the conference was not called upon to give emphatic approval to measures that had already been taken by the Chinese Government, and which were calculated to cause loss to his country; and this course was taken.\n\n26. A further resolution which was subsequently proposed on the subject, primarily, of raw opium may be conveniently referred to here. This was brought forward by the Persian delegation at the thirteenth session, and was to the effect that there should be a gradual suppression of the production of opium containing less than 9 per cent. of morphine; and that to this end the interested Powers should agree to discourage the production of all opium of this sort by private enterprise, and to stop its production under direct Government control within a period of eight years.\n\nHe stated that this resolution was justified by the fact that medicinal opium must contain not less than 10 per cent. of morphine, and that it was desirable to confine the consumption of opium to medical purposes.\n\n27. Sir William Meyer replied that the British delegation could not possibly accept this resolution. The great bulk of Indian opium contained less than 9 per cent. of morphine---on the average about 7 per cent. He had already explained (vide Appendix 1) the policy of the Indian Government in regard to raw opium. That Government did not agree that its use should be confined to so-called medical purposes, since they had to take into consideration the usages and needs of a large number of people who could not or would not have recourse to European treatment.\n\n7\n\nOn a division the resolution was defeated by 9 votes to 2, the American delegation being the only one which rallied to its support.\n\nIt is tolerably certain that this mischievous resolution, the intention of which was to strike at Indian opium, was due to the suggestion of Dr. Hamilton Wright, since it is within our knowledge that Dr. Wright had himself previously drafted a resolution to the same effect.\n\n28. Reverting now to the proceedings of the sixth session (the 12th December), the conference then took up the subject of prepared opium, and the Netherlands delegation moved a resolution that the participating Powers should prohibit, as a general rule, the importation and exportation of this species of opium, subject to a proviso that, in certain circumstances, it might be allowed on board ship for the personal use of the crew during the voyage.\n\nOn discussion this proviso was withdrawn, and the Portuguese delegation proposed to amend the main clause of the resolution by making the prohibition of export of prepared opium a gradual one, on the ground that there was an export of locally manufactured and prepared opium from Macao into China; that the supply was in the hands of a contractor whose contract had some time to run; and (as explained in the following session) that it was desirable to substitute gradual for immediate reform in order to gain the adhesion of outside Powers. The amendment was lost, and the original resolution was then passed in the following form: Les Gouvernements participants à la conférence s'engagent à prohiber l'importation et l'exportation d'opium préparé. The resolution forms the basis of the first part of article 7 of the convention, and the only vote cast against it was that of Portugal.\n\n29. We, however, recorded our affirmative vote ad referendum, in view of the possibility of the resolution being held to apply to traffic between one British possession and another, and of the fact that an absolute prohibition of such traffic, in respect of prepared opium, might be inconvenient, since, for example, some of the protected Malay States are supplied with prepared opium from Singapore, and a similar course is under consideration as regards the North Borneo Protectorate. On reference to you, we were authorised to accept the resolution on the understanding that the words \"exportation\" and \"importation\" referred merely to foreign trade, and not to traffic between different territories under His Majesty's jurisdiction. A declaration to this effect was accordingly made at the fourteenth session.\n\n30. The American delegation then brought forward a series of further resolutions on the subject of prepared opium. Dr. Hamilton Wright had previously declared that these would not be put if the main part of the Dutch resolution above referred to was passed unanimously; but as Portugal had voted against it, he held himself at liberty to proceed with his resolutions. The first of these was to the effect that such of the participating Powers as had not already prohibited the exportation of prepared opium should do so, or else should restrict the number of places through which prepared opium might be exported. After some amendments moved by ourselves and the Chinese delegation with the object of eliminating Portuguese opposition, the resolution was unanimously passed in the following terms:\n\n\"Il est convenu que les pays représentés qui ne sont pas encore prêts à prohiber l'exportation de l'opium préparé la prohiberont aussitôt que possible, et restreindront en attendant le nombre de localités par lesquelles l'opium préparé pourra être exporté.\"\n\nThis resolution now figures in the convention, partly as a second part of article 7 and partly as clause (a) of article 8; and it may be noted that, with article 7 as thus constituted, the Portuguese objection to the resolution which formed the basis of the first part of the article disappeared.\n\n31. Later on, at the twenty-first session, when article 7 came up for second reading, the Chinese delegation proposed an addition to the effect that in any case there should be prohibition within three years of the convention coming into force. The Portuguese, however, strongly opposed this amendment, and said that if it were carried they could not take part in the further work of the conference.\n\nWe thought the amendment reasonable, but in view of the strong opposition of the Portuguese to reopening the question at this stage, we abstained from voting, as did most of the other delegations, with the result that the amendment was carried by the votes of three delegations only, those of China, the United States, and Persia. In view of the small number of positive votes in its favour, the Chinese delegation thereupon withdrew the amendment.\n\n32. The next American resolution was that the Governments represented should forbid the exportation of prepared opium to such countries as may forbid its entry, and that no prepared opium should be shipped to a country which wishes to restrict the ...", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 440412, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912", "page_number": 335, "title": "CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912", "content_text": "8\n\nentry of the drug unless in accordance with the regulations of the receiving country. This resolution was carried unanimously and forms the basis of clauses (b) and (c) of article 8 of the convention.\n\n33. Two further resolutions of the American delegation were carried without opposition, and laid down (1) that any prepared opium which might be exported from one of the participating countries should bear a special mark of identification, and (2) that the export of prepared opium should only be allowed to specially authorised persons.\n\nThese resolutions form the basis of clauses (d) and (e) of article 8 of the convention.\n\n34. The concluding American resolution, brought forward at this session, was that the Universal Postal Union should prohibit the transmission of prepared opium through the post. It was pointed out by Sir Cecil Clementi Smith that the conference had no power to bind the Postal Union in this, and the resolution was consequently carried in the following form :-\n\nQu'il est à désirer que des mesures soient adoptées par l'Union postale universelle pour réglémenter la transmission de l'opium préparé par la poste.\n\nIt now finds place, like the similar resolution on the subject of raw opium, as a vou in the final protocol, clause 1 (3).\n\n35. At the seventh session (13th December) the last American resolution on the subject of prepared opium was brought forward, and passed, with an amendment suggested by the Japanese delegation, in the following form :----\n\nIl est convenu que tous les Gouvernements représentés à la conférence prendront des mesures pour la suppression graduelle et efficace de la fabrication, de la distribution et de l'usage de l'opium préparé, en tenant compte des conditions différentes de chacun des pays en cause.\n\nIt forms the basis of article 6 of the convention.\n\n36. It may be conveniently mentioned here that at the tenth session (18th December), the Persian delegate brought forward a resolution that prepared opium found in transit between one country and another should be considered contraband, and forthwith destroyed. After some discussion as to whether this resolution should be referred to the Programme Committee, or dealt with at once by the conference, the latter course was adopted. It was then pointed out by ourselves and by the French delegation that the proposal was an impracticable one, and that it would involve the right of searching vessels, which was one of the items in the original American programme to which His Majesty's Government had taken exception. Finally the resolution was negatived nem. con., even its sponsor refraining from voting for it.\n\n37. The most important business of the seventh, eighth, and ninth sessions was the carrying by the British delegation of a series of resolutions in respect of morphia and cocaine, and it will be convenient to deal with these together in later paragraphs. The other matters not as yet mentioned at these sessions, were the following --\n\n38. Seventh session (13th December). The first part of this session was of an informal character, and devoted to the reception of the Dutch and British anti-opium societies who had expressed a desire to attend. The Dutch representative spoke very briefly, and Sir Matthew Dodsworth, the president of the British society, delivered an eloquent and tactful speech which produced a very good impression on the conference,\n\n39. During the eighth session (14th December) the Chinese delegation submitted a report on the subject of the measures taken to suppress opium in China. In the course of his introductory remarks, their spokesman, Mr. Tang Kwo-an, referred to the intelligence reported in the \"Times\" that one incident of the revolutionary movement had been a revival of opium cultivation in Yunnan and Szechuan. He said that if this was true, it was only a regrettable incident of the present situation, and that when order was re-established, the Chinese Government would pursue its anti-opium measures with still greater energy than before. Mr. Max Müller pointed out that a number of the figures in regard to reduction of opium cultivation furnished in the Chinese memorandum were reproductions of statistics which Sir Alexander Hosie had shown to be inaccurate at the Shanghai commission; and Mr. Tang admitted that the figures were estimates only.\n\n40. M. Guesde (France) then asked the American delegation (a) which of the countries not represented at the conference had refused an invitation to be present; (b) which States, while not attending the conference, had declared themselves ready to adhere to its proposals; and (c) what States had not been invited at all.\n\n9\n\n331\n\nM. Guesde pointed out, as justifying these questions, that Peru and Bolivia might quite well set up as cocaine producers, and that Trieste might become a port of transport for the drugs whose abuses the conference wishes to check. These observations were supported by the Russian and Portuguese delegations; and M. Cremer, on behalf of the Dutch delegation, said that his Government was ready to invite the Governments not represented to associate themselves with the proposals of the conference. Dr. Hamilton Wright gave no categorical answer to the questions put, but observed that it would be extraordinary if outside Powers did not adhere to the proposals of the conference. He also stated that he would probably present a resolution to the effect that if countries which produced opium, or were interested in the trade in opium and its various drugs, did not adhere to the convention, their products should be considered as outside the bounds of legitimate commerce. Mr. Max Müller pointed out, in reply, that such action would conflict with the most-favoured-nation clauses of commercial treaties.\n\n41. The Chinese delegation had framed and distributed a number of printed questions addressed to the delegations of Germany, France, Great Britain, Japan, Portugal, and Russia on the subject of opium administration in their Far Eastern possessions. The questions were couched in an inquisitorial style, and assumed the right of the Chinese delegation to investigate the efficacy and sincerity of the internal regulations of other countries.\n\nAt the ninth session (15th December) M. Guesde (France) took exception to these questions, and asked very pertinently whether the delegates were sitting in an international conference, or had become a commission of inquisitorial investigation. He emphatically refused to follow the Chinese delegation in its attempt to make for the latter category; and observed that, if this method was adopted, the Chinese themselves might be subjected to very inconvenient questions as to the resumption of opium cultivation in provinces in which it was alleged to have disappeared, or the extent to which the Chinese Government had facilitated the efforts of the Government of Indo-China to deal with the smuggling of opium, and other such matters.\n\n42. The Russian, Portuguese, and Japanese delegations emphatically supported the French view; and we also opposed any action being taken on the questions, Mr. Max Müller pointing out that in some cases the Chinese already knew the answers to them, while in others they could have obtained information through the ordinary diplomatic channels. Dr. Hamilton Wright alone supported the Chinese view that their questions were proper and relevant. The president, being called on for a ruling, held that only such questions as were germane to the issues immediately before the conference should be proceeded with, but in answer to a suggestion by Mr. Tang declined to take the responsibility of deciding which of the questions came within this category. Finally the Chinese questions were dropped, and nothing more was heard of them.\n\nThe Chinese procedure on this occasion was typical of an attitude often assumed by their delegation. They were constantly endeavouring to pose as the protagonists in the matter of opium reform, and to divert attention from their own shortcomings by endeavouring to cross-question other people, forgetting that this was just the way to provoke retort. As a matter of fact, the Chinese were treated with singular forbearance throughout the conference. The other delegations generously refrained from drawing attention to the possibility of the actions of the Chinese Government of the future being widely divergent from the promises of the Chinese Government of the past; and it was only when the Chinese themselves, by their own action, made it necessary for this matter to be cautiously alluded to that any such doubts were hinted at.\n\n43. We now return to the subject of morphine and cocaine. In view of the fact that it was on the initiative of His Majesty's Government that measures in respect of these drugs had become an integral part of the conference programme, it was obviously for the British delegation to suggest the specific restrictions to be adopted; and in the memorandum referred to in paragraph 7 above we were informed that His Majesty's Government considered that such action might be on the following lines:-\n\n(1) All manufacturers of, and dealers in, morphia and cocaine shall be required to take out a licence. Persons manufacturing or dealing in the above articles without licence shall be liable to penalty.\n\n(2) All such manufacturers and dealers will be required to keep a record of all transactions in such drugs, including the names and addresses of all persons from whom they obtain or to whom they sell them, and the quantity involved in each transaction. This record shall be open to inspection and verification by a Government officer.\n\n[2458]\n\n-2]\n\nD", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 440415, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912", "page_number": 338, "title": "CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912", "content_text": "334\n\n14\n\nso-called anti-opium remedies, which for the most part contained opium, morphine, or cocaine. After some discussion, during which Dr. Wu-Lien-Teb showed, from a series of analyses that had been made in regard to a number of these remedies, that nearly all of them contained opium or morphine, even though in some cases warranted not to do so, the resolution was passed unanimously in the following form:\n\n\"La conférence, constatant que, dans les pays où des efforts ont été faits pour combattre l'abus de l'opium, on a été amené à faire usage de soi-disant remèdes anti-opium, contenant de l'opium, de la morphine ou de la cocaine, décide que les Gouvernements participants prendront contre ces remèdes dangereux des mesures analogues à celles qui sont proposées contre l'opium, la morphine, la cocaïne et contre leurs sels respectifs.\"\n\nThe substance of this resolution has been embodied in article 14 (6) of the final convention, which lays down that any preparations, whether styled anti-opium remedies or not, containing more than 2 per cent. of morphine or 1 per cent of cocaine, shall be treated in the same way as those drugs.\n\n57. The Chinese delegation then submitted a series of resolutions having special reference to China, and to the Powers having special treaties with the Chinese Government. These resolutions had been previously discussed with us before they had been presented, and they had been worded in accordance with suggestions we had made.\n\nThe first two resolutions were to the effect that:\n\n(1) The participating Governments agree to co-operate with the Chinese Government in the prevention of the smuggling of opium, morphine, cocaine, &c., from their colonies in the Far East, or from their leased territories in China into Chinese territory, while the Chinese Government will similarly co-operate towards the prevention of such smuggling from China into the colonies and territories in question.\n\n(2) With a view to giving practical effect to the principle embodied in resolution No. 9 of the Shanghai commission, the Chinese Government will enact pharmaceutical laws for its subjects, regulating the sale and distribution of morphine, cocaine, &c., and will communicate these laws to the treaty Powers represented at the conference. These Powers will, if they find the said laws acceptable, take the necessary steps for applying them to their own nationals in China.\n\nThese two resolutions were carried as they stood.\n\n58. The third resolution was to the effect that the participating Governments would undertake to adopt all necessary measures to restrict and control the smoking of opium in their leased territories, settlements, or concessions in China, and to suppress any opium-smoking divans, &c., that might still exist there, as also to prohibit the smoking of opium in places of public amusement and houses of ill-fame.\n\nTo this resolution the German delegation moved an amendment, which was adopted, to the effect that the suppression of opium-smoking divans, &c., should take place pari passu with similar measures adopted by the Chinese Government in its own territories.\n\n59. The fourth resolution, as carried with a verbal amendment suggested by the French delegation, proposed that the participating Powers should take effective measures for the gradual reduction, pari passu with similar measures taken by the Chinese Government, of the number of shops dealing in opium, which may still exist in their leased settlements, territories or concessions, and that they should adopt suitable and effective measures for the restriction and control of the retail trade in opium in these areas.\n\n60. The fifth resolution, after some alteration in the original wording which took place after discussion thereon, was to the following effect:\n\n\"The participating Governments possessing post offices of their own in China undertake to adopt stringent measures to prevent the illegal importation into China, as well as the transmission from one part of China to another through the agency of their aforesaid post offices, of opium, whether raw or prepared, of morphine, cocaine, and their respective salts, and of the other substances dealt with in the convention.\"\n\n61. All these resolutions, subject to the amendments above indicated, passed without opposition, but Siam and Persia abstained from voting as not having treaties with China. The resolutions were originally embodied, as having special reference to the conditions of China and to circumstances which did not affect some of the conference Powers, in a separate supplementary convention. At the fourteenth session, however,\n\non\n\n15\n\nwhen the articles came up for discussion in this form, the Chinese delegation proposed that they should figure in the main convention, on the ground that they were of primary importance, and that their relegation to a separate convention would seem to place China on a footing apart from the other conference Powers. After some discussion the matter was referred to the Drafting Committee, which recommended (section II of its report on a variety of matters which had been referred to it, contained in the minutes of the fifteenth session) that to meet the Chinese wish, and with the alteration of “contracting Powers\" into \"contracting Powers having treaties with China,\" the articles should figure in the main convention. This proposal came up for discussion at the sixteenth session, and was adopted, Persia and Siam alone dissenting. The articles now figure as Nos. 15 to 19 of Chapter IV in the final convention, and in signing the convention the Siamese and Persian delegates indicated that they did so with a reserve on the subject of these articles, since they have no special treaties with China. We could never understand why these delegations, and especially that of Siam, were so tenacious in pressing this point, since obviously the chapter, as now worded, could only refer to the treaty Powers.\n\n62. The Drafting Committee then put before the conference three drafts, comprising:\n\n(a) Draft articles of a convention embodying the general resolutions already passed on the subject of opium, raw and prepared, morphine, cocaine, &c.\n\n(b) Draft articles on the subject of ratification, adhesion, and denunciation.\n\n(c) A draft final protocol.\n\nA preliminary reading was then given to document (a), and some verbal amendments were introduced.\n\n63. At the twelfth session (20th December) the conference proceeded to the discussion of the first portion of document (b), which dealt with the procedure in regard to ratification coming into force, adhesion coming into force, and denunciation in respect of the convention. The procedure submitted for discussion was as follows:\n\n(1) There would be a premier dépôt des ratifications at The Hague as soon as several signatory Powers were prepared to ratify.\n\n(2) The remaining participating Powers would ratify subsequently by written notification.\n\n(3) All outside Powers should then be invited to adhere.\n\n(4) The convention would come into force a year after the Netherlands Government had received the ratifications of all the contracting Powers and the adhesion of all the outside Powers above mentioned.\n\n(5) If, however, matters were not so far advanced two years after the signing of the convention, all the Powers that had by that time ratified or adhered were to be invited to send delegates to a fresh conference at The Hague to consider the conditions under which the convention might nevertheless be wholly or partially enforced.\n\n(6) A subsequent denunciation of the convention by any Power would apply only to that Power, and would come into effect a year after notice of denunciation had been given.\n\n64. In regard to the first condition above mentioned, we proposed, to expedite matters, that the convention should in any case be ratified by the participating Powers within six months, and, subject to an American amendment which extended the period to one year, this was carried. As regards the third condition, we also procured an amendment providing that invitation to the outside Powers should take place after the premier dépôt instead of after universal ratification, and that the premier dépôt might have effect as soon as six Powers were ready to ratify.\n\nThe discussion of the draft did not proceed further before our Christmas recess, but\n\nat the thirteenth session we tabled an important amendment with reference to the manner in which the convention was to come into force, which is given in paragraph 77 infra.\n\nThis amendment was referred to the Drafting Committee.\n\n65. The Germans had at the same time drawn up an additional draft article on the subject of denunciation to the following effect:\n\n\"In case a nation which, up to the date of signing the present convention, has not produced opium or manufactured morphine, cocaine, &c., should engage in such production or manufacture, every Power within whose territories opium is produced, or", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 440416, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912", "page_number": 339, "title": "CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912", "content_text": "16\n\nmorphine, cocaine, &c., are manufactured on the date when the present convention shall be signed, shall have the right to denounce the said convention; and such denunciation may take effect a month after it has been communicated to the Netherlands Government.' \n\nIt will be observed that this proposal aimed not merely at the production of opium, morphine, or cocaine for purposes condemned by the convention, but even at production for legitimate medical purposes, and would in fact have prevented any Power from starting a new internal industry for such purposes.\n\nThe German delegates, in private conversation with us, suggested that we ought to welcome this proposal, since it would permanently establish our practical monopoly in the morphine trade like that of the Germans in cocaine. We replied, of course, that we could not assent to anything of the kind, and that our instructions were simply to obtain measures for confining the use of these drugs to proper medical purposes. The proposal gave us considerable anxiety, since it seemed to us to indicate that the Germans, in spite of the agreement we had come to with them in regard to the morphine and cocaine articles, were casting about for an easy means of withdrawing from the convention. We hoped, however, that this was merely a ballon d'essai, and that the idea would not be pressed.\n\nThe proposal was subsequently withdrawn, in view of the methods finally adopted to secure the adhesion of outside Powers to the convention.\n\n66. At the thirteenth session (21st December) the American delegation also brought forward resolutions on the subject of adhesion to and ratification of the convention, which were to the following effect -----\n\n(1)(a) Powers not represented at the conference might be allowed to adhere to the convention; but the participating Powers might lay down conditions of adherence. In the absence of such conditions, adherence would imply acceptance of all the obligations required by the convention.\n\n(b) The interested Governments should agree among themselves as to the steps to be taken to obtain the adhesion of States whose co-operation might be necessary or useful in order to secure complete execution of the convention.\n\n(2) The convention should be ratified as soon as possible, and in any case within a year. This was merely setting forth in other words a matter which had already been agreed to provisionally.\n\n(3) The convention should come into force in all the dominions of the contracting Powers sixty days after ratification.\n\nThese resolutions were subsequently withdrawn.\n\n67. The powers of the Drafting Committee were, by a resolution passed during this session, extended so as to enable it not merely to put into conventional form the substance of resolutions already accepted by the conference, but to add such additional articles as seemed necessary for the purposes of completing the convention.\n\n68. Reference had been made in more than one of the previous sessions of the conference to the difficulty in regard to dealing with \"Indian hemp.\" The Italian Government had put this subject forward as one of the matters which the conference should consider, but its delegate, M. Santoliquido, having also to attend the International Sanitary Conference in Paris, had only been present at one of our meetings (at the fourth session). The Italian Minister at The Hague had accordingly been communicated with by M. Cremer (Netherlands), as chairman of the Programme Committee; and M. Cremer now put before the conference a letter from the Minister stating that M. Santoliquido had informed him that the Italian delegation had no intention of presenting any specific proposal in regard to hemp drugs, and left it to the conference as a whole to take such measures in regard to these as it might deem expedient.\n\n69. At the urgent request of Dr. Hamilton Wright the subject was referred to the Programme Committee, but that body was of the unanimous opinion that no useful purpose would be served by entering on the discussion of such a question, in which many interests might be involved, without careful study and consideration. M. Cremer, its chairman, therefore announced to the conference that, having regard to these circumstances, and to the facts that--(a) the conference was not in possession of the statistics necessary for adequate treatment of the subject; (b) it was difficult to obtain a scientific definition of the preparations that would have to be dealt with; (c) the delegates had no instructions in regard to the discussion of this matter; (d) it appeared sufficient for the countries threatened by the abuse of hemp drugs to take internal measures against them--the Programme Committee considered it sufficient to recommend the adoption of the following resolution in the form of a vœu :--\n\n“Il est à désirer que les Gouvernements participants étudient la question du chanvre indien au point de vue statistique et scientifique, dans le but de régler éventuellement, par leur législation intérieure ou pour un accord international, les abus de son emploi.” \n\nThis resolution was accordingly introduced by the Netherlands delegation, and was carried, with an amendment proposed by us substituting for the word éventuellement the words si la nécessité s'en fait sentir.\n\n70. The Chinese delegation wished the resolution to read as follows:\n\n\"Il est à désirer que les Gouvernements participants étudient la question du chanvre indien au point de vue statistique et scientifique, dans le but d'en contrôler le commerce, et d'en régler l'usage par leur législation intérieure ou par un accord international, ou par tous les deux' \n\nBut this was objected to on the ground that it was going beyond what the data before us justified. M. Brenier (France) pointed out that the Chinese Government could, if it pleased, take restrictive measures against hemp drugs such as had been already taken in Indo-China, and Sir William Meyer added that similar restrictions had been in force in British India for a good many years. The Chinese amendment was accordingly withdrawn.\n\nDr. Hamilton Wright expressed the hope that the resolution as carried would become a definite article of the convention, but he met with no support in this view, and the resolution remained a vœu, and stands as such in the final protocol (clause I (2)).\n\n71. The next matter for consideration was a resolution by the American delegation which had been brought forward and received some discussion at the twelfth session. This was to the effect that the participating Powers should communicate to one another, through the medium of the Netherlands Government, texts of existing and future laws and regulations bearing on matters dealt with in the convention; as also statistical information in regard to the trade in raw and prepared opium, morphine, and cocaine, and their respective salts, hemp drugs, and any other drugs or preparations dealt with in the convention.\n\nThe mention of hemp drugs was now deleted from the resolution, and, as regards the exchange of statistical information, an amendment, moved by our delegation and accepted by the Americans, to the effect that the statistics should be based, not only on Customs reports, but also on the registers of sale kept by persons licensed to carry on trade in the drugs concerned, was carried with a single negative vote--that of Germany. Our object, as Mr. Max Müller explained, was not in any way to divulge the statistics of individual firms, but, by grouping these together, to obtain information which would be very valuable as a supplement to the Customs returns.\n\nLater on, however (seventeenth session), when article 21 of the convention, which was based on this resolution, came up for consideration, the German delegation pointed out that in some cases, as in regard to heroine, the trade was so largely in the hands of a single firm that to give the statistics proposed would in effect amount to divulging private affairs; and, recognising the justice of this view, the conference brought back the article to the scope of the original resolution by merely prescribing in general terms the submission of statistical information in regard to trade in the drugs mentioned.\n\n72. At the fourteenth session (22nd December) the American delegation brought up a fresh series of resolutions, intended to stiffen the restrictive measures already agreed upon in respect of the drugs dealt with by the convention. The fourth resolution, however, which concerned the protection of aboriginal natives of Pacific Islands, was withdrawn, and the remaining three resolutions were referred to the Drafting Committee and subsequently dropped.\n\n73. The conference then proceeded to the discussion in article form, and at this stage in a separate convention, of the special resolutions regarding China referred to in paragraphs 57-61 above, and then adjourned for a Christmas recess.\n\n74. We had now been sitting for about three weeks, and had, as it seemed, come to a final agreement in regard to most of the matters with which we had been called upon to deal. The resolutions covering the ground which forms the basis of the\n\n[2458 s-2]\n\nF\n\n335\n\n17", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 440418, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912", "page_number": 341, "title": "CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912", "content_text": "20\n\nof M. Asser, the committee had prepared the following formula, which specifically applied only to raw opium, but would, of course, be equally necessary in regard to importation or exportation of other drugs:-\n\n\"Par importation, on entend l'acte d'introduire de l'étranger en qualité de commerçant en gros, demi-gros ou en détail, de consignataire ou commissionnaire, de l'opium brut.\n\n\"Par exportation, on entend l'acte d'expédier vers l'étranger, en qualité de commerçant en gros, en demi-gros ou en détail, où de commissionnaire, de l'opium brut.\"\n\n83. This definition would show that it was only actual traders who required a licence. M. Asser and Sir William Collins had objected to the addition of the words, à l'exclusion des simples transporteurs, expéditeurs ou transitaires, on the ground that the formal exclusion of these persons might constitute indirect encouragement to contraband dealing, and that it was, therefore, better to omit them by implication, in the event of the definition proposed being necessary, rather than explicitly. The committee further pointed out that the question of carriers was specifically raised by the second American resolution brought forward at the fourteenth session and referred to in paragraph 72 above.\n\n84. As Sir William Meyer subsequently pointed out to the conference (twentieth session), we could not accept the definition prepared by the committee, since it omitted two categories of persons, whom experience in India had shown to be very dangerous smugglers of prohibited drugs, i.e.:--\n\n(a.) Persons who were not in any way traders by profession, but took advantage of their visit to a prohibiting country to introduce, for their own profit, considerable quantities of the forbidden drugs.\n\n(b.) Go-betweens secretly employed by persons engaged in trade, who were paid to undergo fine or imprisonment, if detected, rather than divulge the names of their real employers.\n\nOur desire was therefore to treat importation and exportation as having the widest possible sense; but this, on the other hand, was not in the least likely to be accepted by the German delegation.\n\n85. The remaining portions of the committee's report dealt mainly with--\n\n(a.) The wording of a number of the articles already agreed on, in regard to which the suggestions of the committee were subsequently in large measure accepted.\n\n(b.) The proposal, already referred to in paragraph 61, for bringing the special Chinese articles into the main convention.\n\n(c.) The submission of a fresh draft final protocol.\n\n86. Apart from the important questions which had been thus raised by the report of the Drafting Committee, we were also faced with a very serious difficulty in regard to the morphine and cocaine articles. Although, as previously explained in paragraphs 45 and 46, the resolutions on which these were based had been put forward by us after consultation and agreement with the German delegation, and we had in some cases modified our original proposals in order to bring them along with us, the Germans now informed us, to our great surprise, that they would be obliged to move a series of amendments in regard to articles 10 to 16 of the original draft convention, as quoted in paragraph 48, which would have the result of invalidating the binding character of most of these articles.\n\n87. We had thus, as will be seen, to face problems of a very serious character, and which involved not merely private conference with other delegations, but in some cases references to His Majesty's Government. Unfortunately, too, we were deprived at this juncture of the guidance of Sir Cecil Clementi Smith, whose health had not permitted him to return to The Hague after the Christmas recess. The leadership of the British delegation accordingly passed, during the remainder of the conference, to Sir William Meyer as the next senior delegate.\n\n38. The sixteenth session (10th January) dealt mainly with matters which have already been reported on, such as the transfer of the special Chinese articles to the main convention.\n\n39. At the seventeenth session (11th January) the report of the Drafting Committee on the various \"effectuating\" proposals came up for discussion. Sir William Meyer pointed out that superficially the main cleavage seemed to be between the primary and the British schemes on the one hand, and the German scheme on the other, since the first two followed the usual method of ratification of the contracting Powers preceding the adhesion of others, while the latter put adhesion first. From the practical point of view, however, the primary and the German schemes stood together on one side, and the British on the other, since the former postponed the coming into force of the convention until the adhesion of all the outside Powers had been obtained, while the latter provided that all matters which did not involve special legislation (or its equivalent, as suggested by the French delegation) should come into force on ratification by the Powers represented at the conference.\n\n90. M. Delbrück gave a clear exposition of the circumstances which had led to the propounding of the German scheme, in the course of which he laid stress on the fact (as we have already indicated) that ratification of the convention by the Reichstag would make it an integral part of the German corpus juris; while in the United States, for example, even if the convention were ratified by the Senate, its provisions would remain ineffective until applied by internal legislation.\n\n91. M. Cremer (Netherlands) said that his delegation could not accept the British scheme even if modified by the acceptance of the French amendment, since no Government was likely to put in hand laws or their equivalents without any certainty that these would eventually be applied. It would, in fact, be a case of every country waiting to see what the others would do.\n\n92. Dr. Hamilton Wright objected to waiting for the adhesion of outside Powers, and said that his delegation would like ratification and the coming into force of the convention to be effectuated as soon as possible. Finally, M. Delbrück indicated that it might be possible to proceed without getting the adhesion of all the outside Powers. The debate was then adjourned to the next session.\n\n93. The course of the discussion, however, and exchanges of opinion with other delegations, had already convinced us that the British amendment to the primary scheme was not likely to find acceptance. As we more than once indicated to the conference, our object throughout was to insist on the practical and expeditions enforcement of the measures that had already been agreed to, rather than on questions of form; and as between the primary and the German schemes, the latter had the advantage that the adhesion of outside Powers was to be sought immediately after the signing of the convention, while under the former that process would not be commenced till six at least of the conference Powers had ratified. Accordingly, on the 11th January, we sent you a telegram asking whether we might negotiate on the basis of the German scheme, endeavouring to shorten the periods before which the convention should come into force, and to substitute \"substantial\" for \"unanimous\" adhesion of outside Powers.\n\n37\n\n*\n\n94. At the eighteenth session (12th January) the adjourned debate on the subject of the \"effectuation\" procedure was opened by M. Brenier (France), who pointed out that the divergent schemes before the conference arose from a conflict of ideas, typically represented by the German and British delegations respectively. The former, looking to the great difficulties of embarking on the measures approved by the conference without adhesion of outside Powers, held that the obtainment of such adhesion was the first object to be aimed at; the latter, concerned chiefly with getting the convention into force as soon as possible, objected to the delay which the German method would involve. In order to bridge these differences between these divergent ideas, M. Brenier suggested a compromise scheme and proposed that the Drafting Committee should reconsider the subject on the lines he had put forward.\n\nThe American delegation, however, proposed an amendment referring the matter back to the committee without any specific instructions, and this was carried.\n\n95. The Drafting Committee, which had been materially aided in its fresh deliberations by the kind assistance of M. van Swinderen as well as of M. Asser, then agreed to put forward a scheme following in some respects the lines of the German proposal as a basis for further discussion by itself. Sir William Collins, our representative on the committee, thereupon discussed with us the amendments which would be necessary in order to make the scheme a satisfactory one from our point of view, and we reported these to you in our despatch No. 9 of the 14th January. The main lines of the scheme as it was thus to be altered are shown below, the clauses italicised being those which Sir William Collins was to propose:----\n\n(1.) As soon as the convention had been signed, the outside Powers of Europe and America were to be invited to sign it also. No reference was now made to the word \"adhesion\" as being an unsuitable term to use in the circumstances proposed.\n\n(2.) As soon as these supplementary signatures had been obtained, ratification would be proceeded with. [2458 s-2\n\nG\n\n-2]\n\n337\n\n21", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 440419, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912", "page_number": 342, "title": "CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912", "content_text": "29\n\n(3.) If, however, all the outside Powers had not signed by the 31st December, 1912, the Powers that had signed, whether originally or by way of supplementary signature, should send representatives to The Hague to consider whether ratification might not nevertheless be proceeded with. Our object here was to cut short the delay which might be caused by refusal to sign, or procrastination in agreeing to sign, on the part of some of the outside Powers.\n\n(4) The convention was to come into force two months after the completion of the ratification process. (The Drafting Committee's original scheme said six months.)\n\n(5.) Laws, &c., necessary to give effect to the provisions of the convention should be drawn and presented to the Parliaments concerned within six months of the convention coming into force.\n\nup\n\n(6.) The date on which such legislation should come into force would, however, be the subject of agreement between the signatory Powers.\n\nWe thus met the point, raised in your telegram of the 12th January, and the Board of Trade letter enclosed in your despatch No. 16 of the 13th idem, that restrictions should not be enforced until each State had had an opportunity of considering the extent to which other Powers were prepared to move in the same direction.\n\n(7.) In the event of grave difficulties arising in regard to the putting into force of the convention as a whole, or of the laws, &c., specifically contemplated thereby, conference should be summoned to obtain agreement on these matters.\n\na fresh\n\n96. We indicated, in addressing you on the subject of these amendments, that we thought the procedure proposed would present material advantages in coping with the difficulties of a situation in which the representatives of only a few Powers were endeavouring to deal with matters some of which were of universal concern. We also observed that M. Brenier, on behalf of France, would, for the reasons stated in paragraph 78, propose to place administrative ordinances on the same footing as laws with reference to conditions (5) to (7), and that we must admit the justice of this proposal.\n\n97. The committee accepted our amendments (with the small change of two months into three in regard to clause 4 above) and also M. Brenier's; and at the nineteenth session (15th January) the latter, as chairman of the Drafting Committee, put the scheme before the conference as the best method of reconciling the differences of view indicated in his speech at the eighteenth session. The scheme was received with general favour, although at this stage several of the delegations, our own included, could not definitely commit themselves to its acceptance pending instructions from their Governments.\n\n98. In your despatch No. 18 of the 17th January you authorised us to accept the scheme if we thought that certain further amendments which had been suggested by the Board of Trade were not likely to prove acceptable to the conference. One of those suggestions was that the provision for a supplementary conference mentioned in clause (7) above should also cover the possibility of undue delay in ratification, and to meet this eventuality we successfully proposed, at the twenty-third session, to amend what is now article 24 of the convention accordingly. We explained in our despatch No. 12 of the 20th January why we had not thought it advisable to press the Board of Trade's other suggestions.\n\n99. It was also agreed at the twenty-third session to amend the conditions of clause (5) above, so as to cover the contingency of a legislature not being in session at the date on which the six months' delay allowed expired. In that case laws not already put before such a Parliament were to be submitted to it on its reassembly.\n\n100. The other delegations which had reserved their acceptance of the scheme when first put forward, also in due course received the assent of their Governments to its adoption, and the scheme has formed the basis, with some verbal modifications, of articles 22-24 of the convention.\n\n101. At the nineteenth session the final protocol as revised by the Drafting Committee, was also accepted on first reading.\n\n102. At the twentieth session (16th January) the German delegation brought forward the amendments to the morphine and cocaine articles of which preliminary mention has been made in paragraph 86 above.\n\nThe extent to which these amendments, as they were first drawn up and communicated to us, altered the provisions of the original articles 10 to 16, as exhibited in paragraph 48 above, will be best seen from the statement below, which puts the original articles and the proposed German re-draft in parallel columns.\n\nOriginal Articles.\n\n(See paragraph 48 ante).\n\n \n ARTICLE 10.\n German re-draft.\n \n \n Les Puissances contractantes limiteront, par des lois, aux seuls établissements et locaux qui auront été désignés à cet effet, la fabrication de la morphine, de la cocaine et de leurs sels respectifs.\n ARTICLE 10 (formerly 13). Les Puissances contractantes auront soin de faire contrôler, dans la mesure du possible, tous ceux qui fabriquent, importent, vendent, distribuent, et exportent la morphine, la cocaïne et leurs sels respectifs, ainsi que les bâtiments où ces fabricants et commerçants exercent cette industrie ou ce commerce.\n \n \n ARTICLE 11. Les Puissances contractantes exigeront que tous ceux qui fabriquent, importent, vendent, distribuent et exportent la morphine, la cocaïne et leurs sels respectifs, soient munis d'un permis pour se livrer à ces opérations.\n ARTICLE 11 (formerly 10). Les Puissances contractantes prendront, à cet effet, les mesures nécessaires pour constater dans quels établissements et locaux la morphine, la cocaïne et leurs sels respectifs sont fabriqués.\n \n \n ARTICLE 12. Les Puissances contractantes exigeront des fabricants et commerçants munis de ces permis la consignation sur leurs livres de toutes transactions concernant la fabrication, l'importation, la vente, la distribution et l'exportation de la morphine, de la cocaïne et de leurs sels respectifs. Cette règle ne s'appliquera pas forcément aux prescriptions médicales, et faites par des pharmaciens dûment autorisés.\n ARTICLE 12 (formerly 11). Les Puissances contractantes auront soin, dans la mesure du possible, d'exiger que tous ceux qui fabriquent, importent, vendent, distribuent et exportent la morphine, la cocaïne et leurs sels respectifs en avertiront les autorités ou se muniront d'un permis pour se livrer à ces opérations.\n \n \n ARTICLE 13. Les Puissances contractantes entreprendront de faire contrôler ces fabricants et commerçants, ainsi que les bâtiments où ils exercent cette industrie ou ce commerce.\n ARTICLE 13 (formerly 12). Les Puissances contractantes auront soin, dans la mesure du possible, d'exiger de ces fabricants et commerçants la consignation sur leurs livres des quantités fabriquées, des importations, des ventes, de toute autre cession, et des exportations de morphine, de la cocaïne et de leurs sels respectifs. Cette règle ne s'appliquera pas forcément aux prescriptions, et aux ventes faites par des pharmaciens dûment autorisés.\n \n \n ARTICLE 14. Les Puissances contractantes prohiberont dans leur commerce intérieur toute cession de morphine, de cocaïne et de leurs sels respectifs, à toutes personnes non autorisées.\n ARTICLE 14 (old 14). Les Puissances contractantes prohiberont dans leur commerce intérieur toute cession de morphine, de cocaïne et de leurs sels respectifs, à toutes personnes non autorisées.\n \n \n ARTICLE 15. Les Puissances contractantes interdiront, en tenant compte des différences de leurs conditions commerciales, l'importation de la morphine, de la cocaïne et de leurs sels respectifs à d'autres qu'à des personnes autorisées.\n ARTICLE 15 (old 15). Les Puissances contractantes, en tenant compte des différences de leurs conditions commerciales, auront soin de restreindre, dans la mesure du possible, l'importation commerciale, de la morphine, de la cocaïne et de leurs sels respectifs aux personnes y autorisées.\n \n \n ARTICLE 16. Les Puissances contractantes s'engagent à prohiber, par des conventions spéciales ou autrement, l'exportation de la morphine, de la cocaïne et de leurs sels respectifs de leurs pays et colonies vers les pays, colonies ou territoires à bail des autres Puissances contractantes, sauf dans le cas où le destinataire aura reçu un permis accordé conformément aux lois du pays.\n ARTICLE 16 (old 16). Les Puissances contractantes envisageront de prendre des mesures pour que...\n \n\n23\n\n338", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 440422, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912", "page_number": 345, "title": "CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912", "content_text": "28\n\n116. The only other business not already referred to, dealt with at the twenty-first session (17th January), was the insertion of a denunciation article (article 25 of the convention) which follows the original scheme of the Drafting Committee, and the commencement of the second reading of the convention as a whole.\n\n117. At the twenty-second session (18th January), as we reported to you at the time (in our despatch No. 11 of the 19th January), Dr. Hamilton Wright, on behalf of the American delegation, suddenly introduced a resolution inviting the Drafting Committee to consider the advisability of preparing an entirely fresh draft of the effectuating clauses, based on the idea that there should be two separate conventions, one principally concerned with the articles relating to opium, and the other containing those relating to morphine, cocaine, &c. The first of these was to be ratified in the usual way, and within a year, by the participating Powers, and the adhesion of outside Powers would be invited. The second would be subject to the special procedure already proposed by the Drafting Committee, and provisionally accepted by the conference, for the convention as a whole, by which preliminary adhesion by outside Powers by way of signature would precede ratification.\n\n118. M. Cremer (Netherlands) pointed out that the adoption of this resolution would involve a breach of the conditions on which His Majesty's Government entered into the conference. Sir William Meyer, speaking for the British delegation, emphasised this point, quoting from your note of the 17th September, 1910, to Mr. Whitelaw Reid, to show that His Majesty's Government had from the outset made their participation in the conference conditional on restrictive measures against morphine and cocaine being taken up pari passu with opium. His Majesty's Government, he said, regarded the consumption of those drugs as being, in present circumstances, a far more serious evil than that of opium, and he could not possibly accept Dr. Hamilton Wright's contention that the primary object of the conference was to conventionalise the opium resolutions of the Shanghai Commission. Opium reform had already advanced very largely, thanks mainly to the generous co-operation, at a material loss to herself, which India had given to the Chinese anti-opium policy, and even if the present conference were to come to nothing, the stimulus thus given would continue to act. The proposed measures in respect of morphine and cocaine, on the other hand, required international co-operation to render them effective, and for this purpose, a convention was necessary. Nevertheless, the American delegation now proposed a course which would have the effect of treating the opium articles as of primary importance, and bringing them into effect with comparatively little reference to outside Powers, while the morphine and cocaine articles would take a back place, and be subject to a much longer process before they could come into force. In fact, this procedure might perfectly well lead to their being shelved altogether. Such a course was emphatically opposed to the condition which His Majesty's Government had laid down as indispensable to their taking part in the conference, and Sir William Meyer said that we must, therefore, absolutely oppose the solution proposed by Dr. Hamilton Wright being regarded as even an open question.\n\n119. After some discussion, in which the British point of view was strongly supported by the Siamese, French, and Russian delegations, Dr. Hamilton Wright, perceiving that the sense of the conference was against him, asked leave to withdraw the resolution. The conference, however, decided on its being put to the vote, and it was then rejected by 9 votes to 1 (that of the United States), the German delegation abstaining.\n\n120. We may add that the first intimation we had of this American move was in a private conversation between Bishop Brent and Mr. Max Müller on the 17th January, in which the former broached the matter. Mr. Max Müller replied that the matter was so clearly contrary to the ideas of His Majesty's Government and to the conditions on which they had entered the conference that the British delegates could at once reply that it was, from their point of view, absolutely inadmissible, and we were greatly surprised when the resolution was nevertheless tabled.\n\n121. At the twenty-third session (19th January) the American proposal was once more brought forward, this time as a resolution committing the conference to direct action. We sent you a copy of the resolution in our despatch No. 11 of the 19th January, above quoted.\n\n122. Before, however, this resolution was discussed upon its merits, the chief delegate for Russia raised the point that it involved a departure from the conditions on which Great Britain had entered the conference and which had been accepted by the other Powers represented. He therefore proposed that the first vote to be taken should be as to whether, in these circumstances, the resolution was one suitable for discussion.\n\n20\n\nThis proposal was supported by M. Cremer (Netherlands), and on a division, it was decided by seven votes to three (Germany and China voting with the United States on this occasion) that the American resolution was not in order; and it was thus finally shelved.\n\n123. The remaining business at this session not already referred to in previous paragraphs—see, for instance, paragraphs 52, 53, and 98, 99—consisted in bringing the second reading of the convention up to article 24. This second reading was extended to the remaining articles at the twenty-fourth session (20th January).\n\n124. At the twenty-fifth session (22nd January) the conference was informed that, in consequence of the continued absence of the Italian delegate, M. Santoliquido, the Italian Minister at The Hague had been authorised to sign the convention on behalf of Italy.\n\n125. Mr. Max Müller read the following declaration, in accordance with the instructions conveyed in your despatch No. 19 of 19th January, on the subject of the application of the convention to His Majesty's dominions:-\n\n\"Nous déclarons que les articles de la présente convention, si elle est ratifiée par le Gouvernement de Sa Majesté, s'appliqueront à l'Empire des Indes britanniques, à Ceylan, aux établissements des Détroits, à Hong Kong et à Wei-hai Wei, sous tous les rapports, de la même façon qu'il s'appliqueront au Royaume-Uni de Grande-Bretagne et d'Irlande; mais le Gouvernement de Sa Majesté se réserve le droit de signer ou de dénoncer séparément ladite convention au nom de toute dominion, colonie, dépendance et protectorat de Sa Majesté outre que ceux qui ont été spécifiés.\"\n\nHe added that this declaration would be appended as a reserve when we signed the convention, and this was accordingly done.\n\n126. The Portuguese delegates also made the declaration that, in signing the convention, they desired it to be understood-\n\n(1.) That the stipulations of the convention would not affect those of existing treaties, conventions, or agreements to which Portugal was a party, or any advantages which she obtained by most-favoured-nation clauses.\n\n(2.) That further action in regard to the limitation of the number of ports from which raw and prepared opium could be exported, with reference to articles 2 and 8 (a), could not be undertaken by Portugal, since Macao was already the only Portuguese port of export in the Far East.\n\n(3.) That, as regards the provisions of articles 4 and 8 (d), in regard to marking exported packages of raw or prepared opium so as to indicate the nature of their contents, the Portuguese Government reserved to itself the right of placing special marks on such packages in addition to any uniform marks that might be adopted as of international application.\n\nThe convention and the final protocol were read for the last time this session.\n\n127. At the twenty-sixth and last session (23rd January) M. Brenier (France) notified the conference that he would place against his signature the words:-\n\n\"Sous réserve d'une ratification, ou d'une dénonciation, éventuellement séparée et spéciale en ce qui concerne les protectorats français.\"\n\n128. Some discussion had taken place at the two previous sessions in regard to the publication of the convention, and it was now indicated by the Netherlands delegation that His Excellency M. de Marees van Swinderen, as Dutch Foreign Minister and honorary president of the conference, was of the opinion that it might be published immediately after signature—a course which was accordingly adopted.\n\n129. After the minutes of previous sessions which had still to undergo this process had been ratified, M. Cremer (Netherlands) proposed a vote of thanks to Bishop Brent, as president of the conference, which was seconded by M. von Müller (Germany) and by M. Sanches de Miranda (Portugal); and after valedictory addresses by the president and honorary president (M. van Swinderen), the conference was then declared closed, and the delegates plenipotentiaries proceeded to sign the convention and the final protocol.\n\n130. In signing the convention, reservations were made, as already indicated, by our own delegation in regard to separate ratification or denunciation in respect of any portion of His Majesty's dominions, colonies, dependencies, or protectorates other than the United Kingdom, India, Ceylon, Straits Settlements, Hong Kong, and Wei-hai Wei; similarly by the French delegation in regard to French protectorates; by the delegates\n\n[2458 s-2]\n\nI\n\n341", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 440526, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912", "page_number": 449, "title": "CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912", "content_text": "[This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.]\n\nC. O.\n\nOPIUM.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL.\n\n[27178]\n\nNo. 1.\n\nForeign Office to Post Office.\n\n[July 3.]\n\nSECTION 2.\n\n16 10\n\nSir,\n\nForeign Office, July 3, 1912.\n\nI am directed by Secretary Sir E. Grey to transmit to you herewith, for the information of the Postmaster-General, copy of the International Opium Convention,* which was signed at The Hague on the 23rd January last.\n\nYou will observe from the final protocol of the International Opium Conference attached to the convention that the conference expressed the view that it was desirable to call the attention of the Universal Postal Union to the necessity for regulating the transmission by post of opium, morphine, and cocaine.\n\nThe United States Ambassador has now informed Sir E. Grey that the American delegates to the Universal Postal Congress which is to meet in Madrid next spring will be instructed to act in accordance with the view expressed at the International Opium Conference, and his Excellency has been informed, in reply, that similar instructions will be sent to the British delegates to the Congress.\n\nI am, &c.\n\nW. LANGLEY.\n\n* Printed separately.\n\n[2549 c-2]", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-395 - Public Offices - 1912.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 440906, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-396 - Public Offices - 1912", "page_number": 242, "title": "CO129-396 - Public Offices - 1912", "content_text": "# THE OPIUM EVIL.\n\nI am not able at the present moment, however, to ask the advice and consent of the Senate to the ratification of the convention, for it is provided by the final articles of the convention that ratification is to depend upon the Netherlands Government securing by the 31st of December next the supplementary signatures of 34 States named in article 22 of the convention, and that in case the signatures of all the powers invited to sign the convention shall not have been secured by December 31, 1912, the Netherlands Government shall immediately invite all the powers who have signed by that date to designate delegates to proceed to The Hague to examine into the possibility of nevertheless depositing their ratifications. It is my hope and belief that the Netherlands Government will secure the necessary signatures to the convention by the date fixed, and that I can then ask the advice and consent of the Senate to the ratification of the convention.\n\nTherefore, at the present time the International Opium Convention and its **protocole de clôture** are submitted to the Congress merely for its information as to the great step in advance which has been taken by 12 States in cooperation with the United States to bring the opium evil to an end.\n\n## THE WHITE HOUSE, May 31, 1912.\n\nThe PRESIDENT: \n**WM. H. TAFT.**\n\n## DEPARTMENT OF STATE, \nWashington, May 28, 1912.\n\nI have the honor to transmit herewith a report of the American Delegation to the International Opium Conference held at The Hague beginning December 1, 1909, and adjourning January 23, 1912, the American delegates being the Right Rev. Charles H. Brent, Protestant Episcopal Bishop of the Philippine Islands, Mr. Hamilton Wright, of Maine, and Mr. Henry J. Finger, of California.\n\nThis report briefly reviews the work of the International Opium Commission which, due to the efforts of this Government, met in Shanghai in 1909, and traces the consistent and successful efforts on the part of the United States to secure the cooperation of all the Governments immediately concerned with the opium problem. It should therefore be considered as in continuation of the report on the International Opium Commission and on the opium problem as seen within the United States, which I had the honor to transmit to you on February 18, 1910, and which is contained in `Senate Document No. 377`, Sixty-first Congress, second session.\n\nThe accompanying report summarizes the steps leading to the conference at The Hague, shows the enlargement of its scope by the inclusion of the consideration of the morphine, cocaine, and Indian hemp drug evils, and exhaustively treats of and explains the convention and the acts signed on January 23, 1912, by the representatives at the conference of the 12 powers party thereto, to wit: The United States, China, France, Germany, Great Britain, Italy, Japan, The Netherlands, Portugal, Russia, Siam, and Persia.\n\nImmediately upon the assembling of the conference it was pointed out, as had been the case at the Shanghai Commission, that the restriction of the manufacture and scale of habit-forming drugs presented commercial and economic, as well as moral, questions of great importance, and that \"it would be useless for those States represented in the conference, and who were the largest producers of opium, morphine, cocaine, etc., to agree to radical measures for the international control of these drugs so long as it was open to the nationals of those States not represented at the conference to continue or take up the production of and traffic in these drugs.\" To this is due a radical departure with respect to ratification; for, instead of the usual conventional provision for ratification, the International Opium Convention provides for the adherence thereto, on the invitation of the Netherlands Government, of all the nonsignatory Governments in Europe and America (34 in all) before any steps may be taken toward the ratification of the convention. In case the entire 34 powers do not adhere before December 31, 1912, another conference is to take place at The Hague attended by the representatives of the signatory and adhering powers. Should this conference be necessary, then the plenipotentiaries thereto shall fix an early date for the ratification of the convention.\n\nThe convention defines raw opium, prepared opium, medicinal opium, morphine, cocaine, and heroin; provides for the enactment of efficacious laws and regulations for the control of the production and distribution of raw opium; for the limiting of the number of ports or other places through which raw opium shall be exported or imported; for the prohibiting of the exportation of raw and prepared opium to prohibiting countries and for the regulation of the exportation of raw and prepared opium to countries which limit their importation; for the importation of raw opium and for the exportation of prepared opium through authorized persons only; for the marking of packages of raw opium exceeding 5 kilograms in weight and for the marking of all packages of prepared opium; for the gradual suppression of the manufacture, internal traffic in, and use of prepared opium; and for the prohibiting of the importation and exportation of prepared opium as soon as possible. In general, its provisions regarding medicinal opium, morphine, cocaine, and their respective salts are similar. It further, in a separate chapter, deals specifically with the relations between China and the \"treaty powers\" with regard to the opium traffic and the traffic in newer habit-forming drugs, China pledging to take strict measures for the prevention of their illicit use and the \"treaty powers\" on their part pledging themselves to aid China in these her efforts. Provision is likewise made for an interchange of laws, regulations, statistical information, and other data regarding the opium and allied traffics and habits.\n\nBy an additional protocol, the conference expressed the opinion that the attention of the Universal Postal Union should be drawn to the urgency of regulating the transmission by post of raw opium, morphine, and cocaine, and their respective salts, and to the necessity of prohibiting the transmission of prepared opium by the post. The conference further expressed the opinion that it is advisable to study the question of Indian hemp from the statistical and scientific standpoint with a view to regulating its misuse, should the necessity therefor make itself felt, by domestic legislation or by an international agreement.\n\nIn sum, recognizing the principle that not by national action alone but only through concerted international action can the question be... \nPage 239", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-396 - Public Offices - 1912.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 440917, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-396 - Public Offices - 1912", "page_number": 253, "title": "CO129-396 - Public Offices - 1912", "content_text": "# THE OPIUM EVIL.\n\nThe agreement of 1911 has an annex providing for the release into China of some thousands of chests of opium held by traders. But the number of these chests is to be deducted from the gradually waning annual exportation from India, permitted by the agreement of 1907 and by the later agreement.\n\nThe agreement of 1907 between Great Britain and China, and the modification of that agreement of May 8, 1911, just outlined, is perhaps the finest example of the comity of nations recorded in modern times. After a controversy sustained for over 100 years both parties to the Indo-Chinese opium trade have now determined upon the gradual and effective suppression of that trade, and one of them--China--has agreed, and has so far most effectively carried out its agreement, to suppress an internal production of opium six times greater than the foreign traffic in the drug.\n\nThe acceptance of Chapter IV of the International Opium Convention by the treaty powers represented at the conference broadens this comity and will prevent any nation signatory to the convention taking unfair advantage of the special Anglo-Chinese agreement.\n\nTo continue an outline of the International Opium Convention, it may be stated that by Chapter V, composed of two articles, the contracting powers agree to examine the possibility of enacting laws or regulations making the illegal possession of the drugs named in the convention liable to penalties unless existing laws or regulations have already done so; and they are to communicate to each other through the Netherlands ministry for foreign affairs the text of the laws and the administrative regulations which concern matters aimed at by the convention; also statistical information with respect to that which concerns the traffics covered by the convention.\n\nBut especially attention should be directed to Chapter VI of the convention containing its final provisions. This chapter, composed of articles 22, 23, 24, and 25, marks a radical departure from final provisions as seen in any other international convention.\n\nIt recognizes the futility of an attempt on the part of a minority of the powers of the world to bring under control the international traffic in anything which may be produced or trafficked in by the nationals of any State, and would seem to have irretrievably determined that future international conferences, such as the International Opium Conference, must be composed of and its convention to be effective signed by an overwhelming majority of the States directly or indirectly interested. Nearly all international conventions similar to the opium convention heretofore signed have been signed by delegates of a comparatively small number of the major and minor States, and generally speaking, their final provisions have permitted of the adhesion of States not represented at the conference, and have provided for ratification by the signatory powers in the shortest possible time--usually not to exceed two years.\n\nThe International Opium Conference had no sooner assembled than certain of the delegations pointed out that it would be useless for those State represented in the conference, and who were the largest producers and traders in opium, morphine, cocaine, etc., to agree to radical measures for the international control of these drugs, so long as it was open to the nationals of those States not represented at the conference to continue or take up the production of and traffic in them.\n\n## THE OPIUM EVIL.\n\nIt was contended by the American delegation, and they were not alone in this contention, that the International Opium Conference was composed of nations representative of the civilized world; therefore that the delegates should pledge their Governments to the convention, and that the ordinary form of adhesion and ratification should be adopted as the final provisions of the convention. The American delegation was urged to this contention by the belief that those Governments interested and not represented at the conference would soon adhere to what had been signed, as they had many times adhered to other conventions to which they were not directly signatory. But this view was not favored by a majority of the delegations present, and the conference finally decided, as provided by article 22 of the convention, that the powers not represented at the conference shall be permitted to sign the present convention, and that to this end the Netherlands Government shall invite immediately after the convention shall have been signed all the powers of Europe and of America not represented at the conference (and then is enumerated the 34 other powers of Europe and America) to designate a delegate armed with the full powers necessary for the signing of the convention at The Hague.\n\nArticle 22 proceeds to provide that the convention shall be furnished with the signatures of the other powers by means of a “Protocol of signature of powers not represented at the conference,” to be added after the signatures of the powers represented, and indicating the date of each signature; and that the Netherlands shall give a monthly notice to all the signatory powers of each supplementary signature.\n\nArticle 23 provides that after all the powers, as much for themselves as for their possessions, colonies, protectorates, and leased territories shall have signed the supplementary protocol of signatures, the Netherland Government shall invite the powers to ratify the convention, together with the protocol of signature.\n\nIn case the signature of all the powers invited shall not have been secured by December 31, 1912, the Netherlands Government shall immediately invite all the powers who have signed by that date to designate delegates to proceed to The Hague to examine into the possibility of nevertheless depositing their ratifications. Ratifications shall then be executed within as short a time as possible, and shall be deposited at once at The Hague in the ministry for foreign affairs. It is also provided that the Netherlands Government shall give notice to all the powers who shall have ratified the convention, and of the date on which the last of such acts of ratification shall have been received.\n\nBy article 24, it is provided that the convention shall go into effect three months after the date on which the Netherlands Government gives notice of ratification to the powers, and again that all laws, regulations, and other measures provided for by the convention shall be drawn up not later than six months after the effectuation of the convention; it is further provided that these measures shall become operative subject to an agreement between the signatory powers at the instance of the Netherlands Government.", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-396 - Public Offices - 1912.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 440918, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-396 - Public Offices - 1912", "page_number": 254, "title": "CO129-396 - Public Offices - 1912", "content_text": "# THE OPIUM EVIL.\n\nIt is important to notice that the last paragraph of article 24 provides that in case questions shall arise relative to the ratification of the convention, for effectuation of the convention, or the effectuation of the laws, regulations, and measures which the convention involves, the Netherlands Government, if these questions shall not be decided by other means, shall invite all the signatory powers to designate delegates who shall assemble at The Hague to come to an immediate agreement on these questions. This is a novel feature, and as it will be readily seen practically provides for an arbitration at The Hague of any disputes growing out of the terms of the convention. Article 25 of the convention is common form, and contains the usual provision for denunciation, for the deposit of the convention, and for the transmission of certified copies of it to the powers represented at the conference.\n\nIt may be stated that the novel final provisions of the convention were designed because of the difficulties connected with its Chapter III concerning morphine and cocaine. Chapters I and II concerning the production and traffic in raw and prepared opium and Chapter IV concerning China are composed of distinct pledges by the signatory powers made on questions on which there was little or no disagreement, and to which it was thought the powers not represented at the conference would readily adhere. Chapter III, on the other hand, deals with the question of the traffic in morphine and cocaine, on which there was disagreement considerable enough to compel certain of the delegations to hold that the chapter could not be effectuated by the signatory powers until it was subscribed to by the States not represented in the conference. Therefore the novel final provisions were designed because of the difficulties connected with the contents of Chapter III, and the ratification of the entire convention must now wait upon the necessary supplementary signatures of 34 other States. Toward the end of the conference, and with the object of escaping this dilemma, the American delegation proposed that the convention should be broken in two parts--one to be composed of Chapters I, II, IV, and V, on the contents and strict pledges of which all the delegations were agreed, and to have as final articles the ordinary form of such articles in other conventions which provide for adhesion and ratification; the other convention to be composed of Chapters III and VI, the latter to contain the novel final articles as eventually adopted for the convention as it now stands. The American view, however, was not acceptable to a majority of the delegations, and therefore was not pressed.\n\nIn addition to the convention the delegates to the International Opium Conference signed a **protocole de clôture**, which contains the following views: That the conference is of the opinion that there is reason to draw the attention of the Universal Postal Union to the urgency of regulating the transmission by post of raw opium; to the necessity of regulating as far as possible the transmission by post of morphine and cocaine and their respective salts, and of the other substances contemplated by article 14 of the convention; to the necessity of prohibiting the transmission of prepared opium by post and of the advisability of the study of the question of the Indian hemp drugs from the statistical and scientific standpoint with a view to regulating their misuse should the necessity thereof make itself felt.\n\n## THE OPIUM EVIL.\n\nGenerally speaking, it may be said that the convention is satisfactory, and illustrates that the most powerful nations in the world are now agreed that an evil such as the opium evil is never wholly national in its incidence, can never be suppressed by two nations alone--as was supposed to be the case in regard to the Indo-Chinese opium traffic--but that such an evil as it appears in one State is a concomitant or reflex of a similar evil in other States and is therefore international in its moral, humanitarian, economic, and diplomatic effect; that this being so, few evils can be eradicated by national action alone; and therefore only by the cooperation of all the States directly or indirectly interested can such an evil be mitigated or suppressed.\n\nThe convention marks a decided step in advance in the international movement for the suppression of the opium evil initiated by the United States. This movement at first was thought to concern only those countries of the Far East, or those western nations having territorial possessions in the Far East--five or six in number. But it has proceeded by way of a sober international commission of inquiry, composed of commissioners representing 13 nations, and by a conference composed of delegates with full powers representing 12 of these nations. These delegates having formulated and signed on behalf of their Governments a convention containing strict pledges for national legislation and international cooperation, the convention has now been presented to the remaining States of Europe and America--34 in number--for their signature.\n\nBut, quite apart from the contents of the convention itself, the international movement initiated by the United States has had a directly beneficial effect on the interested nations, for pending the assembling and action of the International Opium Commission, and while the diplomatic correspondence, aimed to secure The Hague conference, was in progress, many of the Governments concerned perfected domestic legislation for the suppression of the evils connected with opium and other narcotics, and took measures concerning the export of these drugs which were of international significance.\n\nBy the final provisions of the convention contained in Chapter VI, there will probably be a delay of a year before the convention can be ratified by the signatory powers and those powers who agree to sign the protocol of supplementary signature. That, however, is of little moment compared to the new international comity which has been established by the document, and the furtherance by it of new principles of international commercial law; while the deduction may be made from article 22 of the convention, that all future Hague conferences dealing with matters of general international commerce must be composed of an overwhelming majority of the nations.\n\nThere is, however, one aspect from which the convention may be viewed that should be disquieting to the Government and the people of the United States. It has just been stated that a reflex effect of the initiation by the United States of the international movement for the abatement of the opium evil took the form of improved domestic legislation in nearly all the countries concerned, of very drastic legislation in some, while one country at least--Great Britain--both by national and colonial law, effectuated resolution 4 of the International Opium Commission, as now embodied in article 3 of the International Opium Convention.", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-396 - Public Offices - 1912.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 440923, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-396 - Public Offices - 1912", "page_number": 259, "title": "CO129-396 - Public Offices - 1912", "content_text": "# THE OPIUM EVIL\n## CHAPTER VI\n### FINAL PROVISIONS\n\n**ARTICLE 22**. The powers not represented at the conference shall be permitted to sign the present convention.\n\nTo this end, the Netherlands Government shall invite, immediately after the convention shall have been signed by the plenipotentiaries of the powers who have taken part in the conference, all the powers of Europe and of America not represented at the conference, to wit, the Argentine Republic; Austria-Hungary; Belgium; Bolivia; Brazil; Bulgaria, Chile, Colombia; Costa Rica; Republic of Cuba; Denmark; Dominican Republic; Republic of Ecuador; Spain; Greece; Guatemala; Republic of Haiti; Honduras; Luxemburg; Mexico; Montenegro; Nicaragua, Norway; Panama; Paraguay; Peru; Roumania; Salvador: Servia; Sweden; Switzerland; Turkey; Uruguay; United States of Venezuela, to designate a delegate armed with the full powers necessary for the signing of the convention at The Hague.\n\nThe convention shall be furnished with these signatures by means of a Protocol of signature of powers not represented at the conference, to be added after the signatures of the powers represented and indicating the date of each signature.\n\nThe Netherlands Government shall give notice every month, to all the signatory powers, of each supplementary signature.\n\n**ARTICLE 23**. After all the powers, as much for themselves as for their possessions, colonies, protectorates, and leased territories, shall have signed the convention, or the supplementary protocol hereinbefore indicated, the Netherlands Government shall invite the powers to ratify the convention together with this protocol.\n\nIn case the signature of all the powers invited shall not have been secured by December 31, 1912, the Netherlands Government shall immediately invite all the powers who have signed by that date to designate delegates to proceed to The Hague to examine into the possibility of nevertheless depositing their ratifications.\n\nRatification shall be executed within as short a time as possible and shall be deposited at once at The Hague in the Ministry for Foreign Affairs.\n\nThe Netherlands Government shall give notice every month to the signatory powers of the ratifications which it shall have received in the interval.\n\nAs soon as the ratifications of all the signatory powers, as much for themselves as for their colonies, possessions, protectorates, and leased territories, shall have been received by the Netherlands Government, this government shall give notice to all the powers who shall have ratified the convention of the date on which the last of such acts of ratification shall have been received.\n\n**ARTICLE 24**. The present convention shall go into effect three months after the date mentioned in the Netherlands Government's notification, as indicated in the last paragraph of the preceding article.\n\nWith regard to the laws, regulations, and other measures provided for by the present convention, it is agreed that the drafts necessary to this end shall be drawn up not later than six months after the going into effect of the convention. With regard to the laws, these shall also be proposed by the governments to their parliaments or legislative bodies within this same period of six months, and in any case at the first session which shall follow the expiration of this period.\n\nThe date from which these laws, regulations, or measures shall go into effect shall be the subject of an agreement between the signatory powers, at the instance of the Netherlands Government.\n\nIn case questions shall arise relative to the ratification of the present convention, or relative to the going into effect of the convention, or of the laws, regulations, and measures which such convention involves, the Netherlands Government, if these questions cannot be decided by other means, shall invite all the signatory powers to designate delegates who shall assemble at The Hague to come to an immediate agreement on these questions.\n\n**ARTICLE 25**. If it should happen that one of the contracting powers should wish to denounce the present convention, such denunciation shall be notified in writing to the Netherlands Government, who shall immediately communicate a certified copy in conformity with such notification to all the other powers, informing them at the same time as to the date on which it received such notification.\n\nThe denunciation shall have no effect except with respect to the power who shall have given notice thereof and one year after such notice shall have reached the Netherlands Government.\n\nIn witness whereof the plenipotentiaries have affixed their signatures to the present convention.\n\nDone at The Hague, January 23, 1912, in one single copy, which shall remain deposited in the archives of the Government of the Netherlands and copies of which, certified in conformity, shall be delivered through diplomatic channels to all the powers represented at the conference.\n\nFor Germany: \nF. DE MÜLLER. DELBRUCK. GRUNENWALD.\n\nFor the United States of America: \nCHARLES H. BRENT, HAMILTON WRIGHT, HENRY J. FINGER.\n\nFor China: \nLIANG CHENG.\n\nFor France: \nH. BRENIER.\n\nFor Great Britain: \nW. S. MEYER. W. G. MAX MÜLLER. WILLIAM JOB COLLINS.\n\nFor Italy: \nG. DE LA TOUR CALVELLO.\n\nFor Japan: \nAIMARO SATO. TOMOE TAKAGI. KOTARO NISHIZAKI.", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-396 - Public Offices - 1912.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 440928, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-396 - Public Offices - 1912", "page_number": 264, "title": "CO129-396 - Public Offices - 1912", "content_text": "## THIRD REVISE FOR PARLIAMENT\nNovember 1912.\n\n264 \nC.O. \n36062 \nRECE \nREG 15 NOV 12 \n\nSir,\n\n**British Delegates to the International Opium Conference to Sir Edward Grey.**\n\nWE, the British delegates at the International Opium Conference at The Hague, have the honour to submit to you our report on the proceedings and results of the conference. We have already transmitted to you (on the 24th January) the convention and the final protocol in which the labours of the conference resulted, and we now submit two volumes containing respectively (a) minutes of the conference sessions, and (b) memoranda or other papers laid before the conference by the various delegations. We also annex an unofficial English summary of the minutes.† \n\n2. The conference was called together at the instance of the United States Government, whose object was to give the force of law and international agreement to the proposals contained in the resolutions of the International Opium Commission which assembled at Shanghai in 1899, and to \"the essential corollaries derived therefrom.\" That Government accordingly put forward the following tentative programme for discussion by the conference - \n\n| Clause | Programme |\n| --- | --- |\n| (a) | The advisability of effective national laws and regulations to control the production, manufacture, and distribution of opium, its derivatives and preparations. |\n| (b) | The advisability of restricting the number of ports through which opium may be shipped by opium-producing countries. |\n| (c) | The measures to be taken to prevent, at the port of departure, the shipment of opium, its derivatives and preparations, to countries that prohibit, or wish to prohibit or control, their entry. |\n| (d) | The advisability of reciprocal notification of the amount of opium, its derivatives and preparations, shipped from one country to another. |\n| (e) | Regulation by the Universal Postal Union of the transmission of opium, its derivatives and preparations, through the mails. |\n| (f) | The restriction or control of the cultivation of the poppy, so that the production of opium will not be undertaken by countries which at present do not produce it, to compensate for the reduction being made in British India and China. |\n| (g) | The application of the pharmacy laws of the Governments concerned to their subjects in the consular districts, concessions, and settlements in China. |\n| (h) | The propriety of restudying treaty obligations and international agreements under which the opium traffic is at present conducted. |\n| (j) | The advisability of uniform provisions of penal laws concerning offences against any agreements that the Powers may make in regard to opium production and traffic. |\n| (k) | The advisability of uniform marks of identification of packages containing opium in international transit. |\n| (l) | The advisability of permits to be granted to exporters of opium, its derivatives and preparations. |\n| (m) | The advisability of reciprocal right of search of vessels suspected of carrying contraband opium. |\n| (n) | The advisability of measures to prevent the unlawful use of a flag by vessels engaged in the opium traffic. |\n| (o) | The advisability of an International Commission to be entrusted with the carrying out of any international agreement concluded. |\n\n3. The clauses given in italics had, however, been the subject of objection by other Powers. His Majesty's Government could not admit the discussion of clauses (l), (m), \n\n* \"Miscellaneous, No. 2 (1912).\" \n† Copies of each of these documents will be placed in the Libraries of both Houses of Parliament.\n\n[665] \nB 2", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-396 - Public Offices - 1912.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 440930, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-396 - Public Offices - 1912", "page_number": 266, "title": "CO129-396 - Public Offices - 1912", "content_text": "# 263 \n\n4 \n\n13. At the third session, approval was also given to the heads of discussion which the Programme Committee had thought suitable in respect to raw and prepared opium; and a resolution that the participating Governments ought to enact effective laws and regulations for the control of the production and distribution of raw opium was proposed by the British delegation.\n\n14. At the fourth session (8th December), the consideration of this resolution was continued, and included some discussion on the information contained in the first of the reports above mentioned (Appendix). Finally, the resolution was carried unanimously, and forms the basis of article 1 of the present convention, the concluding proviso, à moins des lois ou des règlements existants n'aient déjà réglé la matière, having been added here as in some other articles.\n\n15. The British delegation then presented a resolution to the effect that each participating Government should strictly limit the number of places through which raw opium may be exported or imported. The German delegation opposed this proposal on the ground that while it might be suitable for countries with a limited number of seaports, and where opium was received or sent out in bulk, it could not be applied to Germany, with its extended land frontiers and its network of railways, where, moreover, opium was often sent in small quantities in the same package with other chemicals. At the fifth session (11th December), therefore, they proposed an amendment, which made the resolution run thus: \"That every Government participating in the conference shall limit, as far as is consistent with its own trade conditions, the number of places through which the exportation or importation of raw opium shall be allowed.\" The resolution as thus amended was carried unanimously, and forms the basis of article 2 of the convention.\n\n16. At this (fifth) session, the British delegation moved a resolution to the effect that the participating Governments should adopt measures:\n- (1.) To prevent the export of raw opium to countries that had prohibited its entry; and\n- (2.) Similarly to control the export of raw opium to countries which restricted its import.\n\nThe Portuguese delegation proposed the insertion of the words \"by special agreement or otherwise\" after the words \"adopt measures,\" appealing to the precedent afforded by the negotiations between Great Britain and China on the subject of Indian opium. The Chinese delegation demurred to this amendment on the ground that the circumstances in regard to Indian opium were special, and that there was no reason why a similar procedure should be followed with reference to other Powers—whose territories did not produce opium on a large scale.\n\nAs we pointed out in the course of the debate, the real point at issue was the observance by Portugal, along with the other treaty Powers, of the Anglo-Chinese agreement of the 8th May, 1911, for in that case the Portuguese could only deal with Indian opium \"certificated\" for export to China, and from the Chinese point of view, it did not matter through what precise channel such opium came into China. We, therefore, accepted the Portuguese amendment, and thus amended, the resolution was carried, though China, the United States, and Persia reserved their votes.\n\n17. Later (at the twenty-first and twenty-second sessions), on the second reading of article 3 of the convention, which reproduced the terms of the resolution, the Chinese moved the omission of the words \"by special agreement or otherwise\" (par convention spéciale ou autrement), and in view of the emphatic declaration they then made that, so amended, the article would not be used to affect existing treaties, we supported their amendment, which was carried, with a dissent by Portugal, subsequently withdrawn at the twenty-fourth session.\n\n18. To revert to the fifth session, the British delegation next proposed a resolution to the effect that each participating Government should notify all consignments of raw opium to such other participating Governments as might desire the information, but after some criticism, this was withdrawn as impossible of general application.\n\n19. The next resolution we moved was that every package containing raw opium intended for export should be so marked as to indicate its contents, and this was accepted with a German amendment that it should only apply to packages exceeding 5 kilog. in weight, the Germans explaining that they could not deal with smaller packages, the bulk of whose contents often consisted of other matters besides opium. The resolution as finally passed forms the basis of article 4 of the convention.\n\n20. The British delegation then proposed a resolution that each participating Government should prohibit the export and import of raw opium save through the agency of specially authorised persons, and this was passed with an amendment duly suggested by the German delegation substituting the word \"duly\" for \"specially.\" The resolution as thus amended forms the basis of article 5 of the convention.\n\n21. The last resolution we proposed on this subject was that measures should be taken by the Universal Postal Union for regulating the transmission of raw opium through the post. This was carried, but does not find place in the articles of the convention, on the ground that the conference had no power to bind the Postal Union. It figures, therefore, as an expression of opinion (vœu) in clause (1) of the final protocol.\n\n22. The report of the Programme Committee on the matters to be discussed under the head of medicinal opium, morphine, and cocaine, &c., was then approved, and some discussion took place in regard to the fourth section of their proposed agenda, which simply specified anti-opium remedies without mentioning points which might be discussed thereunder. The action subsequently taken in regard to this matter will be found stated in paragraph 47, and was in accord with a suggestion made by us at this stage.\n\n23. At the sixth session (the 12th December), the conference took up the subject of prepared opium, and the Netherlands delegation moved a resolution that the participating Powers should prohibit, as a general rule, the importation and exportation of this species of opium, subject to a proviso that, in certain circumstances, it might be allowed on board ship for the personal use of the crew during the voyage. On discussion, this proviso was withdrawn, and the original resolution was passed with one negative vote in the following form: Les Gouvernements participants à la conférence s'engagent à prohiber l'importation et l'exportation d'opium préparé. The resolution forms the basis of the first part of article 7 of the convention.\n\n24. The American delegation then brought forward a series of further resolutions on the subject of prepared opium. Dr. Hamilton Wright had previously declared that these would not be put if the main part of the Dutch resolution above referred to was passed unanimously; but as one vote had been given against it, he held himself at liberty to proceed with his resolutions. The first of these was to the effect that such of the participating Powers as had not already prohibited the exportation of prepared opium should do so, or else should restrict the number of places through which prepared opium might be exported. After some amendments moved by ourselves and the Chinese delegation with the object of eliminating Portuguese opposition, the resolution was unanimously passed in the following terms: \"Il est convenu que les pays représentés qui ne sont pas encore prêts à prohiber l'exportation de l'opium préparé la prohiberont aussitôt que possible, et restreindront en attendant le nombre de localités par lesquelles l'opium préparé pourra être exporté.” This resolution now figures in the convention, partly in article 7 and partly as clause (a) of article 8.\n\n25. The next American resolution was that the Governments represented should forbid the exportation of prepared opium to such countries as may forbid its entry, and that no prepared opium should be shipped to a country which wishes to restrict the entry of the drug unless in accordance with the regulations of the receiving country. This resolution was carried unanimously and forms the basis of clauses (b) and (c) of article 8 of the convention.\n\n26. Two further resolutions of the American delegation were carried without opposition, and laid down (1) that any prepared opium which might be exported from one of the participating countries should bear a special mark of identification, and (2) that the export of prepared opium should only be allowed to specially authorised persons. These resolutions form the basis of clauses (d) and (e) of article 8 of the convention.\n\n27. The concluding American resolution, brought forward at this session, was that the Universal Postal Union should prohibit the transmission of prepared opium through the post. It was, however, pointed out that the conference had no power to bind the Postal Union in this manner, and the resolution was consequently carried in the following form: Qu'il est à désirer que des mesures soient adoptées par l'Union postale universelle pour réglementer la transmission de l'opium préparé par la poste. It now finds place, like the similar resolution on the subject of raw opium, as a vœu in the final protocol, clause 1 (3).\n\n5", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-396 - Public Offices - 1912.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 440934, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-396 - Public Offices - 1912", "page_number": 270, "title": "CO129-396 - Public Offices - 1912", "content_text": "## 44. A further German amendment which inserted the words \"généralement reconnues\" after the words \"recherches scientifiques\" in what is now article 14 (d) was at the same time carried, its desirability being generally apparent.\n\n45. It may be explained here that the original resolution on which draft article 17, as given in paragraph 39, was based, made no specific mention of anti-opium remedies. The circumstances in which this reference was inserted in clause (b) of the draft article, and in article 14 (b) of the final convention, are stated in paragraph 47.\n\n46. We need only add at present, that when the resolution which formed the basis of draft article 11 (paragraph 39) came under consideration, the American delegation suggested that the licence system therein contemplated should apply also to instruments used for the injection of morphine and cocaine. This was, however, opposed by the German delegation, on the ground that there was no special set of instruments set apart for use in connection with these drugs, and, the objection being supported by Sir William Collins, the proposal was dropped.\n\n47. At the eleventh session (19th December) the French delegation brought forward a resolution to the effect that it was desirable to take measures against so-called anti-opium remedies, which for the most part contained opium, morphine, or cocaine. After some discussion, during which Dr. Wu-Lien-Teh showed, from a series of analyses that had been made in regard to a number of these remedies, that nearly all of them contained opium or morphine, even though in some cases warranted not to do so, the resolution was passed unanimously in the following form:\n\n\"La conférence, constatant que, dans les pays où des efforts ont été faits pour combattre l'abus de l'opium, on a été amené à faire usage de soi-disant remèdes anti-opium, contenant de l'opium, de la morphine ou de la cocaïne, décide que les Gouvernements participants prendront contre ces remèdes dangereux des mesures analogues à celles qui sont proposées contre l'opium, la morphine, la cocaïne et contre leurs sels respectifs.\"\n\nThe substance of this resolution has been embodied in article 14 (b) of the final convention, which lays down that any preparations, whether styled anti-opium remedies or not, containing more than 2 per cent. of morphine or 1 per cent of cocaine, shall be treated in the same way as those drugs.\n\n48. The Chinese delegation then submitted a series of resolutions having special reference to China, and to the Powers having special treaties with the Chinese Government. These resolutions had been discussed with us before they were presented, and had been worded in accordance with suggestions we had made.\n\nThe first two resolutions were to the effect that:\n\n| Resolution # | Description |\n| --- | --- |\n| 1 | The participating Governments agree to co-operate with the Chinese Government in the prevention of the smuggling of opium, morphine, cocaine, &c., from their colonies in the Far East, or from their leased territories in China into Chinese territory, while the Chinese Government will similarly co-operate towards the prevention of such smuggling from China into the colonies and territories in question. |\n| 2 | With a view to giving practical effect to the principle embodied in resolution No. 9 of the Shanghai commission, the Chinese Government will enact pharmaceutical laws for its subjects, regulating the sale and distribution of morphine, cocaine, &c., and will communicate these laws to the treaty Powers represented at the conference. These Powers will, if they find the said laws acceptable, take the necessary steps for applying them to their own nationals in China. |\n\nThese two resolutions were carried as they stood.\n\n49. The third resolution was to the effect that the participating Governments would undertake to adopt all necessary measures to restrict and control the smoking of opium in their leased territories, settlements, or concessions in China, and to suppress any opium-smoking divans, &c., that might still exist there, as also to prohibit the smoking of opium in places of public amusement and houses of ill-fame.\n\nTo this resolution the German delegation moved an amendment, which was adopted, to the effect that the suppression of opium-smoking divans, &c., should take place pari passu with similar measures adopted by the Chinese Government in its own territories.\n\n50. The fourth resolution, as carried with a verbal amendment suggested by the French delegation, proposed that the participating Powers should take effective measures for the gradual reduction, pari passu with similar measures taken by the Chinese Government, of the number of shops dealing in opium, which may still exist in their leased settlements, territories or concessions, and that they should adopt suitable and effective measures for the restriction and control of the retail trade in opium in these areas.\n\n51. The fifth resolution, after some alteration in the original wording which took place after discussion thereon, was to the following effect:\n\n\"The participating Governments possessing post offices of their own in China undertake to adopt stringent measures to prevent the illegal importation into China, as well as the transmission from one part of China to another through the agency of their aforesaid post offices, of opium, whether raw or prepared, of morphine, cocaine, and their respective salts, and of the other substances dealt with in the convention.\"\n\n52. All these resolutions, subject to the amendments above indicated, passed without opposition, but Siam and Persia abstained from voting as not having treaties with China. The resolutions were originally embodied, as having special reference to the conditions of China and to circumstances which did not affect some of the conference Powers, in a separate supplementary convention. The articles now figure as Nos. 15 to 19 of Chapter IV in the final convention, and in signing the convention the Siamese and Persian delegates indicated that they did so with a reserve on the subject of these articles, since they have no special treaties with China.\n\n53. The Drafting Committee then put before the conference three documents, comprising:\n\n| Document | Description |\n| --- | --- |\n| (a) | Draft articles of a convention embodying the general resolutions already passed on the subject of opium, raw and prepared, morphine, cocaine, &c. |\n| (b) | Draft articles on the subject of ratification, adhesion, and denunciation. |\n| (c) | A draft final protocol. |\n\nA preliminary reading was then given to document (a), and some verbal amendments were introduced.\n\n54. At the twelfth session (20th December) the conference proceeded to the discussion of the first portion of document (b), which dealt with the procedure in regard to ratification coming into force, adhesion coming into force, and denunciation in respect of the convention. The procedure submitted for discussion was as follows:\n\n| Procedure # | Description |\n| --- | --- |\n| 1 | There would be a premier dépôt des ratifications at The Hague as soon as several signatory Powers were prepared to ratify. |\n| 2 | The remaining participating Powers would ratify subsequently by written notification. |\n| 3 | All outside Powers should then be invited to adhere. |\n| 4 | The convention would come into force a year after the Netherlands Government had received the ratifications of all the contracting Powers and the adhesion of all the outside Powers above mentioned. |\n| 5 | If, however, matters were not so far advanced two years after the signing of the convention, all the Powers that had by that time ratified or adhered were to be invited to send delegates to a fresh conference at The Hague to consider the conditions under which the convention might nevertheless be wholly or partially enforced. |\n| 6 | A subsequent denunciation of the convention by any Power would apply only to that Power, and would come into effect a year after notice of denunciation had been given. |\n\n55. In regard to the first condition above mentioned, we proposed, to expedite matters, that the convention should in any case be ratified by the participating Powers within six months, and, subject to an American amendment which extended the period to one year, this was carried. As regards the third condition, we also procured an amendment providing that invitation to the outside Powers should take place after the premier dépôt instead of after universal ratification, and that the premier dépôt might have effect as soon as six Powers were ready to ratify.\n\n56. The discussion of the draft did not proceed further before our Christmas recess, but at the thirteenth session (21st December) we presented an important amendment with reference to the manner in which the convention was to come into force, which is given in paragraph 61 infra. This amendment was referred to the Drafting Committee, whose powers were extended so as to enable it not merely to put into conventional form the substance of resolutions already accepted by the conference, but to add such additional articles as seemed necessary for the purposes of completing the convention.\n\nPage 270\nPage 271", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-396 - Public Offices - 1912.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 440936, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-396 - Public Offices - 1912", "page_number": 272, "title": "CO129-396 - Public Offices - 1912", "content_text": "269 \n\n16 \n\nmight withdraw or modify them. The French contention as to the equivalence, in certain circumstances, of administrative enactments and laws, was one which we were bound to accept.\n\n## 66\n-(i) M. Delbrück, the German delegate on the Committee, had submitted a new scheme, the main lines of which were as follows:- \n\n(a) Immediately after the signature of the convention by the conference delegates, all the outside Powers of Europe and America were to be invited to adhere. \n\n(b) When all these Powers had thus adhered to the convention, the process of ratification by all the Powers now concerned would commence, and would be carried into effect as soon as possible. \n\n(c) Adherence and ratification should be not merely for the home territories of any Power, but for its colonies and other outside possessions and protectorates also. \n\n(d) The convention would come into force a year after the completion of ratification by all the Powers concerned. \n\n(e) If, however, matters had not advanced to the ratification stage two years after the date of the signing of the convention by the delegates, a fresh conference should be held to consider conditions under which the convention might nevertheless be brought into force, wholly or in part.\n\nThis project, which we shall refer to hereafter as the German scheme, involved an entirely new principle, viz., the subordination of ratification to adhesion; but M. Asser did not think there was any objection in principle to this, although his own preference was for the usual method.\n\n## 67\nThe reasons brought forward by M. Delbrück in support of his proposal were that the circumstances were unprecedented, since some of the matters dealt with by the conference were of world-wide interest, and could not be adequately carried out by the small number of Powers represented at the conference, especially in view of the fact that some of the non-represented Powers occupied a very important position in regard to the questions under discussion, as, for instance, Turkey in regard to raw opium, and Bolivia and Peru (where the coca plant is principally produced) in regard to cocaine. M. Delbrück argued further that, as regards Germany, the convention would require the ratification of the Reichstag, and that it would be difficult to obtain such ratification while the attitude of outside Powers was unknown.\n\nOn the other hand, Sir William Collins had pointed out that this scheme as it stood, making ratification dependent on the adherence of all outside Powers of Europe and America, was likely to lead to indefinite delay in regard to the practical enforcement of the measures on which the conference had agreed.\n\n## 68\nThe Drafting Committee also reported difficulties which had arisen as to the exact significance of the words \"importation\" and \"exportation,\" as used in article 5 of the convention, on the subject of raw opium, and also in articles 7 and 8, and in some of the articles in chapter 3, in regard to prepared opium, morphine, cocaine, &c.\n\n## 69\nThe remaining portions of the committee's report dealt mainly with-- \n(a) The wording of a number of the articles already agreed on, in regard to which the suggestions of the committee were subsequently in large measure accepted. \n(b) A proposal for bringing the special Chinese articles into the main convention. \n(c) The submission of a fresh draft final protocol.\n\n## 70\nApart from the important questions which had been thus raised by the report of the Drafting Committee, we were also faced with a serious difficulty in regard to the morphine and cocaine articles, into which the German delegation, as a result of the conferences they had had with their Government in Berlin, were now desirous of introducing important modifications. We had thus, as will be seen, to face fresh problems of a serious character, which involved not merely private conference with other delegations, but in some cases references to His Majesty's Government. Unfortunately we were deprived at this juncture of the guidance of Sir Cecil Clementi Smith, whose health had not permitted him to return to The Hague after the Christmas recess.\n\n## 71\nThe sixteenth session (10th January) dealt mainly with matters which have already been reported on, such as the transfer of the special Chinese articles to the main convention.\n\n## 72\nAt the seventeenth session (11th January) the report of the Drafting Committee on the various \"effectuating\" proposals came up for discussion. M. Delbrück gave a clear exposition of the circumstances which had led to the propounding of the German scheme, in the course of which he laid stress on the fact that ratification of the convention by the Reichstag would make it an integral part of the German corpus juris, while in the United States, for example, even if the convention were ratified by the Senate, its provisions would remain ineffective until applied by internal legislation.\n\n## 73\nThe course of the discussion, in which various delegations took part, had convinced us that the British amendment to the primary scheme had been superseded by the new proposals now put forward. As we more than once indicated to the conference, our object throughout was to insist on the practical and expeditious enforcement of the measures that had already been agreed to, rather than on questions of form; and as between the primary and the German schemes, the latter had the advantage that the agreement of outside Powers was to be sought immediately after the signing of the convention, while under the former that process would not be commenced till six at least of the conference Powers had ratified. We accordingly requested instructions as to whether we should negotiate on the basis of the German scheme, while endeavouring to shorten the periods before the convention should come into force, and to substitute \"substantial\" for \"unanimous\" adhesion of outside Powers.\n\n## 74\nAt the eighteenth session (12th January) the adjourned debate on the subject of the \"effectuation\" procedure was opened by M. Brenier (France), who pointed out that the divergent schemes before the conference arose from a conflict of ideas. The German delegation, looking to the great difficulties of embarking on the measures approved by the conference without adhesion of outside Powers, held that the obtainment of such adhesion was the first object to be aimed at; other delegations, concerned chiefly with getting the convention into force as soon as possible, objected to the delay which the German method would involve. In order to bridge the differences between these divergent ideas, M. Brenier suggested a compromise scheme and proposed that the Drafting Committee should present a definite proposal in regard to ratification, adhesion, and the coming into force of the convention. The American delegation proposed an amendment, which was carried, directing the committee to have regard to all the proposals which had been made, but not to express approval of any one of them.\n\n## 75\nThe Drafting Committee, which had been materially aided in its fresh deliberations by the kind assistance of M. van Swinderen as well as of M. Asser, then put forward a scheme following in some respects the lines of the German proposal. The main lines of the scheme as it was thus to be altered are shown below, the clauses italicised being those which we considered necessary in order to make the scheme a satisfactory one from our point of view - \n| Clause | Description |\n| --- | --- |\n| (1) | As soon as the convention had been signed, the outside Powers of Europe and America were to be invited to sign it also. No reference was now made to the word \"adhesion\" as being an unsuitable term to use in the circumstances proposed. |\n| (2) | As soon as these supplementary signatures had been obtained, ratification would be proceeded with. |\n| (3) | If, however, all the outside Powers had not signed by the 31st December, 1912, the Powers that had signed, whether originally or by way of supplementary signature, should send representatives to The Hague to consider whether ratification might not nevertheless be proceeded with. Our object here was to cut short the delay which might be caused by refusal to sign, or procrastination in agreeing to sign, on the part of some of the outside Powers. |\n| (4) | The convention was to come into force two months after the completion of the ratification process. (The Drafting Committee's original scheme said six months.) |\n| (5) | Laws, &c., necessary to give effect to the provisions of the convention should be drawn up and presented to the Parliaments concerned within six months of the convention coming into force. |\n| (6) | The date on which such legislation should come into force would, however, be the subject of agreement between the signatory Powers. We thus met the point which had been raised by the Board of Trade that restrictions should not be enforced until each State had had an opportunity of considering the extent to which other Powers were prepared to move in the same direction. |\n| (7) | In the event of grave difficulties arising in regard to the putting into force of the convention as a whole, or of the laws, &c., specifically contemplated thereby, a fresh conference should be summoned to obtain agreement on these matters. |\n\n## 76\nWe indicated, in addressing you on the subject of these amendments, that we thought the procedure proposed would present material advantages in coping with the ... \n\nPage 269\nPage 16\nPage 17\n[660] \nD 2", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-396 - Public Offices - 1912.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 440937, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-396 - Public Offices - 1912", "page_number": 273, "title": "CO129-396 - Public Offices - 1912", "content_text": "## 18 \n\nThe difficulties of a situation in which the representatives of only a few Powers were endeavouring to deal with matters some of which were of universal concern. We also observed that the French Delegation would, for the reasons stated in paragraph 65, propose to place administrative ordinances on the same footing as laws with reference to conditions (5) to (7), and that we must admit the justice of this proposal.\n\n77. The committee accepted our amendments (with the small change of two months into three in regard to clause 4 above) and also that of the French Delegation; and at the nineteenth session (15th January) the chairman of the Drafting Committee put the scheme before the conference as the best method of reconciling the differences of view indicated in his speech at the eighteenth session. The scheme was received with general favour, although at this stage several of the delegations, our own included, could not definitely commit themselves to its acceptance pending instructions from their Governments. The delegations which had reserved their acceptance of the scheme when first put forward, in due course received the assent of their Governments to its adoption, and the scheme has formed the basis, with some verbal modifications, of articles 22-24 of the convention.\n\n78. At the nineteenth session the final protocol as revised by the Drafting Committee, was also accepted on first reading.\n\n79. At the twentieth session (16th January) the German delegation brought forward the amendments to the morphine and cocaine articles of which preliminary mention has been made in paragraph 70 above. We had had a meeting with the German delegates on the subject on the 9th January, at which they had explained to us, as they now proceeded to do to the full conference, that on returning to Berlin for the Christmas recess and discussing matters with their Government, it had been found that the categorical form in which the original articles were drawn up was not suited to the constitution and conditions of the Empire, for while the convention would have to be ratified by the Reichstag, so becoming a part of the German law, the matters with which these articles dealt were, for the most part, within the sphere not of the Imperial Government or legislature, but of the individual States. The Bundesrat was accordingly not likely to put before the Reichstag, or was the latter likely to ratify, articles which would thus encroach upon State autonomy. The German delegates further explained to us that in a number of the individual States the method of controlling chemical or dangerous industries was not by licensing, but simply by requiring notification to the authorities, who could then intervene if their intervention seemed called for. It was to suit this method that amendments in the wording of the old articles 10 and 11 were now proposed to be introduced.\n\n80. Having taken note of these considerations, we proceeded to discuss the amendments on their merits, and pointed out that we could not accept them as they stood, since they whittled down the original articles far too much.\n\nIn the original German draft of the amended articles the categorical terms \"limiteront,\" \"exigeront,\" &c., had been replaced by such formulae as \"auront soin, dans la mesure du possible, de faire contrôler, exiger,\" &c. Further, whereas the original article 10 laid down that the manufacture of morphine, cocaine, &c., should only take place in premises specially set apart for the purpose, the German amendment merely provided that the authorities should take note of such premises. Again, whereas the original article 11 required producers of, and dealers in, the drugs in question to obtain a licence, the German amendment allowed them, as an alternative, merely to apprise the authorities that they were embarking on these operations, and this alternative was placed first as if to show that it would be the more usual course.\n\n81. After considerable discussion it was provisionally agreed that:\n\n(1.) Instead of such expressions as \"auront soin, dans la mesure du possible,\" the word employed should be the equivalent of the English \"will use their best endeavours,\" or of the German \"nach Möglichkeit darauf Bedacht nehmen.\"\n\nWe proposed \"s'efforceront\" as the proper French equivalent, and our German colleagues, though at first reluctant to accept this rendering, on the ground that it seemed to imply an undesirable amount of coercion, ultimately, after several meetings, agreed to it.\n\n(2.) As regards original article 10, the former provisions should stand, provided that, as an alternative, Governments which so desired might simply keep themselves informed of the premises in which manufacture was carried on, and maintain a register of them.\n\n(3.) As regards original article 11 again, the licensing method should come first, with an official notification to the authorities as an alternative.\n\n## 19 \n\n## 270 \n\n82. The final result of our conferences with the German delegates will be seen from the text of the German amendments as actually presented to the conference which is given below. It represents the substance of what we provisionally agreed to on the 9th January, with some verbal modifications subsequently arrived at:\n\n(Old Article 13.)\n\n**ARTICLE 10.**\n\n\"The contracting Powers shall use their best endeavours to cause to be controlled all persons manufacturing, importing, selling, distributing, and exporting morphine, cocaine, and their respective salts, as well as the buildings in which these manufacturers and traders carry on such industry or trade.\n\nTo this end, the contracting Powers shall use their best endeavours to take the following measures:\n\n(Old Article 10.)\n\n\"(a.) Limit to the sole establishments and premises which have been designated for this purpose the manufacture of morphine, cocaine, and their respective salts, or inform themselves in which establishments and premises morphine, cocaine, and their respective salts are manufactured, and keep a register of them.\n\n## 14 \n\n(Old Article 11.)\n\n(b) Require all those who manufacture, import, sell, distribute, and export morphine, cocaine, and their respective salts to obtain a permit to carry out these operations, or give official notice to the authorities.\n\n(Old Article 12.)\n\n(c) Require these manufacturers and traders to record in their books the quantities manufactured, imports, sales, any other transfer, and exports of morphine, cocaine, and their respective salts. This rule shall not necessarily apply to prescriptions and sales made by duly authorised pharmacists.\n\n**ARTICLE 11** (Old Article 14).\n\n\"The contracting Powers shall prohibit in their internal trade any transfer of morphine, cocaine, and their respective salts to unauthorised persons.\n\n**ARTICLE 12** (Old Article 15).\n\n\"The contracting Powers, taking into account the differences in their conditions, shall use their best endeavours to restrict the importation of morphine, cocaine, and their respective salts to authorised persons.\n\n**ARTICLE 13** (Old Article 16).\n\n\"The contracting Powers shall use their best endeavours to take measures to ensure that the exportation of morphine, cocaine, and their respective salts from their countries, colonies, and leased territories to the countries, colonies, and leased territories of the other contracting Powers takes place only in cases where the recipient has received a permit issued in accordance with the laws of the importing country authorising the importation of these drugs.\n\nTo this end, any Government may from time to time provide the Governments of exporting countries with information regarding persons to whom import permits for morphine, cocaine, and their respective salts have been issued.\"\n\n(Old Article 18.)\n\n(Translation.)\n\n**ARTICLE 10.**\n\n| English | French |\n| --- | --- |\n| The contracting Powers shall use their best endeavours to cause to be controlled all persons manufacturing, importing, selling, distributing, and exporting morphine, cocaine, and their respective salts, as well as the buildings in which these manufacturers and traders carry on such industry or trade. | Les Puissances contractantes s'efforceront de faire contrôler tous ceux qui fabriquent, importent, vendent, distribuent et exportent la morphine, la cocaïne et leurs sels respectifs, ainsi que les bâtiments où ces fabricants et commerçants exercent cette industrie ou ce commerce. |", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-396 - Public Offices - 1912.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 440939, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-396 - Public Offices - 1912", "page_number": 275, "title": "CO129-396 - Public Offices - 1912", "content_text": "## 22\n\naux établissements des Détroits, à Hong Kong et à Wei-hai Wei, sous tous les rapports, de la même façon qu'il s'appliqueront au Royaume-Uni de Grande-Bretagne et d'Irlande; mais le Gouvernement de Sa Majesté se réserve le droit de signer ou de dénoncer séparément ladite convention ou nom de toute dominion, colonie, dépendance et protectorat de Sa Majesté outre que ceux qui ont été spécifiés.”* \n\nThis declaration was appended as a reserve when we signed the convention. 89. The Portuguese delegates also made the declaration that in signing the convention, they desired it to be understood-- \n\n(1) That the stipulations of the convention would not affect those of existing treaties, conventions, or agreements to which Portugal was a party, or any advantages which she obtained by most-favoured-nation clauses. \n\n(2) That further action in regard to the limitation of the number of ports from which raw and prepared opium could be exported, with reference to articles 2 and 8 (a), could not be undertaken by Portugal, since Macao was already the only Portuguese port of export in the Far East. \n\n(3) That as regards the provisions of articles 4 and 8 (d), in regard to marking exported packages of raw or prepared opium so as to indicate the nature of their contents, the Portuguese Government reserved to itself the right of placing special marks on such packages in addition to any uniform marks that might be adopted as of international application. \n\nThe convention and the final protocol were read for the last time this session. 90. At the twenty-sixth and last session (23rd January) M. Brenier (France) notified the conference that he would place against his signature the words - \n\n“Sous réserve d'une ratification, ou d'une dénonciation, éventuellement séparée et spéciale, en ce qui concerne les protectorats français.\" (With the proviso that, in the case of the French protectorate, the ratification, or denunciation, may be a separate and special act.) \n\n91. Some discussion had taken place at the two previous sessions in regard to the publication of the convention, and it was now indicated by the Netherlands delegation that his Excellency M. de Marees van Swinderen, as Dutch Foreign Minister and honorary president of the conference, was of opinion that it might be published immediately after signature—a course which was accordingly adopted. \n\n92. After the minutes of previous sessions which had still to undergo this process had been ratified, M. Cremer (Netherlands) proposed a vote of thanks to Bishop Brent, as president of the conference, which was seconded by M. von Müller (Germany) and by M. Sanches de Miranda (Portugal); and after valedictory addresses by the president and honorary president (M. van Swinderen), the conference was declared closed, and the delegates plenipotentiaries proceeded to sign the convention and the final protocol. \n\n93. In signing the convention, reservations were made, as already indicated, by our own delegation in regard to separate ratification or denunciation in respect of any portion of His Majesty's dominions, colonies, dependencies, or protectorates other than the United Kingdom, India, Ceylon, Straits Settlements, Hong Kong, and Wei-hai Wei; similarly by the French delegation in regard to French protectorates; by the delegates of Persia and Siam in regard to articles 15 to 19; and by the Persian delegate alone in regard to article 3 (a). \n\n94. We may now fittingly consider how far, and with what extension, the recommendations contained in the resolutions of the Shanghai Commission of 1909 have found place in the present convention. \n\nThe first of the Shanghai resolutions was as follows:— \n\n\"That the International Opium Commission recognises the unswerving sincerity of the Government of China in their efforts to eradicate the production and consumption of opium throughout the Empire; the increasing body of public opinion among their own subjects by which these efforts are being supported; and the real, though unequal, progress already made in a task which is one of the greatest magnitude.\" \n\n* (TRANSLATION).--\"We declare that the articles of the present convention, if ratified by His Britannic Majesty's Government, shall apply to the Government of British India, Ceylon, the Straits Settlements, Hong Kong, and Wei-hai Wei in every respect in the same way as they shall apply to the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland; but His Britannic Majesty's Government reserve the right of signing or denouncing separately the said convention in the name of any dominion, colony, dependency, or protectorate of His Majesty other than those which have been specified.” \n\n## 23\n\nThe good faith of the Chinese Government was of course assumed by the conference. \n\n95. The second of the Shanghai resolutions was as follows: \"That in view of the action taken by the Government of China in suppressing the practice of opium-smoking, and by other Governments to the same end, the International Opium Commission recommends that each delegation concerned move its own Government to take measures for the gradual suppression of the practice of opium-smoking in its own territories and possessions, with due regard to the varying circumstances of each country concerned.\" \n\nThis policy has found place in article 6 of the convention, which extends the policy of effective suppression to the production, internal distribution, and use of prepared opium. It was recognised that such policy could, in the case of some countries, be only of gradual application, and that the repressive measures contemplated must be suitable to the varying circumstances of the countries concerned. \n\n96. The third of the Shanghai resolutions was as follows: \n\n\"That the International Opium Commission finds that the use of opium in any form otherwise than for medical purposes is held by almost every participating country to be a matter for prohibition or for careful regulation; and that each country in the administration of its system of regulation purports to be aiming, as opportunity offers, at progressively increasing stringency. In recording these conclusions, the International Opium Commission recognises the wide variations between the conditions prevailing in the different countries, but it would urge on the attention of the Governments concerned the desirability of a re-examination of their systems of regulation in the light of the experience of other countries dealing with the same problem.\" \n\nRead with the resolution preceding it, this resolution was meant to apply mainly to raw opium primarily used for eating, and this matter is dealt with in article 1 of the convention. \n\n97. We may point out, with reference to resolutions 2 and 3 of the Shanghai Commission, that-- \n\n| Resolution Point | Description |\n| --- | --- |\n| (1) | Article 20 of the convention pledges the contracting Powers to investigate the possibility of making penal regulations against the illegal possession of opium and other drugs dealt with by the convention, if such measures have not already been taken. |\n| (2) | The first part of article 17, and article 18, impose upon the contracting Powers having treaties with China the obligation (a) of taking measures to restrict and control opium-smoking in their leased territories and settlements in China; and (b) of gradually restricting, pari passu with Chinese action in the territories adjoining, the number of shops for the sale of opium, which may still exist in such leased territories, &c. They are also to adopt such effective measures in these leased territories for the restriction and control of the retail trade in opium generally. |\n\n98. The fourth resolution of the Shanghai Commission was as follows: \"That the International Opium Commission finds that each Government represented has strict laws which are aimed directly or indirectly to prevent the smuggling of opium, its alkaloids, derivatives, and preparations into their respective territories; in the judgment of the International Opium Commission it is also the duty of all countries to adopt reasonable measures to prevent at ports of departure the shipment of opium, its alkaloids, derivatives, and preparations, to any country which prohibits the entry of any opium, its alkaloids, derivatives, and preparations.\" \n\n99. Putting aside for the moment alkaloids and derivatives of opium, as being more suitable for discussion in connection with the Commission's resolution 5, the policy here suggested in regard to raw and prepared opium has been carried into effect, with a far wider scope, in articles 2-5 and 7-8 of the convention. These articles lay down that--- \n\n| Article Point | Description |\n| --- | --- |\n| (1) | The prohibition of exportation of raw or prepared opium to a country which prohibits the entry of such opium shall be of a general character, and not merely confined to seaports. (Articles 3 (a) and 8 (b)) |\n| (2) | Where a country has not altogether prohibited the entry of such opium, but desires to place such entry under special restrictions, the exporting country shall co-operate in the enforcement of these restrictions, as, for instance, has been done by India in regard to China (Articles 3 (b) and 8 (c)). |", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-396 - Public Offices - 1912.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 444193, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-403 - Governor Sir May Acting Governor Claud Severn - 1913 [8-10]", "page_number": 190, "title": "CO129-403 - Governor Sir May Acting Governor Claud Severn - 1913 [8-10]", "content_text": "## Enclosure \n\n`32182` \n**RIC** \nREG: 15 SEP 13 \n\nHon. Colonial Secretary, \n\nArticles 1 and 2 of the Convention signed at Paris on the 4th May, 1910, are those which define the nature of the specific offences condemned by the Convention signed at Paris on the 4th May, 1910; but they must be read in connection with clauses a, b, c, and d of the final Protocol of the same date if they are to be clearly understood, and of these clause (b) is the most important. Article 1 deals with the procuring, enticing or leading away of a woman or girl under age for immoral purposes even with her consent. Article 2 deals with the procuring, enticing or leading away by fraud, violence, threats, abuse of authority or any other method of compulsion of a woman or girl over age for immoral purposes. By clause (b) of the final Protocol, a woman or girl under age means a woman or girl under 20 completed years of age, and similarly a woman or girl over age refers to a woman or girl over 20 completed years of age. It should be observed that both Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention state that offenders should be punished notwithstanding that the various Acts constituting the offence may have been committed in different countries. With regard to the punishment, clause (c) of the Convention provides that at any rate imprisonment shall form part of the penalty. With regard to the punishment of the offences designated though the various Acts constituting the offence may have been committed in different countries, I do not imagine that it is intended that local legislation should specifically state this decision of the Convention, and I am inclined to assume (although I may not be correct) that the form and the language which the legislation of Great Britain, for example, has taken is sufficient to include offences committed under circumstances there in Great Britain apparent and adequate to avoid either the necessity for obtaining evidence of the commission in other countries of parts of the Acts constituting an offence (broadly defined in the first and second articles in the Convention) or to prevent an evasion of punishment by an individual who may commit different parts of the offence.", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-403 - Governor Sir May Acting Governor Claud Severn - 1913 [8-10].txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 444194, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-403 - Governor Sir May Acting Governor Claud Severn - 1913 [8-10]", "page_number": 191, "title": "CO129-403 - Governor Sir May Acting Governor Claud Severn - 1913 [8-10]", "content_text": "# OCR Proofread Text\n\n(broadly defined in Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention) within different jurisdictions; or in other words I assume that the legislation in Great Britain is regarded as ample to meet the requirements of Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention. It should also here be noticed that under clause (a) of the final Protocol, the requirements of Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention are only to be regarded as a minimum. Clause (d) of the final Protocol points out that the question of detention of women in brothels is essentially a matter for local internal legislation.\n\n2.\n\nIt would naturally not be concluded that the broad principles enunciated in Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention could possibly be carried into effect by one or even a few simple clauses in local legislation, and it will be noticed that in the Secretary of State's Despatch now under consideration, it is stated that the relative legislation is in Great Britain found to be contained in\n\n(a) The Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1885,\n(b) The Vagrancy Act, 1898.\n(c) The Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1912.\n\nIf a comparison is made between the provisions of these enactments and of those of the enactments which obtain in Hong Kong, it will be found that this Colony possesses already very similar and in some respects even more rigid legislation than that which obtains in Great Britain. I have made a rough Table of comparison which I put up marked Blue \"A\" and without going into detail I may say that the only substantial differences between the British and Local legislation are as follows:\n\n| Description | Great Britain | Hong Kong | Protocol Minimum |\n| --- | --- | --- | --- |\n| (1). The age of the female affected by an offence which would directly fall under the provisions of Article 1 of the Convention as explained by clause (b) of the first Protocol is | 21 years | 18 | 20 |\n| (2). In the Penal sections of the English law dealing with defilement of young girls, such offence is divided into two categories for which punishments vary in severity. | | | |", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-403 - Governor Sir May Acting Governor Claud Severn - 1913 [8-10].txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 444208, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-403 - Governor Sir May Acting Governor Claud Severn - 1913 [8-10]", "page_number": 205, "title": "CO129-403 - Governor Sir May Acting Governor Claud Severn - 1913 [8-10]", "content_text": "## Enclosure 7, C.O.\n\nHon. Colonial Secretary, \n32182 \nREC \nArticles 1 & 15, SEP 13 \n206 \n\nThe Articles of the Convention signed at Paris on the 4th May, 1910, are those which define the nature of the specific offences condemned by the Convention signed at Paris on 4th May, 1910; but they must be read in connection with clause 8 (a), (b), (c), and (d) of the final Protocol of the same date if they are to be clearly understood, and of these clause (b) is the most important. Article 1 deals with the procuring, enticing, or leading away of a woman or girl under age for immoral purposes even with her consent. Article 2 deals with the procuring, enticing or leading away by fraud, violence, threats, abuse of authority or any other method of compulsion of a woman or girl over age for immoral purposes. By clause (b) of the final Protocol, a woman or girl under age means a woman or girl under 20 completed years of age, and similarly a woman or girl over age refers to a woman or girl over 20 completed years of age. It should be observed that both Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention state that offenders should be punished notwithstanding that the various acts constituting the offence may have been committed in different countries. With regard to the punishment, clause (c) of the Convention provides that at any rate imprisonment shall form part of the penalty.\n\nWith regard to the punishment of the offences designated, though the various acts constituting the offence may have been committed in different countries, I do not imagine that it is intended that local legislation should specifically state this decision of the Convention, and I am inclined to assume (although I may not be correct) that the form and the language which the legislation of Great Britain, for example, has taken is sufficient to include offences committed under circumstances, i.e., in Great Britain apparent and adequate to avoid either the necessity for obtaining evidence of the commission in other countries of parts of the acts constituting an offence (broadly defined in the first and second articles in the Convention) or to prevent an evasion of punishment by an individual who may commit different parts of the offence...", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-403 - Governor Sir May Acting Governor Claud Severn - 1913 [8-10].txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 444209, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-403 - Governor Sir May Acting Governor Claud Severn - 1913 [8-10]", "page_number": 206, "title": "CO129-403 - Governor Sir May Acting Governor Claud Severn - 1913 [8-10]", "content_text": "## OS 207\n\n(broadly defined in Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention) within different jurisdictions; or in other words I assume that the legislation in Great Britain is regarded as ample to meet the requirements of Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention. It should also here be noticed that under clause (a) of the final Protocol, the requirements of Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention are only to be regarded as a minimum. Clause (d) of the final Protocol points out that the question of detention of women in brothels is essentially a matter for local internal legislation.\n\n2.\n\nIt would naturally have been concluded that the broad principles enunciated in Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention could possibly be carried into effect by one or even a few simple clauses in local legislation, and it will be noticed that in the Secretary of State's Despatch now under consideration, it is stated that the relative legislation is in Great Britain found to be contained in\n\n(a) The Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1885.\n(b) The Vagrancy Act, 1898.\n(c) The Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1912.\n\nIf a comparison is made between the provisions of these enactments and of those of the enactments which obtain in Hong Kong, it will be found that this Colony possesses already very similar, in some respects even more rigid legislation than that which obtains in Great Britain. I have made a rough table of comparison which I put up marked Blue \"A\" and without going into detail I may say that the only substantial differences between the British and Local legislation are as follows:-\n\n| Difference | Great Britain | Hong Kong | Protocol |\n| --- | --- | --- | --- |\n| (1). The age of the female affected by an offence | 21 years | 18 | 20 as a minimum |\n| (2). Classification of defilement of young girls | Divided into two categories for which punishments vary in severity | | |\n\nIn the Penal sections of the English law dealing with defilement of young girls, such offence is divided into two categories for which punishments vary in severity.", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-403 - Governor Sir May Acting Governor Claud Severn - 1913 [8-10].txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 445176, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-405 - Public Offices - 1913", "page_number": 250, "title": "CO129-405 - Public Offices - 1913", "content_text": "**CONFIDENTIAL**\n\n## OPIUM\n\n### No. 1\n\nFebruary 7\n\n#### SECTION 1\n\nSeñor de Villa Urrutia to Sir Edward Grey.--(Received February 7.)\n\n(Translation.)\n\nYour Excellency,\n\nSpanish Embassy, London, February 4, 1913.\n\nUnder instructions from my Government, I have the honour to inform you as follows:-\n\nIn accordance with the clause contained in the final protocol of the International Opium Conference, held at The Hague from the 1st December, 1911, to the 23rd January, 1912, to the effect that the attention of the International Postal Union should be called to the necessity of regulating the dispatch by post of opium, morphine, and cocaine, instructions have been given both to the Central Postal and Telegraph Administration, and to the other postal authorities concerned, to look into the matter and to take action in accordance with the views expressed at the International Opium Conference.\n\nI have, &c.\n\nVILLA URRUTIA", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-405 - Public Offices - 1913.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 445774, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-406 - Public Offices - 1913", "page_number": 245, "title": "CO129-406 - Public Offices - 1913", "content_text": "[This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.]\n\nOPIUM.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL.\n\n[37744]\n\nNo. 1.\n\n[August 15.]\n\nSECTION 1.\n\nM. van der Goes to Sir Edward Grey.-(Received August 15.)\n\nLégation des Pays-Bas, Londres, M. le Secrétaire d'État,\n\nle 12 août, 1913.\n\nCONFORMÉMENT aux instructions que je viens de recevoir, j'ai l'honneur de transmettre ci-joint à votre Excellence un exemplaire du protocole de clôture de la deuxième Conférence internationale de l'Opium, 1913, en ajoutant que la copie certifiée conforme, mentionnée à la dernière alinéa de ce document suivra plus tard.\n\nPour satisfaire aux résolutions de ladite Conférence, énumérées dans ce protocole, le Ministre des Affaires Étrangères à La Haye a fait des démarches pressantes auprès des Gouvernements austro-hongrois, norvégien et suisse afin de les persuader à procéder à la signature de la Convention internationale de l'Opium de 1912, et je viens d'être chargé par mon Gouvernement de prier le Gouvernement de Sa Majesté britannique de vouloir bien appuyer ces démarches en conformité avec le contenu de l'alinéa 4 de 2 du protocole de clôture mentionné ci-dessus.\n\nJe me permets encore d'ajouter que les Gouvernements de Suède et d'Uruguay ont consenti à procéder à la signature de la Convention, que le Pérou a déjà signé, tandis que des démarches auprès des États du Balkans seront faites dans un bref délai.\n\nVeuillez, &c.\n\nVAN DER GOES.\n\nEnclosure in No. 1.\n\nFinal Protocol of the Second International Opium Conference.\n\nLA deuxième Conférence internationale de l'Opium, convoquée par le Gouvernement des Pays-Bas en vertu de l'article 23 de la Convention internationale de l'Opium, s'est réunie à La Haye, dans le Palais des Comtes, le 1er juillet, 1913.\n\nLes Gouvernements, dont l'énumération suit, ont pris part à la Conférence, pour laquelle ils avaient désigné les délégués nominés ci-après :-\n\nL'Allemagne :\n\nSon Excellence M. Felix de Müller, Conseiller intime actuel, Envoyé extraordinaire et Ministre plénipotentiaire à La Haye, Délégué.\n\nLes États-Unis d'Amérique :\n\nM. le Dr. Hamilton Wright, Commissaire spécial au Département d'Etat, Délégué ; Son Excellence M. Lloyd Bryce, Envoyé extraordinaire et Ministre plénipotentiaire à La Haye, Délégué ;\n\nM. Gerrit John Kollen, Président émérite du Hope College, Professeur de Mathématiques, Délégué.\n\nLa République argentine:\n\nM. le Dr. François de Veyga, Délégué.\n\nLa Belgique :\n\nSon Excellence M. le Baron Alberic Fallon, Envoyé extraordinaire et Ministre plénipotentiaire à La Haye, Délégué.\n\nLes États-Unis du Brésil :\n\nSon Excellence M. J. Graça Aranha, Envoyé extraordinaire et Ministre plénipotentiaire à La Haye, Délégué.\n\nLe Chili:\n\nSon Excellence M. Jorje Huneeus, Envoyé extraordinaire et Ministre plénipotentiaire à Bruxelles et La Haye, Délégué.\n\n[1836 p-1]", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-406 - Public Offices - 1913.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 445809, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-406 - Public Offices - 1913", "page_number": 280, "title": "CO129-406 - Public Offices - 1913", "content_text": "SECOND PLENARY SESSION.\n\nWednesday, July 2, 1913.\n\nPresidency of Mr. J. T. Cremer.\n\nThe President took the chair at 2.30 p.m.\n\nAll the Delegations were present except that of the Dominican Republic.\n\nThe President read the following telegram which Her Majesty the Queen of the Netherlands had been pleased to address to him in reply to the message of the Conference:\n\n\"I am happy to see at The Hague the representatives of the Nations assembled for the Second International Opium Conference. While thanking you, Mr. President, for the sentiments you have interpreted, I express to you my good wishes for the humanitarian goal of the Conference.\n\nWILHELMINA.”\n\nThe President: My proposal is to take the rules for the first Conference also for this Conference, with the understanding that what is superfluous in them we can leave aside.\n\nThe proposal was carried unanimously.\n\nThe rules read as follows:\n\nRule I.\n\nThe International Opium Conference is composed of all the Delegates of the Powers which have signed the International Opium Convention of January 23, 1912 or the additional Protocol for the non-signatory Powers and have accepted the invitation of the Government of the Queen of the Netherlands.\n\nRule II.\n\nAfter organizing its Bureau, the Conference shall discuss in pleno the way in which the program shall be drawn up. The Conference, if necessary, shall appoint Committees to study the questions submitted to it.\n\nThe Plenipotentiaries of the Powers are free to register on the lists of these Committees according their own convenience, and to appoint technical Delegates to take part therein.\n\nRule III.\n\nEach Committee shall appoint a Chairman, a Secretary and a Reporter.\n\nRule IV.\n\nA drafting Committee for the purpose of coordinating the acts adopted by the Conference and preparing them in their final form shall also be appointed by the Conference at the beginning of its labors.\n\nRule V.\n\nThe Delegates are all authorized to take part in the deliberations at the plenary sessions of the Conference as well as in the Committees of which they form part. The members of one and the same Delegation may mutually replace one another.\n\nRule VI.\n\nMembers of the Conference attending the meetings of Committees of which they are not members, are not entitled to take part in the deliberations without special authorization of the Chairmen of the Committees.\n\nRule VII.\n\nWhen a vote is taken, each Delegation shall have only one vote. The vote shall be taken by roll-call in the alphabetical order of the Powers represented.\n\nRule VIII.\n\nEvery resolution or motion proposed for discussion by the Conference must, as a general rule, be delivered in writing to the President, and be printed and distributed before being taken up for discussion.\n\nThe resolution referred to in the present rule is one of such character as is destined to form the subject of international agreement and consequently to require a careful study beforehand; and does not include a resolution offered in the course of the sitting of the Conference for transaction of business.\n\nSuch proposals cannot be voted on during the same session, without the unanimous consent of all the Delegations.\n\nRule IX.\n\nA Committee of three Delegates shall be appointed by the Conference to which shall be entrusted the duty of making communications to the Press.\n\nRule X.\n\nThe minutes of the plenary sessions of the Conference and of the Committees shall give a succinct résumé of the deliberations. A proof copy of them shall be delivered with as little delay as possible to the members of the Conference; they need not be read at the beginning of the sessions except by the request of a Delegate.\n\nEach Delegate shall have a right to request the insertion in full of his official declarations according to the text delivered by him to the Secretary, and to make observations regarding the minutes.\n\nThe reports of the Committees shall be printed and distributed before they are taken up for discussion.\n\nRule XI.\n\nFrench shall be the official language of the Conference, and the minutes shall be recorded in this language. However other languages may be used in the Conference.\n\nThis rule shall not exclude the delivery of a translation to those Delegates who desire to receive documents in any other language.\n\n1\n\n279", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-406 - Public Offices - 1913.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 445815, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-406 - Public Offices - 1913", "page_number": 286, "title": "CO129-406 - Public Offices - 1913", "content_text": "20\n\nHis Exe. Mr. Marcellin Pellet proposed that instead of discussing the proposed resolution which had just been deposited and with which the members of the Conference were familiar, this proposition be put immediately to vote. The members who had objections might advance them while voting.\n\nThe proposed resolution was put to vote and unanimously adopted.\n\nHis Exe. Mr. Ferreira justified his affirmative vote in the following words: Mr. President! I am in accord with the proposition presented by His Excellency the First Delegate of Germany on behalf of the Delegations of Germany, the United States of America, France, Great Britain, the Netherlands, and Russia, because it is conceived in the same spirit that prompted the observations made at the third meeting of the First Opium Conference on December 7, 1911, which were made because so few nations were represented at a Conference whose aim was generally humanitarian.\n\nThese observations have borne fruit, for a new Article 22 was inserted in the Convention by which an invitation was addressed to the nations which were not represented at the First Conference, with the object of inducing them to lend their support and I note with pleasure that this resolution is only an amplification, so to speak, of the article to which I have just referred.\n\nNow the statements to which I have just alluded were made in the First Conference by the Delegations of Persia, France, and the one of which I had the honor to form part. This is why I not only support the proposition which has been submitted to you, but do so with the greatest enthusiasm and pleasure.\n\nThe President considered that unanimous adoption of the resolution would contribute considerably to the efficacy of the proposals which the Government of the Netherlands, under this resolution, would make to the Powers who have not yet signed the Convention. He believed that he voiced the sentiment of the entire Conference in expressing his sincere thanks to the Delegates who, in formulating this resolution, had notably facilitated the humanitarian work of the Conference.\n\nThe PRESIDENT believed that, upon the adoption of this resolution, the principal task of the Conference appeared to have been accomplished: the Government of the Netherlands now knew in what manner it should proceed. Nevertheless, the question arises: what should be done if, as a result of the measures which the Government of the Netherlands should take, only a part of the Powers who had not yet signed the Convention should decide to do so. Would it be necessary again to convoke a Conference of the Signatory Powers, in accordance with the provisions of Article 23, in order to examine the possibility of depositing ratifications? Article 23 of the Convention deals only with the action that the Government of the Netherlands has taken in accordance with the second paragraph of Article 22 of said Convention. Is it the wish of the Conference that Article 23 should be considered applicable to the steps that the Government of the Netherlands proposes to take? Shall the same apply to the last paragraphs of Articles 22 and 23, prescribing that the Government of the Netherlands shall each month inform the Signatory Powers of each additional signature and of each ratification that it may receive, or shall this Government, while informing the Signatory Powers of the new adherents, request ratification through diplomatic channels? These are the questions that present themselves and which should be determined in order that the Government of the Queen may determine its procedure in case there should remain some nations who refuse to sign the Convention in spite of its efforts in this direction. The speaker proposed that the Editing Committee undertake to examine these questions with the assistance, should the Committee deem it advisable, of those Delegates who might be willing to cooperate, and formulate a resolution which should be discussed and, upon its adoption by the Conference, embodied in the \"Protocol de Clôture\".\n\n21\n\nHis Exe. Mr. Swétchine believed it inadvisable at present to determine upon a plan of procedure in a situation which did not yet exist.\n\nIn case the procedure of the Government of the Netherlands did not meet with complete success and should it prove impossible to induce certain of the Powers to adhere, the time would then be opportune to decide the question. At this moment the Netherlands Government should ask the Signatory Powers whether they wished to ratify notwithstanding the abstentions, or whether they considered it necessary to call another Conference. Such a decision seemed to him to be premature at this moment.\n\nThe President: It is for this reason that I would like to open the discussion of this question. The Editing Committee will profit by the discussion and formulate a well-prepared proposition in accord with the Delegates who will kindly assist them.\n\nHis Exc. Mr. Yen said: Mr. President. I have the honor to call your attention to our interpretation of the 2nd paragraph of Art. 23 of the Opium Convention; the last part of this paragraph defines the duties of Delegates to this Conference. They are to come to The Hague to examine into the possibility of nevertheless depositing their ratifications.\n\nWe beg to submit that if we scatter now or next week without providing a way whereby we may reassemble and make a final decision, we should be acting against the letter and spirit of the foregoing paragraph. The paragraph in question predicates or assumes a possibility of the deposit of ratifications, but the possibility is one requiring examination. Hence the Conference. But possible or impossible, the question, it seems to us, must be fully examined and decided at this, the second, Conference. The Convention does not provide for a 3rd or 4th or 5th Conference.\n\nWe beg to submit that, individually, the nations here represented have declared their ability or inability to ratify, and it is most gratifying that a very large majority voted in the affirmative when the question was put. But collectively and as a Conference, with all due deference, we beg to submit that we have not yet completely discharged our duty outlined in Art. 23. The excellent resolution proposed by the German, the American, the British, the Dutch, the French, and the Russian Delegations is a long step taken to increase the possibility of ratification, for which we all are exceedingly grateful, but after the replies are received from the countries, the possibility of ratification must again be examined according to Art. 23. To put it bluntly, it is to be decided at this Conference whether the solemn compact, originally signed by 12 Powers, and subsequently signed by 22 more, whose number is now to be still further increased, is to be enforced as the will of the civilised Powers, or is to be shelved or thrown into the waste basket.\n\nWe venture to submit that the second alternative is unthinkable. We must, therefore, devise measures to make the possibility of ratification a fact.\n\nPersonally, we are as anxious as any other Delegation to resume our normal duties, and we beg to suggest that the Conference do take a recess. In the meantime, the resolutions will have been forwarded to the Governments concerned and very likely definite replies will soon be received.\n\nNow I believe that near the end of next month, the formal dedication of the Peace Palace will take place. The majority of us present will no doubt be invited to come, and it seems to us that the recess may very well end at that date. We feel assured that at that time the Conference will as a body be in a position to say conscientiously that we have fully examined the question and found it possible to ratify. We can think of no happier combination of events than the opening of the Peace Palace and the unanimous ratification of the International Opium Convention.\n\nHis Exc. Mr. Jorge Huneeus did not believe it wise to fix a date at present. It did not seem possible for the Netherlands Government to conclude...\n\n285", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-406 - Public Offices - 1913.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 445935, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-406 - Public Offices - 1913", "page_number": 406, "title": "CO129-406 - Public Offices - 1913", "content_text": "This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.\n\n404\n\nOPIUM.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL.\n\n[46293]\n\nNo. 1.\n\nC.O\n\n40958\n\nRECE\n\nREG! 27 NOV 13 [October 16.]\n\nSECTION 1.\n\nCircular Letter addressed to His Majesty's Representatives at Vienna (No. 186),* Athens (No. 125), Cettinjé (No. 26), Christiania (No. 26), Bucharest (No. 32), and Belgrade (No. 67).\n\nSir,\n\nForeign Office, October 16, 1913.\n\nI TRANSMIT to you herewith a copy of the International Opium Convention signed at The Hague on the 23rd January, 1912,† and also a copy of a resolution passed by the Second Opium Conference and embodied in the Final Protocol signed on the 9th July, 1913, in regard to the measures to be adopted to induce those Governments which have hitherto either refused or failed to adhere to the convention, to alter their attitude and sign the convention without further delay.\n\nYou will see from a perusal of the enclosed resolution that the Netherland Government will take the first step in making the fresh representations to the Government to which you are accredited, and I have to instruct you to communicate with your Netherland colleague with a view to lending him your support, if possible in concert with the representatives of the other Governments who signed the Final Protocol of the 9th July, 1913.\n\nWith a view to assist you in explaining to the Government to which you are accredited the urgent necessity for their co-operation in the humanitarian work of the convention, and to enable you to meet objections which may be raised by them, I enclose a memorandum § dealing with the question of the international regulation of the trade in opium, morphine, cocaine, and kindred drugs, which proves clearly how necessary it is to obtain international co-operation if the Convention of the 23rd January, 1912, is to prove really effective.\n\nIt is proposed to hold another meeting of the Opium Conference early next year, and it is urgently hoped that before then affirmative replies may be received from the few non-adhering Governments. I have to request you therefore to lose no time in carrying out these instructions, and to report to me as soon as you can the result of the action taken by you and your colleagues.\n\nA similar communication has been addressed to His Majesty's representatives at Berne, Constantinople, Athens, Cettinjé, Christiania, Bucharest, Belgrade, and Vienna.\n\nI am, &c.\n\nE. GREY.\n\n* Similar despatch to Berne (No. 28) and Constantinople (No. 828) on October 7.\n\n† \"Opium\" Print, July 8, Section 2.\n\n† Opium Convention of 1912.\n\n§ Not printed.\n\n[1903 -1]", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-406 - Public Offices - 1913.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 445960, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-406 - Public Offices - 1913", "page_number": 431, "title": "CO129-406 - Public Offices - 1913", "content_text": "CONFIDENTIAL.\n\nJ\n\nSir,\n\nexi\n\nrojdne\n\n44948\n\n31\n\n429\n\nForeign Office, October 1, 1913.\n\nWE have the honour to transmit to you herewith the final protocol signed at The Hague on the 9th July by the delegates to the Second International Opium Conference, and also a volume containing the minutes of the sessions of the Conference. We desire further to take this opportunity of submitting a few remarks on the proceedings and results of the Conference.\n\nThe Conference was called together by the Netherland Government in accordance with the terms of the second paragraph of article 23 of the International Opium Convention, signed at The Hague on the 23rd January, 1912, which runs:\n\n\"In the event of the signature of all the Powers invited not having been obtained on the date of the 31st December, 1912, the Government of the Netherlands will immediately invite the Powers who have signed by that date to appoint delegates to examine at The Hague the possibility of depositing their ratifications notwithstanding.\"\n\nThe circumstances which led up to the summoning of the Conference, and the reasons which induced His Majesty's Government to accept with pleasure the invitation of the Netherland Government, are so clearly set out in the instructions which we had the honour to receive from you, that it seems unnecessary for us to do more than refer to them.\n\nThe Conference was opened on the 1st July by his Excellency Jonkheer de Marees van Swinderen, Netherland Minister for Foreign Affairs, who delivered a short speech of welcome to the delegates, in which he pointed out that the very fact of the assembling of this second Conference indicated that the issue contemplated by the convention had not been completely attained, inasmuch as of the Powers invited to sign the supplementary protocol all had not replied in the affirmative.\n\nAs a matter of fact, at the date of the opening of the Conference twenty-two Powers out of the thirty-four invited had signed, namely, the Argentine Republic, Belgium, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, the Republic of Cuba, Denmark, the Dominican Republic, the Republic of Ecuador, Guatemala, the Republic of Hayti, Honduras, Luxemburg, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panamá, Paraguay, Salvador, Spain, and the United States of Venezuela. These, with the twelve Powers who participated in the first Conference, made thirty-four Powers which had actually signed the convention, leaving only twelve, the signatures of which were still wanting, namely, Austria-Hungary, Bulgaria, Greece, Montenegro, Norway, Peru, Roumania, Servia, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, and Uruguay.\n\nOf the original signatory Powers all except Persia were represented at the second Conference, while of the twenty-two Powers who had signed the supplementary protocol of signature nine only were not represented, viz., Bolivia, the Republic of Cuba, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, Panamá, Paraguay, Salvador, and the United States of Venezuela. The countries, therefore, which actually sent delegates to the present Conference, and through them, were parties to the final protocol of the 9th July, 1913, were as follows: Argentine Republic, Belgium, Brazil, Chile, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, France, Germany, Great Britain, Hayti, Italy, Japan, Luxemburg, Mexico, the Netherlands, Portugal, Russia, Siam, Spain, and the United States of America, or exactly twice as many as were represented at the first Conference.\n\nThe proceedings at the first meeting of the Conference were purely formal. On the proposal of the French and German delegates, as being the senior members of the Diplomatic Body at The Hague appointed to represent their Governments at the Conference, M. Cremer, the senior Netherland delegate, was unanimously elected president. M. Cremer pronounced a speech in which he pointed out that the task\n\n\"Miscellaneous, No. 2 (1912),\"\n\n[\n\n4\n\n1", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-406 - Public Offices - 1913.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 445961, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-406 - Public Offices - 1913", "page_number": 432, "title": "CO129-406 - Public Offices - 1913", "content_text": "430\n\n2\n\nbefore the present Conference was far lighter than that with which the first Conference had found itself confronted, for while the latter had to formulate in a convention the principles which were to solve the international problem arising from the abuse of opium, morphine, and cocaine, the mission of the present Conference was limited to the question of ratification.\n\nA dutiful telegram was despatched to Her Majesty the Queen of the Netherlands, the honorary presidency of the Conference was offered to M. de Marees van Swinderen, the members of the secretariat were appointed, and it was decided that French should be the official language of the Conference, though the use of other languages would be permitted at the sessions, and the Conference then adjourned till the following afternoon. We would therefore beg to point out that the official minutes are to be found in the French text, and that the English version is only an unofficial summary of the minutes kindly prepared by the secretariat.\n\nAt the second session, after some further purely formal preliminaries had been disposed of and delegates had been appointed to serve on the Editing Committee (\"Comité de Rédaction\") and the Press Committee, the real work of the Conference was commenced. The president proposed, in view of the terms of article 23 of the convention directing an examination into the possibility of ratifying the Opium Convention, and with the object of ascertaining the intentions of the various Governments represented, to invite each delegation, in alphabetical order, to state whether its Government were prepared to proceed at once to ratification.\n\nEight delegations, namely, those of China, Costa Rica, Denmark, Ecuador, Italy, Luxemburg, Siam, and Spain, declared that their Governments were ready unconditionally to deposit their ratifications, the Italian delegate explaining that the ratification of his Government would cover the colonies of Erythrea, Somaliland, Tripoli, and Cyrene.\n\nMr. Shinobu, the Japanese delegate, declared that his Government had no objection in principle to depositing their ratification.\n\nSeven delegations, namely, those of Belgium, Brazil, Chile, Hayti, Mexico, the Netherlands, and the United States of America, declared that their Governments were ready to proceed to ratification, subject only to the statutory approval of their respective legislative bodies.\n\nThree delegates, those of the Argentine Republic, Colombia, and the Dominican Republic, were absent from the meeting.\n\nThe remaining delegations of the twenty-four constituting the Conference, only five in number, but including the representatives of countries so vitally interested as France, Germany, Great Britain, and Portugal, declared that for various reasons their respective Governments were not at present willing to proceed to the ratification of the Opium Convention.\n\nM. Pellet, the French delegate, explained that his Government were ready to ratify the convention as far as regards France proper, but not as regards French Indo-China, as on the one hand they wished to await the final decision of certain Powers which had not as yet signed the convention, but which were important as producers of opium and coca, and on the other hand they intended beforehand to examine carefully the efficacy of the measures which the Chinese Government proposed to adopt for the suppression of the cultivation of opium and for the prevention of the smuggling of opium over the frontier separating China from French Indo-China. At the fourth session M. Pellet supplemented this statement by reading a telegram from his Government to the effect that, on account of the contraband trade existing on its frontier, Indo-China was for the present unable to sign the convention in its entirety in respect of that colony, although almost all of its provisions were already being enforced, but that it was sincerely desirous of adopting, pari passu with the Chinese Government, further measures in order to eradicate the use of opium as soon as the situation in the southern provinces of China improved. This declaration on behalf of the French Government as regards their possessions in the Far East appears to us to be a matter of such importance that we have hesitated to include France among the countries which were ready to proceed to ratification.\n\nM. von Müller, the German delegate, after referring to the reasons which induced the first Conference to invite all the Powers of Europe and America not represented at that Conference to sign the convention and to make ratification dependent on the replies received, declared that the German Government, considering that ratification by only a proportion of the Powers interested would not achieve the full results aimed at, regretted that they were for the present unable to ratify the Opium Convention.\n\nOn being called on to declare whether His Majesty's Government were prepared to ratify the Opium Convention, we made a detailed statement (vide p. 12, English summary of minutes) based on our instructions, setting forth the reasons for which His Majesty's Government were unable to proceed to immediate ratification. We pointed out that the non-signature of the convention by certain countries, such as Austria-Hungary, Norway, Peru, and Switzerland, would seriously prejudice the effect of the measures proposed for checking the export of morphine and cocaine to the East, and that a not improbable result of the strict control to be exercised in the dominions of the signatory Powers over the manufacture of, and trade in, the drugs in question might be that in non-signatory countries new factories might be started and the output of existing factories increased. Moreover, non-signatory countries would be open to unrestricted importation of the drugs and their ports could be freely used for their illicit transmission to the Eastern consumer. The abstention of Peru would of itself be sufficient to render useless any effort to regulate the trade in cocaine. His Majesty's Government had therefore come to the conclusion that any attempt to suppress the illicit trade in morphine and cocaine would thus be seriously impeded unless all countries which manufacture or are likely to manufacture these drugs could be induced to agree to proposals on the lines of those laid down in the Opium Convention. The first step, therefore, in the opinion of His Majesty's Government, was not ratification under circumstances unlikely to achieve the real object of such ratification, but a combined attempt on the part of the signatory Powers to secure the signatures of those Powers which had either refused to sign or had for the present abstained from doing so. A study of the replies received from certain of those countries had convinced His Majesty's Government that some of the refusals were due to misapprehensions as to the purport and provisions of the convention and that these misapprehensions could be removed by explanations. We laid particular emphasis on the fact that our statement was not to be interpreted as a refusal on the part of His Majesty's Government to ratify, but only as a postponement. On the contrary, we explained that His Majesty's Government were most anxious to ratify at the earliest possible moment at which such action on their part would be likely to achieve the fullest effect, and meanwhile our instructions were to seek to hasten that moment by securing the co-operation of all the Governments represented at the Conference in inducing those countries which had, for one reason or another, abstained to alter their attitude and consent to sign the convention without further delay.\n\nIf we have dwelt at some length on the attitude taken up by us on this occasion we have done so because we feel that on it hinged the whole work accomplished by the Conference and incorporated in the final protocol.\n\nThe Portuguese delegate also declared that ratification by his Government must await the signature of the other Governments; the Powers that had signed the convention had pledged themselves to make economic sacrifices in a humanitarian cause, but these sacrifices should not conduce to the profit of other nations who remained free to continue and even to develop their trade in opium, morphia, and cocaine.\n\nThe Russian delegate also explained that his Government were not ready at present to ratify the convention, and expressed his agreement with the views put forward by the British delegation.\n\nThe Conference was therefore confronted with the position that, while a majority of the Powers represented were ready to proceed to ratification, an important minority declared that, for the present at all events, they were unable to do so. The President expressed the personal opinion that the Governments which were willing to do so might proceed to deposit their ratifications, without waiting until the other Governments had decided to do likewise, but as a matter of fact at this stage of the proceedings no formal action was taken to answer the question submitted to the Conference in the invitation of the Netherland Government, in accordance with article 23 of the convention, namely, whether, notwithstanding the fact that certain of the Powers invited to sign the convention had hitherto failed to do so, the deposit of ratifications could nevertheless take place. It was pointed out subsequently that, unless some definite decision on this point was taken by the Conference, the Government of the Netherlands would have no authority to accept the instruments of ratification from the Governments which were prepared to ratify. This omission was remedied at the fourth session by the unanimous adoption of a resolution by the Conference to the effect that the deposit of ratifications might now take place. Those, therefore, of the Signatory Powers which were ready to ratify were authorised to deposit their ratifications at The Hague, and some Powers proceeded forthwith to make the deposit.\n\n3", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-406 - Public Offices - 1913.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 445962, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-406 - Public Offices - 1913", "page_number": 433, "title": "CO129-406 - Public Offices - 1913", "content_text": "4\n\nTo return to the proceedings at the second session, after all the delegations had declared the views of their Governments as to the possibility of immediate ratification, some informal discussion took place in regard to a solution which had already, at the suggestion of the president, formed the subject of private conversations between representatives of the six delegations of Great Britain, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Russia, and the United States of America, with a view to giving practical effect to the British proposal for the adoption by the Conference of measures to secure the signatures of those countries which had, for one reason or another, hitherto failed to sign the convention. We laid stress on the importance of giving careful consideration to the drafting of this resolution (vide p. 14, English summary of minutes) as, in our opinion, it would probably be the chief work of the Conference, and should therefore be worded in such a manner as to command unanimous consent. It was clear that the value and efficacy of the convention depended so largely upon the generality, if not the universality, of agreement that no effort should be spared to secure the solidarity of Europe in regard to this question, and also the co-operation of the countries of South America, especially Peru. In order to afford the delegations who were acting as sponsors of the proposed resolution sufficient time for its elaboration, and to enable members of the other delegations to study it in print, the Conference was adjourned for two days.\n\nThe reasons which guided the representatives of the six delegations in the drafting of the resolution, and the methods which they considered best adapted to the attainment of the object which they had in mind, can be gathered from the wording of the preamble and of the resolution itself as they appear in the volume of the minutes of the Conference. The representatives were at one in considering that, for reasons which need not be repeated here, as they are already explained both in the instructions which you addressed to us and in the statements made at the second session of the Conference, it was essential to the proper working and full effectuation of the measures contemplated in the convention, to secure the co-operation, if not of all, at any rate of the more important of the Governments which had not yet signed. The first step towards this was to examine the replies received from those Governments, in so far as they had been communicated to us by the Netherland Government, and to consider (1) how far the tenor of those replies might be traceable to misapprehension as to the provisions and scope of the convention, and (2) by what arguments such misapprehension could best be met and removed.\n\nA summary of the replies of the twelve non-signatory States will be found at the beginning of the volume of the minutes of the Conference; but we should point out that the statement in regard to the reply of the Swedish Government, though correct, is not complete, as we had unofficial information that Sweden's attitude was, like that of Austria-Hungary and Norway, due to the supposed necessity of first introducing fresh legislation.\n\nWe decided to divide the twelve countries into three groups, according to the nature of the further representations which we considered applicable to each case:\n\n1. Powers which, without actually refusing to sign the supplementary protocol, had explained that they were unable to do so immediately, on the ground that the convention entailed for them fresh legislation, and that they could not sign until the new legislative measures had been passed. This group included Austria-Hungary, Norway, and Sweden.\n\n2. Powers which had refused on the ground that their domestic laws in regard to the manufacture and sale of opium, morphia, and cocaine were already sufficiently strict to ensure the prevention of abuse, and that their co-operation would therefore be practically valueless. Under this heading Switzerland stood alone.\n\n3. Powers (a) which had refused to sign without stating any reason, viz., Greece and Turkey; (b) which had promised to sign, but had not yet done so, viz., Bulgaria and Uruguay; (c) which had replied that they were still considering the question and had not yet come to a decision, viz., Roumania; and (d) which had not replied at all, viz., Montenegro, Peru, and Servia.\n\nIt was agreed that the Netherland Government should be requested to make further representations to the various Governments concerned, and that those representations should be framed so as to meet the reasons (if any) advanced by those Governments for their refusal to sign, at all events for the present, the supplementary protocol of the Opium Convention.\n\n>>\n\n5\n\n431\n\nIn regard to the first group, Austria-Hungary, Norway, and Sweden, we were of opinion that the Netherland Government should be requested to explain to those Governments that the fact that the provisions of the convention involved fresh legislation on their part was no obstacle to their immediate signature. Legislation was, as a matter of fact, the last of the stages contemplated by the final provisions of the convention; first came signature, then came ratification; a space of three months was then to elapse between the receipt of the last instrument of ratification and the coming into force of the convention; and yet a further six months was allowed for the elaboration of the laws, regulations, and other measures contemplated by the convention, while, finally, the date on which these laws, regulations, and other measures were to come into force was to form the subject of agreement between the contracting Powers. As a matter of fact, in this respect most of the signatory Powers found themselves in the same position as the Governments of Austria-Hungary, Norway, and Sweden, and, indeed, have not as yet elaborated all the legislative and other measures involved in the articles of the convention.\n\nIn regard to the reasons advanced by the Swiss Government for their refusal to sign, it was felt that they arose from a failure to appreciate the full scope of the convention and the necessity of general international co-operation in order to render fully effective the domestic regulations of the various nations for the suppression of the illicit trade in morphia and cocaine. In regard to the question raised by the Swiss Government as to respective spheres of the federal and cantonal authorities in the matter of the supervision of factories, we pointed out that similar difficulties had confronted the German delegates in the course of the discussions at the first Conference, that they were fully considered at the time, and that the provisions of the convention were specially drafted to meet those difficulties. It was the opinion of the representatives of the six delegations who drafted the resolution, that if the Netherland Government explained these points to the Swiss Government, and represented to them how far from valueless—on the contrary, how essential—the co-operation of Switzerland was, the probability was that the Swiss Government would consent to sign the convention.\n\nIn regard to group 3, we decided that, though the attitude of the various countries included in this group towards the question of signature was not in all cases the same, it would be simpler to make no difference in the fresh representations to be made, between those Powers that had definitely refused to sign without stating any specific reason, those that had agreed to sign but had not actually done so, those that had not yet concluded their examination of the convention, and those that had not replied at all. We merely recommend that the Netherland Government be requested to approach the Governments of all those countries again, to express to them the earnest desire of the Conference that they should sign the convention, and to point out how prejudicial their abstention might prove to the work which the signatory Powers hoped to accomplish.\n\nIn our instructions you had suggested that any action taken by the Netherland Government might usefully be supplemented by action taken jointly by all the signatory Powers, and that such action, if decided on by the Conference, would have all the greater weight as being the result of the joint deliberations of the Powers assembled at The Hague. This suggestion, which we had already communicated to the Conference, met with the approval of the delegates of France, Germany, the Netherlands, Russia, and the United States of America, who agreed that it would add weight to the representations of the Netherland Government if the diplomatic representatives of the signatory Powers at the various capitals where such representations were to be made were directed to support the action of their Netherland colleagues. A clause was accordingly inserted in the draft resolution inviting the signatory Governments to issue the necessary instructions to their representatives abroad.\n\nThe resolution, as drafted by representatives of the six delegations, was circulated to all the delegates and then formally presented to the Conference at its third session; so entirely did it commend itself to the approval of all the delegations that it gave rise to no discussion and was at once put to the vote and adopted unanimously.\n\nIt is perhaps to be regretted that more time was not given to the discussion of a document which embodies practically the whole work of the Conference. It had, it is true, been the subject of considerable thought and discussion at the hands of the delegates who were instrumental in submitting it to the Conference, but as two of those delegates, who may perhaps claim to have had most to do with its actual drafting, we do not feel that in the form in which it was submitted to the Conference it was insusceptible of further emendation, and we should certainly have welcomed criticism and...\n\n[1247]", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-406 - Public Offices - 1913.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 445963, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-406 - Public Offices - 1913", "page_number": 434, "title": "CO129-406 - Public Offices - 1913", "content_text": "6\n\ndiscussion of its terms. As a matter of fact, at the next session, on the consideration of the report of the Editing Committee, which incorporated the resolution in the protocol, the Haytian delegate proposed certain alterations of form to which no exception could be taken, but it was ruled that, as the resolution had been unanimously accepted and had been included, unaltered, in the protocol, it was impossible to reopen discussion upon it. There was, indeed, throughout the sittings of the Conference a tendency on the part of certain delegates, whose Governments were only interested in a secondary degree in the subjects we were met together to discuss, unduly to hasten the proceedings and to sacrifice thorough consideration of the questions before us to a speedy termination of our labours. On the other hand, certain other delegations desired to protract the duration of the Conference until replies had been received from the non-signatory Powers to the new representations which were about to be made. We are not aware, however, that the results attained by the Conference were in any way prejudiced either by too little discussion or by the expedition of the procedure.\n\nWe desire to draw attention to a speech made by Dr. Wu Lien-Téh, one of the Chinese delegates, at the commencement of the third session (l. c., p. 16). Dr. Wu urged the necessity of speedy ratification by all the signatory Powers, and insisted on the efficacy of the measures adopted by the Chinese Government since the signature of the convention and the importance of the results thus obtained. He pointed out that China was especially interested in an early ratification of the convention as it contains articles specially applying to China. He quoted article 18, which deals with the reduction, pari passu with the adoption of corresponding measures by the Chinese Government, of the number of shops for the sale of raw or prepared opium existing in the leased territories, foreign settlements, and concessions in China, and the restriction and control of the retail trade in opium in the leased territories, settlements, and concessions. He gave instances of the state of affairs in this respect at present prevailing in the International Settlement of Shanghai and the French Concession at Tien-tsin. We were not in a position either to confirm or contest the accuracy of Dr. Wu's figures though we reasserted (l. c., p. 18) the belief of His Majesty's Government in the sincerity of the Chinese Government in their opium policy; our object in referring to this particular point is merely to express our opinion that this is one of the matters where action on the part of the signatory Governments need not wait on ratification and enforcement of the convention.\n\nWith the adoption of the resolution prescribing the steps to be taken with the object of inducing the hitherto abstaining Governments to sign, it was felt that the Conference had accomplished its principal task and that little remained to be done. However, as the president pointed out, it was necessary to decide what should be the next step on the part of the signatory Powers if the fresh representations contemplated failed to produce the desired effect and certain Governments still refused to sign. In the course of the ensuing discussion the Chinese delegate explained (l. c., p. 21) that according to his interpretation of article 23 of the Opium Convention, under which we had been summoned, we were bound to decide before separating, either in the affirmative or the negative, the question of the possibility of ratifying the convention. He contended that, though the delegations had individually declared the ability or inability of their Governments to ratify, no decision on this point had been come to by the Conference as a whole, so that we had not as yet discharged the duty imposed on us by article 23. He suggested that the new representations contemplated by the resolution just adopted be made at once, and that, pending receipt of replies, the Conference do adjourn. He was optimistic enough to believe that the replies would be received by the end of August, and he proposed that the delegates should reassemble by that date, which would coincide with the opening of the Peace Palace, and expressed his firm belief that the Conference would by that time be in a position to decide as a body on the ratification of the Opium Convention.\n\nDr. Hamilton Wright, the first delegate of the United States, seconded the proposal of the Chinese delegate, and expressed his wish that the Conference should not dissolve until the result of the fresh representations had been ascertained. The opinion of the majority of the delegates was against such a proposal. It was felt that the question of the possibility of ratification had already been fully examined into, and it was quite evident, though the minutes do not clearly indicate this, that few, if any, of the delegates shared the optimistic views of their Chinese and American colleagues as to the time necessary to obtain the replies of those Governments which had hitherto failed to sign, several of which were at the time actively engaged in war.\n\nOur opinion was that the event contemplated by article 23 had taken place; the Powers which had signed had met together, and had examined the possibility of depositing their ratifications notwithstanding the absence of certain signatures. That mandate was exhausted, and it therefore seemed necessary to amend or extend article 23. We accordingly proposed (l. c., p. 22) the following resolution:—\n\n“That it be referred to the Editing Committee to prepare and present to the next meeting of the Conference a protocol de clôture, setting out the resolution which has been passed unanimously by the Conference, and also suggesting an amendment of article 23 with a view to meet the situation which has arisen from the signature of the convention by a large number of Powers and the abstention of a certain number.”\n\nAfter some further discussion our resolution was adopted, and the Conference adjourned in order to allow the Editing Committee to accomplish the duties thus imposed on them.\n\n7\n\nThe reasons which guided the Editing Committee in drafting the final protocol are fully described in the explanatory statement made by their chairman, M. van Deventer, at the fourth session of the Conference (l. c., p. 31). For the moment it is sufficient to say that their draft protocol was printed and distributed to the delegates in time to permit of its consideration before it came up for discussion at the fourth session. At this same session the Chinese delegation submitted a resolution in the following terms:-\n\n“That the delegates to the Second International Opium Conference advise their Governments to deposit forthwith their ratifications.”\n\nThis resolution had been previously circulated, and we took an early opportunity of pointing out privately to the Chinese delegates that such a resolution could not be accepted by certain of the delegations; that it was superfluous as far as concerned the Governments which had already declared their readiness to deposit their ratifications; while, as regarded the other Governments, their delegates had, under instructions, stated the reasons for which their Governments were for the present unable to proceed to ratification, and nothing had meanwhile occurred which would justify those delegates in advising their Governments to alter their attitude and deposit their ratifications forthwith. Dr. Yen therefore withdrew this resolution, and agreed to move in its place the resolution to which reference has already been made, and which had been drafted by the Editing Committee, thus providing the Netherland Government with the necessary authority to receive the instruments of ratification from those Governments which were prepared to ratify. This resolution appears in the final protocol in these words: “a décidé que le dépôt des ratifications peut avoir lieu dès maintenant.” TRANSLATION——“Has decided that the deposit of ratifications may now take place.”\n\nM. van Deventer, chairman of the Editing Committee, in submitting for the approval of the Conference the draft final protocol, referred to the assistance afforded to the Committee by the honorary president of the Conference, M. van Swinderen, who had attended their last meeting and was in full accord with the proposals now submitted. M. van Deventer explained that the Committee had, at the outset of their labours, noticed the omission on the part of the Conference, already referred to by us, to give a direct reply to the question submitted to it under article 23 of the convention, whether, in spite of the fact that certain signatures had not yet been obtained, the deposit of ratifications could nevertheless take place. This omission, M. van Deventer explained, had now been remedied by the resolution just unanimously adopted. The Committee had next dealt with the British resolution adopted at the third session. They had had no difficulty in deciding on the bodily incorporation of the resolution dealing with the steps to be taken to secure the signatures of further Powers, but they had found that the suggestion of a modification of article 23 of the Convention of the 23rd January, 1912, presented difficulties. It had appeared to the Committee that to modify in any way the text of the convention was open to exception, especially in view of the fact that one of the original signatory Powers to the convention was not represented at the second Conference; moreover, the chairman of the Committee explained that it was scarcely logical to eliminate a provision which had already been acted upon and to which practical consequences attached. In place of a formal amendment of article 23, the Committee accordingly proposed that the Conference should pass the following vœu, which would then be inserted in the final protocol:-\n\n“Que dans le cas où la signature de toutes les Puissances invitées en vertu du paragraphe 1 de l'article 23 n'aurait pas été obtenue à la date du 31 décembre, 1913, le\n\nD\n\n432", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-406 - Public Offices - 1913.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 445964, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-406 - Public Offices - 1913", "page_number": 435, "title": "CO129-406 - Public Offices - 1913", "content_text": "8\n\nGouvernement des Pays-Bas invite immédiatement les Puissances signataires à cette date de désigner des délégués pour procéder à La Haye à l'examen de la possibilité de faire entrer en vigueur la Convention internationale de l'Opium du 23 janvier, 1912.”* \n\nThis vau, as M. van Deventer explained, goes farther than a mere prolongation by one year of the period prescribed by paragraph 2 of article 23 of the convention; it recommends that should the signature of all the Powers not be obtained by the end of the present year a further Conference should be summoned, not to examine the possibility of depositing ratifications, because that question has already been dealt with, but to examine the possibility of putting the convention into force.\n\nIn the discussion which ensued Dr. Wu Lien-Teh expressed the opinion that the period of six months allowed for further signatures might well have been reduced to one or two months, but no other delegates spoke in support of this view.\n\nThe vau in the form proposed by the Editing Committee and certain recommendations as to the arrangement of the other vœux already agreed to having been adopted, the final protocol was unanimously passed without further discussion.\n\nAt the fifth and closing session on the 9th July the final protocol was signed by all the delegates except those of Brazil and Colombia, who were unavoidably prevented from attending, but who affixed their signatures subsequently.\n\nM. Pellet, the French delegate, and Mr. Lloyd Bryce, the American delegate, made short speeches expressing the thanks of their colleagues to Her Majesty the Queen of the Netherlands and to the Government for the hospitality extended to us, and to M. Cremer, our president, for the zeal, patience, and impartiality with which he had conducted the business of our sessions. M. Cremer, in replying, paid a well-deserved tribute to the valuable assistance received from our honorary president, M. van Swinderen, Netherland Minister for Foreign Affairs.\n\nM. van Swinderen said a few words congratulating the delegates on the progress made towards the goal which they had set before them, and accepted on behalf of the Netherland Government the fresh task which they had been invited to undertake and in the execution of which they would count on the active support of the signatory Governments. He then declared the Conference closed.\n\nTo the superficial observer it might perhaps appear that little had been achieved by the Second Opium Conference, but a closer comparison of the position of affairs as they were at the close of the first Conference with the present situation will show that such a conclusion is unwarranted. At the close of the first Conference twelve Powers had signed a convention to regulate the trade in opium, morphia, and cocaine, but had simultaneously come to the conclusion that there could be no idea of any practical enforcement of the provisions of that convention without first securing the co-operation of numerous Governments who had not even been represented at the Conference. At present the position is far different; a large majority of the Governments of the world have signed the convention, several have already signified their readiness to ratify, and only a very small minority, though representing powerful interests, have decided to postpone ratification, in the hope of first securing the co-operation of the Governments which have not yet signed.\n\nIn our report on the work of the first Conference, we claimed to have established a new principle of international morality in laying down that, in regard to the traffic in these harmful drugs, it was not sufficient for a particular State to take measures for the protection of its own subjects, but that it must also assist the efforts of other countries by organising international control over the traffic in these drugs; but we pointed out that, in order to give adequate effect to this principle, a substantial degree of unanimity among the nations of the world as to the measures to be adopted was essential. We now claim that a long step has been made towards the attainment of that unanimity. The second Conference has served to review the international position and accelerate the pace.\n\nOur instructions were to direct our efforts to securing the co-operation of the signatory Governments in such measures as, in the opinion of the delegates, were most likely to induce those countries which, for one reason or another, had not yet signed,\n\n* TRANSLATION.—“That if the signature of all the Powers invited in accordance with paragraph 1 of article 23 be not obtained by the 31st December, 1913, the Government of the Netherlands do immediately invite the signatory Powers to appoint delegates to proceed to The Hague to examine the possibility of putting in force the International Opium Convention of the 23rd January, 1912.”\n\n9\n\nto sign the convention without further delay, and thus enable His Majesty's Government to ratify. A perusal of the final protocol will, we think, show that we have succeeded in carrying out our instructions to the letter. It would nevertheless be idle to disguise the fact that the refusal of His Majesty's Government to ratify, there and then, was a cause of great disappointment to many of the delegates. We venture, however, to point out that the position is already different from what it was when His Majesty's Government decided that the question of ratification must be postponed. After the summoning of the Conference, but before the opening of its sessions, Chile and Nicaragua had signed; during the Conference Uruguay intimated its intention of signing, though it has not as yet done so, while since its close, according to information received from the Netherland Government, Peru, whose abstention was so fatal to any effective control of the cocaine trade, has come into line; and, more recently, Norway and Sweden have also signed the convention. This reduces the number of non-signatory Powers to nine, viz., Austria-Hungary, Bulgaria, Greece, Montenegro, Roumania, Servia, Switzerland, Turkey, and Uruguay, and of these six have certainly had more vitally important questions to occupy them lately than the regulation of the international trade in certain noxious drugs. There is therefore, we consider, every indication that matters will soon have reached a stage which will justify His Majesty's Government in altering their attitude and ratifying the convention.\n\nM. van Swinderen, in his closing speech, referred to the disappearance of all doubt as to the sincerity of the individual intentions entertained by the Governments concerned as being the great forward step made by the Conference, and he further expressed his conviction that the task of civilisation to which the Conference had devoted its energies would be realised in its widest conception. We sincerely hope, nay, we have every reason to believe, that events will justify M. van Swinderen's confidence. There may be delays and disappointments yet to be encountered; several Powers have still to ratify before the putting into force of the convention; there will then be further difficulties to be surmounted in regard to the enactment of the legislative and other measures entailed, and finally there will be the fixing of the date for the enforcement of those measures. Time must elapse before this final stage is reached, but, without wishing to be unduly optimistic, we may at least say that there seems every indication that we have reached a point from which we cannot go back, but are bound to go forward till the work that the Powers which framed the convention set before them is finally accomplished.\n\nIn view of the fact that the putting into force of the convention by Great Britain must necessitate the enactment of entirely new legislation in respect of the drugs which are the subject of the convention, it would appear desirable that the Department concerned should have in preparation a Bill to give effect to the provisions therein laid down, in anticipation of the next and subsequent stages which must follow upon the deposit of ratification, which has already commenced.\n\nBefore closing, there is one further point to which we wish to draw attention. In the list, which accompanied our instructions, of the dominions, colonies, dependencies, and protectorates of His Majesty which have refused to sign the convention, we noticed the names of the Union of South Africa, of several of our West Indian colonies, and of British Guiana and British Honduras. The question of the signature of the British colonies was not mentioned at the Conference, and the abstention of those figuring in the above-mentioned list may not, perhaps, be considered to have the same importance as, for instance, the abstention of French Cochin-China, to which we have already referred. Nevertheless it is evident that so long as colonies possessing important ports such as those mentioned above, which could be used for the unrestricted transhipment of opium, morphia, and cocaine to neighbouring countries, refuse to be bound by the provisions of the Opium Convention in regard to the international trade in those drugs, we lay ourselves open to the same criticism that we have applied to the refusal of the other countries to sign, namely, that the abstention of those colonies must prove prejudicial to the full and effective enforcement of international measures for the suppression of the illicit trade in opium, morphia, and cocaine.\n\nFinally, we wish again to give public expression to our grateful sense of the obligation under which the Netherland Government have laid all the Governments interested in this humanitarian work, not only by affording us the opportunity of meeting together for discussion, but also for so readily undertaking for the second time the task of securing further signatures to the convention. We feel that the whole world owes a debt of gratitude to the Government of the Netherlands for the repeated proofs they have given of their readiness to promote international settlement of\n\n433\n\n1", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-406 - Public Offices - 1913.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 450468, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-416 - Public Offices - 1914", "page_number": 50, "title": "CO129-416 - Public Offices - 1914", "content_text": "SECOND REVISE FOR PARLIAMENT.\n\nFebruary 1914.\n\nColonial Office\n\nMISCELLANEOUS. No.\n\n(1914)C.O.\n\n4615\n\n48\n\nRECR\n\nREGE 6 FEB 14,\n\nCORRESPONDENCE\n\nRESPECTING THE\n\nSECOND INTERNATIONAL OPIUM\n\nCONFERENCE,\n\nHELD AT THE HAGUE, JULY 1913,\n\nCOMPRISING THE\n\nINSTRUCTIONS TO THE BRITISH DELEGATES, THEIR REPORT, AND THE\n\nFINAL PROTOCOL OF JULY 9, 1913,\n\nSignatory Powers.\n\nand list\n\n[In continuation of \"Miscellaneous, No. 3 (1913)\": Cd. 6605.]\n\nPresented to both Houses of Parliament by Command of His Majesty. February 1914.\n\nLONDON:\n\nPRINTED UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF HIS MAJESTY'S STATIONERY OFFICE\n\nBY HARRISON AND SONS, 45-47, ST. MARTIN'S LANE, W.C., PRINTERS IN ORDINARY TO HIS MAJESTY.\n\nTo be purchased, either directly or through any Bookseller, from WYMAN AND SONS, LTD., 29, BREAMS BUILDINGS, FETTER LANE, E.C., and\n\n28, ABINGDON STREET, S.W., and 54, ST. MARY STREET, CARDIFF; or\n\nH.M. STATIONERY OFFICE (SCOTTISH BRANCH), 23, FORTH STREET, EDINBURGH; or\n\nE. PONSONBY, LTD., 116, GRAFTON STREET, DUBLIN;\n\nor from the Agencies in the British Colonies and Dependencies,\n\nthe United States of America, the Continent of Europe and Abroad of\n\nT. FISHER UNWIN, LONDON, W.C.\n\n[Cd. ...] Price ... d.\n\n1914.", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-416 - Public Offices - 1914.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 450469, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-416 - Public Offices - 1914", "page_number": 51, "title": "CO129-416 - Public Offices - 1914", "content_text": "TABLE OF CONTENTS.\n\nNo.\n\n1. Instructions to British Delegates\n\n2. Report of British Delegates..\n\n3. Final Protocol of July 9, 1913\n\n4. Sir A. Johnstone to Sir Edward Grey..\n\nPage\n\n1\n\n4\n\n11\n\n49\n\nCorrespondence respecting the Second International Opium Conference, held at The Hague, July 1913, comprising the Instructions to the British Delegates, their Report, and the Final Protocol of July 9, 1913.\n\n[In continuation of \"Miscellaneous, No. 3 (1913)\": 'Cd. 6605.]\n\nNo. 1.\n\nSir Edward Grey to British Delegates to the Second International Opium Conference.\n\nGentlemen,\n\nForeign Office, June 30, 1913. YOU have already been informed that His Majesty's Government have selected you to be the British delegates at the International Conference which is to meet at The Hague on the 1st July to consider the question of the ratification of the International Opium Convention of January 1912.\n\nYou will doubtless remember with what difficulties you were confronted at the former Conference owing to the fact that, the Powers represented being limited in number to twelve, they were not alone competent to carry out the full extent of international co-operation contemplated by the convention, and owing to the danger also that the participating Powers might eventually find that they had unavailingly sacrificed their trade interests for the sake of international morality, while outside Powers, on whom no such obligation might rest, had merely profited by this altruism to advance their own interests, at the same time nullifying to a great extent the objects aimed at by the convention.\n\nThe circumstances of the Conference were in this respect unprecedented, since some of the matters dealt with at its sittings were of world-wide interest and could not be adequately carried out by the small number of Powers represented, especially in view of the fact that some of the non-represented Powers occupied a very important position in regard to the questions under discussion, as for instance, Turkey in regard to raw opium, and Peru and Bolivia in regard to cocaine.\n\nIt was difficulties of this sort that necessitated the special and original character of the \"effectuating\" clauses, according to which the first step after the signing of the convention was not to be ratification by the signatory Powers, but an invitation addressed to the thirty-four Powers of Europe and America not represented at the Conference, to sign the convention, and thus put themselves on the same footing as the original participating Powers.\n\nArticle 23 further provided that in the event of the signatures of all the Powers invited not having been obtained by the 31st December, 1912, the Netherland Government should immediately invite the Powers who had signed by that date to appoint delegates to examine at The Hague the possibility of depositing the ratifications notwithstanding.\n\nAccordingly in the month of January the Netherland Chargé d'Affaires communicated to His Majesty's Government an invitation from his Government to a Conference to be held at The Hague in the month of June, to consider the possibility of proceeding to the ratification of the International Opium Convention. Accompanying the invitation was a list of countries which had signed the supplementary protocol provided for in article 22 of the convention, as well as of those countries which had at that date either failed or definitely refused to sign.\n\nAn examination of this list shows that of the thirty-four Powers invited to sign the additional protocol, seventeen had actually signed, namely: the Argentine Republic, Belgium, Brazil, Costa Rica, Denmark, the Dominican Republic, the Republic of Ecuador, Guatemala, the Republic of Hayti, Honduras, Luxemburg, Mexico, Panamá, Paraguay, Salvador, Spain, and the United States of Venezuela.\n\n[158]\n\nB 2", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-416 - Public Offices - 1914.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 450471, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-416 - Public Offices - 1914", "page_number": 53, "title": "CO129-416 - Public Offices - 1914", "content_text": "4\n\nFinally, I would add that your powers to enter into any agreement are not plenary, but are merely of an ad referendum nature.\n\nSir,\n\nNo. 2.\n\nI am, &c.\n\nE. GREY.\n\nForeign Office, October 1, 1913.\n\nWE have the honour to transmit to you herewith the final protocol signed at The Hague on the 9th July by the delegates to the Second International Opium Conference. We desire further to take this opportunity of submitting a few remarks on the proceedings and results of the Conference.\n\nThe Conference was called together by the Netherland Government in accordance with the terms of the second paragraph of article 23 of the International Opium Convention,* signed at The Hague on the 23rd January, 1912, which runs: \"In the event of the signature of all the Powers invited not having been obtained on the date of the 31st December, 1912, the Government of the Netherlands will immediately invite the Powers who have signed by that date to appoint delegates to examine at The Hague the possibility of depositing their ratifications notwithstanding.\"\n\nThe circumstances which led up to the summoning of the Conference, and the reasons which induced His Majesty's Government to accept with pleasure the invitation of the Netherland Government, are so clearly set out in the instructions which we had the honour to receive from you, that it seems unnecessary for us to do more than refer to them.\n\nThe Conference was opened on the 1st July by his Excellency Jonkheer de Marees van Swinderen, Netherland Minister for Foreign Affairs, who delivered a short speech of welcome to the delegates, in which he pointed out that the very fact of the assembling of this second Conference indicated that the issue contemplated by the convention had not been completely attained, inasmuch as the Powers invited to sign the supplementary protocol had not all replied in the affirmative.\n\nAs a matter of fact, at the date of the opening of the Conference twenty-two Powers out of the thirty-four invited had signed, namely, the Argentine Republic, Belgium, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, the Republic of Cuba, Denmark, the Dominican Republic, the Republic of Ecuador, Guatemala, the Republic of Hayti, Honduras, Luxemburg, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Salvador, Spain, and the United States of Venezuela. These, with the twelve Powers who participated in the first Conference, made thirty-four Powers which had actually signed the convention, leaving only twelve, the signatures of which were still wanting, namely, Austria-Hungary, Bulgaria, Greece, Montenegro, Norway, Peru, Roumania, Servia, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, and Uruguay.\n\nOf the original signatory Powers all except Persia were represented at the second Conference, while of the twenty-two Powers who had signed the supplementary protocol of signature nine only were not represented, viz., Bolivia, the Republic of Cuba, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, Panamá, Paraguay, Salvador, and the United States of Venezuela. The countries, therefore, which actually sent delegates to the present Conference, and which, through them, were parties to the final protocol of the 9th July, 1913, were as follows: Argentine Republic, Belgium, Brazil, Chile, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, France, Germany, Great Britain, Hayti, Italy, Japan, Luxemburg, Mexico, the Netherlands, Portugal, Russia, Siam, Spain, and the United States of America, or exactly twice as many as were represented at the first Conference.\n\nOn\n\nThe proceedings at the first meeting of the Conference were purely formal. The proposal of the French and German delegates, as being the senior members of the Diplomatic Body at The Hague appointed to represent their Governments at the Conference, M. Cremer, the senior Netherland delegate, was unanimously elected president. M. Cremer pronounced a speech in which he pointed out that the task before the present Conference was far lighter than that with which the first Conference had found itself confronted, for while the latter had to formulate in a convention the principles which were to solve the international problem arising from the abuse of opium, morphine, and cocaine, the mission of the present Conference was limited to the question of ratification.\n\nA dutiful telegram was despatched to Her Majesty the Queen of the Netherlands, the honorary presidency of the Conference was offered to M. de Marees van Swinderen, the members of the secretariat were appointed, and it was decided that French should be the official language of the Conference, though the use of other languages would be permitted at the sessions, and the Conference then adjourned till the following afternoon.\n\nAt the second session, after some further purely formal preliminaries had been disposed of and delegates had been appointed to serve on the Editing Committee (\"Comité de Rédaction\") and the Press Committee, the real work of the Conference was commenced. The president proposed, in view of the terms of article 23 of the convention directing an examination into the possibility of ratifying the Opium Convention, and with the object of ascertaining the intentions of the various Governments represented, to invite each delegation, in alphabetical order, to state whether its Government were prepared to proceed at once to ratification.\n\nEight delegations, namely, those of China, Costa Rica, Denmark, Ecuador, Italy, Luxemburg, Siam, and Spain, declared that their Governments were ready unconditionally to deposit their ratifications, the Italian delegate explaining that the ratification of his Government would cover the colonies of Erythrea, Somaliland, Tripoli, and Cyrene.\n\nMr. Shinobu, the Japanese delegate, declared that his Government had no objection in principle to depositing their ratification.\n\nSeven delegations, namely, those of Belgium, Brazil, Chile, Hayti, Mexico, the Netherlands, and the United States of America, declared that their Governments were ready to proceed to ratification, subject only to the statutory approval of their respective legislative bodies.\n\nThree delegates, those of the Argentine Republic, Colombia, and the Dominican Republic, were absent from the meeting.\n\nThe remaining delegations of the twenty-four constituting the Conference, only five in number, but including the representatives of countries so vitally interested as France, Germany, Great Britain, and Portugal, declared that for various reasons their respective Governments were not at present willing to proceed to the ratification of the Opium Convention.\n\nM. Pellet, the French delegate, explained that his Government were ready to ratify the convention as far as regards France proper, but not as regards French Indo-China, as on the one hand they wished to await the final decision of certain Powers which had not as yet signed the convention, but which were important as producers of opium and coca, and on the other hand they intended beforehand to examine carefully the efficacy of the measures which the Chinese Government proposed to adopt for the suppression of the cultivation of opium and for the prevention of the smuggling of opium over the frontier separating China from French Indo-China. At the fourth session M. Pellet supplemented this statement by reading a telegram from his Government to the effect that, on account of the contraband trade existing on its frontier, Indo-China was for the present unable to sign the convention in its entirety in respect of that colony, although almost all of its provisions were already being enforced, but that it was sincerely desirous of adopting, pari passu with the Chinese Government, further measures in order to eradicate the use of opium as soon as the situation in the southern provinces of China improved. This declaration on behalf of the French Government as regards their possessions in the Far East appears to us to be a matter of such importance that we have hesitated to include France among the countries which were ready to proceed to ratification.\n\nM. von Müller, the German delegate, after referring to the reasons which induced the first Conference to invite all the Powers of Europe and America not represented at that Conference to sign the convention and to make ratification dependent on the replies received, declared that the German Government, considering that ratification by only a proportion of the Powers interested would not achieve the full results aimed at, regretted that they were for the present unable to ratify the Opium Convention.\n\nOn being called on to declare whether His Majesty's Government were prepared to ratify the Opium Convention, we made a detailed statement based on our instructions, setting forth the reasons for which His Majesty's Government were unable to proceed to immediate ratification. We pointed out that the non-signature of the convention by certain countries, such as Austria-Hungary,\n\n5\n\n* See \"Miscellaneous, No. 2 (1912).\"\n\nprinciples which were to solve the international problem arising from the abuse of opium, morphine, and cocaine, the mission of the present Conference was limited to the question of ratification.\n\n...\n\n \n51", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-416 - Public Offices - 1914.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 450472, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-416 - Public Offices - 1914", "page_number": 54, "title": "CO129-416 - Public Offices - 1914", "content_text": "Norway, Peru, and Switzerland, would seriously prejudice the effect of the measures proposed for checking the export of morphine and cocaine to the East, and that a not improbable result of the strict control to be exercised in the dominions of the signatory Powers over the manufacture of, and trade in, the drugs in question might be that in non-signatory countries new factories might be started and the output of existing factories increased. Moreover, non-signatory countries would be open to unrestricted importation of the drugs and their ports could be freely used for their illicit transmission to the Eastern consumer. The abstention of Peru would of itself be sufficient to render useless any effort to regulate the trade in cocaine. His Majesty's Government had therefore come to the conclusion that any attempt to suppress the illicit trade in morphine and cocaine would thus be seriously impeded unless all countries which manufacture or are likely to manufacture these drugs could be induced to agree to proposals on the lines of those laid down in the Opium Convention. The first step, therefore, in the opinion of His Majesty's Government, was not ratification under circumstances unlikely to achieve the real object of such ratification, but a combined attempt on the part of the signatory Powers to secure the signatures of those Powers which had either refused to sign or had for the present abstained from doing so. A study of the replies received from certain of those countries had convinced His Majesty's Government that some of the refusals were due to misapprehensions as to the purport and provisions of the convention and that these misapprehensions could be removed by explanations. We laid particular emphasis on the fact that our statement was not to be interpreted as a refusal on the part of His Majesty's Government to ratify, but only as a postponement. On the contrary, we explained that His Majesty's Government were most anxious to ratify at the earliest possible moment at which such action on their part would be likely to achieve the fullest effect, and meanwhile our instructions were to seek to hasten that moment by securing the co-operation of all the Governments represented at the Conference in inducing those countries which had, for one reason or another, abstained to alter their attitude and consent to sign the convention without further delay.\n\nIf we have dwelt at some length on the attitude taken up by us on this occasion we have done so because we feel that on it hinged the whole work accomplished by the Conference and incorporated in the final protocol.\n\nThe Portuguese delegate also declared that ratification by his Government must await the signature of the other Governments; the Powers that had signed the convention had pledged themselves to make economic sacrifices in a humanitarian cause, but these sacrifices should not conduce to the profit of other nations who remained free to continue and even to develop their trade in opium, morphia, and cocaine.\n\nThe Russian delegate also explained that his Government were not ready at present to ratify the convention, and expressed his agreement with the views put forward by the British delegation.\n\nThe Conference was therefore confronted with the position that, while a majority of the Powers represented were ready to proceed to ratification, an important minority declared that, for the present at all events, they were unable to do so. The President expressed the personal opinion that the Governments which were willing to do so might proceed to deposit their ratifications, without waiting until the other Governments had decided to do likewise, but as a matter of fact at this stage of the proceedings no formal action was taken to answer the question submitted to the Conference in the invitation of the Netherland Government, in accordance with article 28 of the convention, namely, whether, notwithstanding the fact that certain of the Powers invited to sign the convention had hitherto failed to do so, the deposit of ratifications could nevertheless take place. It was pointed out subsequently that, unless some definite decision on this point was taken by the Conference, the Government of the Netherlands would have no authority to accept the instruments of ratification from the Governments which were prepared to ratify. This omission was remedied at the fourth session by the unanimous adoption of a resolution by the Conference to the effect that the deposit of ratifications might now take place. Those, therefore, of the signatory Powers which were ready to ratify were authorised to deposit their ratifications at The Hague, and some Powers proceeded forthwith to make the deposit.\n\nTo return to the proceedings at the second session, after all the delegations had declared the views of their Governments as to the possibility of immediate ratification, some informal discussion took place in regard to a solution which had already, at the suggestion of the president, formed the subject of private conversations between representatives of the six delegations of Great Britain, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Russia, and the United States of America, with a view to giving practical effect to the British proposal for the adoption by the Conference of measures to secure the signatures of those countries which had, for one reason or another, hitherto failed to sign the convention. We laid stress on the importance of giving careful consideration to the drafting of this resolution as, in our opinion, it would probably be the chief work of the Conference, and should therefore be worded in such a manner as to command unanimous consent. It was clear that the value and efficacy of the convention depended so largely upon the generality, if not the universality, of agreement that no effort should be spared to secure the solidarity of Europe in regard to this question, and also the co-operation of the countries of South America, especially Peru. In order to afford the delegations who were acting as sponsors of the proposed resolution sufficient time for its elaboration, and to enable members of the other delegations to study it in print, the Conference was adjourned for two days.\n\nThe reasons which guided the representatives of the six delegations in the drafting of the resolution, and the methods which they considered best adapted to the attainment of the object which they had in mind, can be gathered from the wording of the preamble and of the resolution itself. The representatives were at one in considering that, for reasons which need not be repeated here, as they are already explained both in the instructions which you addressed to us and in the statements made at the second session of the Conference, it was essential to the proper working and full effectuation of the measures contemplated in the convention, to secure the co-operation, if not of all, at any rate of the more important of the Governments which had not yet signed. The first step towards this was to examine the replies received from those Governments, in so far as they had been communicated to us by the Netherland Government, and to consider (1) how far the tenor of those replies might be traceable to misapprehension as to the provisions and scope of the convention, and (2) by what arguments such misapprehension could best be met and removed.\n\nWe decided to divide the twelve countries into three groups, according to the nature of the further representations which we considered applicable to each case:\n\n1. Powers which, without actually refusing to sign the supplementary protocol, had explained that they were unable to do so immediately, on the ground that the convention entailed for them fresh legislation, and that they could not sign until the new legislative measures had been passed. This group included Austria-Hungary, Norway, and Sweden.\n\n2. Powers which had refused on the ground that their domestic laws in regard to the manufacture and sale of opium, morphia, and cocaine were already sufficiently strict to ensure the prevention of abuse, and that their co-operation would therefore be practically valueless. Under this heading Switzerland stood alone.\n\n3. Powers (a) which had refused to sign without stating any reason, viz., Greece and Turkey; (b) which had promised to sign, but had not yet done so, viz., Bulgaria and Uruguay; (c) which had replied that they were still considering the question and had not yet come to a decision, viz., Roumania; and (d) which had not replied at all, viz., Montenegro, Peru, and Servia.\n\nIt was agreed that the Netherland Government should be requested to make further representations to the various Governments concerned, and that those representations should be framed so as to meet the reasons (if any) advanced by those Governments for their refusal to sign, at all events for the present, the supplementary protocol of the Opium Convention.\n\nIn regard to the first group, Austria-Hungary, Norway, and Sweden, we were of opinion that the Netherland Government should be requested to explain to those Governments that the fact that the provisions of the convention involved fresh legislation on their part was no obstacle to their immediate signature. Legislation was, as a matter of fact, the last of the stages contemplated by the final provisions of the convention; first came signature, then came ratification; a space of three months was then to elapse between the receipt of the last instrument of ratification and the coming into force of the convention; and yet a further six months was allowed for the elaboration of the laws, regulations, and other measures contemplated by the convention, while, finally, the date on which these laws, regulations, and other measures were to come into force was to form the subject of agreement between the contracting Powers.\n\n[158]\n\nC\n\n52", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-416 - Public Offices - 1914.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 450473, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-416 - Public Offices - 1914", "page_number": 55, "title": "CO129-416 - Public Offices - 1914", "content_text": "Powers found themselves in the same position as the Governments of Austria-Hungary, Norway, and Sweden, and, indeed, have not as yet elaborated all the legislative and other measures involved in the articles of the convention.\n\nIn regard to the reasons advanced by the Swiss Government for their refusal to sign, it was felt that they arose from a failure to appreciate the full scope of the convention and the necessity of general international co-operation in order to render fully effective the domestic regulations of the various nations for the suppression of the illicit trade in morphia and cocaine. In regard to the question raised by the Swiss Government as to respective spheres of the federal and cantonal authorities in the matter of the supervision of factories, we pointed out that similar difficulties had confronted the German delegates in the course of the discussions at the first Conference, that they were fully considered at the time, and that the provisions of the convention were specially drafted to meet those difficulties. It was the opinion of the representatives of the six delegations who drafted the resolution, that if the Netherland Government explained these points to the Swiss Government, and represented to them how far from valueless, on the contrary, how essential—the co-operation of Switzerland was, the probability was that the Swiss Government would consent to the convention.\n\nIn regard to group 3, we decided that, though the attitude of the various countries included in this group towards the question of signature was not in all cases the same, it would be simpler to make no difference in the fresh representations to be made, between those Powers that had definitely refused to sign without stating any specific reason, those that had agreed to sign but had not actually done so, those that had not yet concluded their examination of the convention, and those that had not replied at all. We merely recommended that the Netherland Government should be requested to approach the Governments of all those countries again, to express to them the earnest desire of the Conference that they should sign the convention, and to point out how prejudicial their abstention might prove to the work which the signatory Powers hoped to accomplish.\n\nIn our instructions, you had suggested that any action taken by the Netherland Government might usefully be supplemented by action taken jointly by all the signatory Powers, and that such action, if decided on by the Conference, would have all the greater weight as being the result of the joint deliberations of the Powers assembled at The Hague. This suggestion, which we had already communicated to the Conference, met with the approval of the delegates of France, Germany, the Netherlands, Russia, and the United States of America, who agreed that it would add weight to the representations of the Netherland Government if the diplomatic representatives of the signatory Powers at the various capitals where such representations were to be made were directed to support the action of their Netherland colleagues. A clause was accordingly inserted in the draft resolution inviting the signatory Governments to issue the necessary instructions to their representatives abroad.\n\nThe resolution, as drafted by representatives of the six delegations, was circulated to all the delegates and then formally presented to the Conference at its third session; so entirely did it commend itself to the approval of all the delegations that it gave rise to no discussion and was at once put to the vote and adopted unanimously.\n\nWith the adoption of the resolution prescribing the steps to be taken with the object of inducing the hitherto abstaining Governments to sign, it was felt that the Conference had accomplished its principal task and that little remained to be done. However, as the president pointed out, it was necessary to decide what should be the next step on the part of the signatory Powers if the fresh representations contemplated failed to produce the desired effect and certain Governments still refused to sign. In the course of the ensuing discussion, the Chinese delegate explained that according to his interpretation of article 23 of the Opium Convention, under which we had been summoned, we were bound to decide before separating, either in the affirmative or the negative, the question of the possibility of ratifying the convention. He contended that, though the delegations had individually declared the ability or inability of their Governments to ratify, no decision on this point had been come to by the Conference as a whole, so that we had not as yet discharged the duty imposed on us by article 23. He suggested that the new representations contemplated by the resolution just adopted be made at once, and that, pending receipt of replies, the Conference do adjourn.\n\nDr. Hamilton Wright, the first delegate of the United States, seconded the proposal of the Chinese delegate, and expressed his wish that the Conference should not dissolve until the result of the fresh representations had been ascertained. The opinion of the majority of the delegates was against such a proposal. It was felt that the question of the possibility of ratification had already been fully examined into, and it was quite evident that few, if any, of the delegates shared the views of their Chinese and American colleagues as to the time necessary to obtain the replies of those Governments which had hitherto failed to sign, several of which were at the time actively engaged in war.\n\nOur opinion was that the event contemplated by article 23 had taken place; the Powers which had signed had met together, and had examined the possibility of depositing their ratifications notwithstanding the absence of certain signatures. That mandate was exhausted, and it therefore seemed necessary to amend or extend article 23. We accordingly proposed the following resolution:—\n\n\"That it be referred to the Editing Committee to prepare and present to the next meeting of the Conference a protocol de clôture, setting out the resolution which has been passed unanimously by the Conference, and also suggesting an amendment of article 23 with a view to meet the situation which has arisen from the signature of the convention by a large number of Powers and the abstention of a certain number.\"\n\nAfter some further discussion, our resolution was adopted, and the Conference adjourned in order to allow the Editing Committee to accomplish the duties thus imposed on them.\n\nThe reasons which guided the Editing Committee in drafting the final protocol were fully described in the explanatory statement made by their chairman, M. van Deventer, at the fourth session of the Conference. For the moment, it is sufficient to say that their draft protocol was printed and distributed to the delegates in time to permit of its consideration before it came up for discussion at the fourth session.\n\nM. van Deventer, chairman of the Editing Committee, in submitting for the approval of the Conference the draft final protocol, referred to the assistance afforded to the Committee by the honorary president of the Conference, M. van Swinderen, who had attended their last meeting and was in full accord with the proposals now submitted. M. van Deventer explained that the Committee had, at the outset of their labours, noticed the omission on the part of the Conference, already referred to by us, to give a direct reply to the question submitted to it under article 23 of the convention, whether, in spite of the fact that certain signatures had not yet been obtained, the deposit of ratifications could nevertheless take place. This omission, M. van Deventer explained, had now been remedied by the resolution just unanimously adopted. The Committee had next dealt with the British resolution adopted at the third session. They had had no difficulty in deciding on the incorporation of the resolution dealing with the steps to be taken to secure the signatures of further Powers, but they had found that the suggestion of a modification of article 23 of the Convention of the 23rd January, 1912, presented difficulties. It had appeared to the Committee that to modify in any way the text of the convention was open to exception, especially in view of the fact that one of the original signatory Powers to the convention was not represented at the second Conference; moreover, the chairman of the Committee explained that it was scarcely logical to eliminate a provision which had already been acted upon and to which practical consequences attached. In place of a formal amendment of article 23, the Committee accordingly proposed that the Conference should pass the following vœu, which would then be inserted in the final protocol:—\n\n\"Que dans le cas où la signature de toutes les Puissances invitées en vertu du paragraphe 1 de l'article 23 n'aurait pas été obtenue à la date du 31 décembre, 1913, le Gouvernement des Pays-Bas invite immédiatement les Puissances signataires à cette date de désigner des délégués pour procéder à La Haye à l'examen de la possibilité de faire entrer en vigueur la Convention internationale de l'Opium du 23 janvier, 1912.\"*\n\nThis vœu, as M. van Deventer explained, goes farther than a mere prolongation by one year of the period prescribed by paragraph 2 of article 23 of the convention; it recommends that should the signature of all the Powers not be obtained by the end of the present year, a further Conference should be summoned, not to examine the possibility of depositing ratifications, because that question has already been dealt with, but to examine the possibility of putting the convention into force.\n\nIn the discussion which ensued, Dr. Wu Lien-Teh expressed the opinion that the\n\n* TRANSLATION. \"That if the signature of all the Powers invited in accordance with paragraph 1 of article 23 be not obtained by the 31st December, 1913, the Government of the Netherlands do immediately invite the signatory Powers to appoint delegates to proceed to The Hague to examine the possibility of putting into force the International Opium Convention of the 23rd January, 1912.\"\n\nPage 53", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-416 - Public Offices - 1914.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 450474, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-416 - Public Offices - 1914", "page_number": 56, "title": "CO129-416 - Public Offices - 1914", "content_text": "11\n\n54\n\n10\n\nperiod of six months allowed for further signatures might well have been reduced to one or two months, but no other delegates spoke in support of this view.\n\nThe vœu in the form proposed by the Editing Committee and certain recommendations as to the arrangement of the other vœux already agreed to having been adopted, the final protocol was unanimously passed without further discussion.\n\nAt the fifth and closing session on the 9th July the final protocol was signed by all the delegates except those of Brazil and Colombia, who were unavoidably prevented from attending, but who affixed their signatures subsequently.\n\nM. Pellet, the French delegate, and Mr. Lloyd Bryce, the American delegate, made short speeches expressing the thanks of their colleagues to Her Majesty the Queen of the Netherlands and to the Government for the hospitality extended to us, and to M. Cremer, our president, for the zeal, patience, and impartiality with which he had conducted the business of our sessions. M. Cremer, in replying, paid a well-deserved tribute to the valuable assistance received from our honorary president, M. van Swinderen, Netherland Minister for Foreign Affairs.\n\nM. van Swinderen said a few words congratulating the delegates on the progress made towards the goal which they had set before them, and accepted on behalf of the Netherland Government the fresh task which they had been invited to undertake and in the execution of which they would count on the active support of the signatory Governments. He then declared the Conference closed.\n\nTo the superficial observer it might perhaps appear that little had been achieved by the Second Opium Conference, but a closer comparison of the position of affairs as they were at the close of the first Conference with the present situation will show that such a conclusion is unwarranted. At the close of the first Conference twelve Powers had signed a convention to regulate the trade in opium, morphia, and cocaine, but had simultaneously come to the conclusion that there could be no idea of any practical enforcement of the provisions of that convention without first securing the co-operation of numerous Governments who had not even been represented at the Conference. At present the position is far different; a large majority of the Governments of the world have signed the convention, several have already signified their readiness to ratify, and only a very small minority, though representing powerful interests, have decided to postpone ratification, in the hope of first securing the co-operation of the Governments which have not yet signed.\n\nIn our report on the work of the first Conference, we claimed to have established a new principle of international morality in laying down that, in regard to the traffic in these harmful drugs, it was not sufficient for a particular State to take measures for the protection of its own subjects, but that it must also assist the efforts of other countries by organising international control over the traffic in these drugs; but we pointed out that, in order to give adequate effect to this principle, a substantial degree of unanimity among the nations of the world as to the measures to be adopted was essential. We now claim that a long step has been made towards the attainment of that unanimity. The second Conference has served to review the international position and accelerate the pace.\n\nOur instructions were to direct our efforts to securing the co-operation of the signatory Governments in such measures as, in the opinion of the delegates, were most likely to induce those countries which, for one reason or another, had not yet signed, to sign the convention without further delay, and thus enable His Majesty's Government to ratify. A perusal of the final protocol will, we think, show that we have succeeded in carrying out our instructions to the letter. It would nevertheless be idle to disguise the fact that the refusal of His Majesty's Government to ratify, there and then, was a cause of great disappointment to many of the delegates. We venture, however, to point out that the position is already different from what it was when His Majesty's Government decided that the question of ratification must be postponed. After the summoning of the Conference, but before the opening of its sessions, Chile and Nicaragua had signed; during the Conference Uruguay intimated its intention of signing, though it has not as yet done so, while since its close, according to information received from the Netherland Government, Peru, whose abstention would have been so fatal to any effective control of the cocaine trade, has come into line; and, more recently, Norway and Sweden have also signed the convention. This reduces the number of non-signatory Powers to nine, viz., Austria-Hungary, Bulgaria, Greece, Montenegro, Roumania, Servia, Switzerland, Turkey, and Uruguay, and of these six have certainly had more vitally important questions to occupy them lately than the regulation of the international trade in certain noxious drugs. There is therefore, we consider, every indication that matters will soon have reached a stage which will justify His Majesty's Government in altering their attitude and ratifying the convention.\n\nM. van Swinderen, in his closing speech, referred to the disappearance of all doubt as to the sincerity of the individual intentions entertained by the Governments concerned as being the great forward step made by the Conference, and he further expressed his conviction that the task of civilisation to which the Conference had devoted its energies would be realised in its widest conception. We sincerely hope, nay, we have every reason to believe, that events will justify M. van Swinderen's confidence. There may be delays and disappointments yet to be encountered; several Powers have still to ratify before the putting into force of the convention; there will then be further difficulties to be surmounted in regard to the enactment of the legislative and other measures entailed, and finally there will be the fixing of the date for the enforcement of those measures. Time must elapse before this final stage is reached, but, without wishing to be unduly optimistic, we may at least say that there seems every indication that we have reached a point from which we cannot go back, but are bound to go forward till the work that the Powers which framed the convention set before them is finally accomplished.\n\nIn view of the fact that the putting into force of the convention by Great Britain must necessitate the enactment of entirely new legislation in respect of the drugs which are the subject of the convention, it would appear desirable that the Department concerned should have in preparation a Bill to give effect to the provisions therein laid down, in anticipation of the next and subsequent stages which must follow deposit of ratification, which has already commenced.\n\nBefore closing, there is one further point to which we wish to draw attention. In the list, which accompanied our instructions, of the dominions, colonies, dependencies, and protectorates of His Majesty which have refused to sign the convention, we noticed the names of the Union of South Africa, of several of our West Indian colonies, and of British Guiana and British Honduras. The question of the signature of the British colonies was not mentioned at the Conference, and the abstention of those figuring in the above-mentioned list may not, perhaps, be considered to have the same importance as, for instance, the abstention of French Cochin-China, to which we have already referred. Nevertheless it is evident that so long as colonies possessing important ports such as those mentioned above, which could be used for the unrestricted transhipment of opium, morphia, and cocaine to neighbouring countries, refuse to be bound by the provisions of the Opium Convention in regard to the international trade in those drugs, we lay ourselves open to the same criticism that we have applied to the refusal of the other countries to sign, namely, that the abstention of those colonies must prove prejudicial to the full and effective enforcement of international measures for the suppression of the illicit trade in opium, morphia, and cocaine.\n\nFinally, we wish again to give public expression to our grateful sense of the obligation under which the Netherland Government have laid all the Governments interested in this humanitarian work, not only by affording us the opportunity of meeting together for discussion, but also for so readily undertaking for the second time the task of securing further signatures to the convention. We feel that the whole world owes a debt of gratitude to the Government of the Netherlands for the repeated proofs they have given of their readiness to promote international settlement of matters in which all civilised nations are interested, and international co-operation in questions affecting the welfare of humanity, thus helping to create an atmosphere of conciliation among nations which we may be allowed to express the hope may in time become more and more all-embracing.\n\nWe have the honour to be,\n\nSir,\n\nYour most obedient,\n\nNo. 3.\n\nhumble Servants,\n\nW. G. MAX MÜLLER. WILLIAM J. COLLINS.\n\nProtocole de Clôture de la deuxième Conférence internationale de l'Opium, 1913.\n\nLA deuxième Conférence internationale de l'Opium, convoquée par le Gouvernement des Pays-Bas en vertu de l'article 23 de la Convention internationale de l'Opium, s'est réunie à La Haye, dans le Palais des Comtes, le 1er juillet, 1913.\n\n? omis\n\nA", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-416 - Public Offices - 1914.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 450476, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-416 - Public Offices - 1914", "page_number": 58, "title": "CO129-416 - Public Offices - 1914", "content_text": "A\n\n5\n\n¡\n\n14\n\nPour la Belgique :\n\nBN. ALB. FALLON.\n\nPour les États-Unis du Brésil:\n\nGRAÇA ARANHA,\n\nPour le Chili:\n\nJORJE HUNEEUS.\n\nPour la Chine :\n\nW. W. YEN.\n\nWU LIEN TEH\n\nPour la Colombie:\n\nCHR. HISCHEMÖLLER.\n\nPour le Costa-Rica:\n\nMANUEL M. DE PERATA.\n\nPour le Danemark :\n\nW. GREVENKOP CASTENSKJOLD,\n\nPour la République dominicaine :\n\nJ. LAMARCHE.\n\nPour l'Équateur:\n\nJORJE HUNEEUS.\n\nPour l'Espagne :\n\nMANUEL G. DE ACILU\n\nPour la France:\n\nMarcellin Pellet.\n\nPour la Grande-Bretagne :\n\nW. G. MAX MÜLLER. WILLIAM JOB COLLINS.\n\nPour l'Haïti :\n\nSTENIO VINCENT.\n\nPour l'Italie :\n\nBRICHANTEAU.\n\nPour le Japon\n\n(Avec la réserve de l'approbation ultérieure de son Gouvernement.)\n\nJ. SHINOBU.\n\nPour le Luxembourg:\n\nBN. ALB. FALLON.\n\nPour les États-Unis mexicains :\n\nF. GAMBOA,\n\nPour les Pays-Bas :\n\nJ. T. CREMER,\n\nC. TH. VAN DEVENTER.\n\nA. A. DE JONGH.\n\nJ. G. SCHEURER.\n\nPour le Portugal:\n\nANTONIO MARIA BARTHOLOMEU FERREIRA.\n\nPour la Russie:\n\nA. SWETCHINE.\n\nPour le Siam:\n\nPHYA SUDHAM MAITRI.\n\nWM. J. ARCHER.\n\nCertifié pour copie conforme :\n\nLe Secrétaire général du Ministère\n\ndes Affaires Étrangères des Pays-Bas,\n\n15\n\n(Translation.)\n\nFinal Protocol of the Second International Opium Conference, 1913.\n\nTHE Second International Opium Conference, convoked by the Government of the Netherlands in accordance with article 23 of the International Opium Convention, met at The Hague, in the Hall of the Knights, on the 1st July, 1913.\n\nThe Governments hereinafter enumerated participated in the Conference, for which they had appointed the following delegates :-\n\nGermany: His Excellency M. Félix von Müller, Privy Counsellor, Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary at The Hague, delegate.\n\nUnited States of America: Dr. Hamilton Wright, Special Commissioner of the Department of State, delegate; His Excellency Mr. Lloyd Bryce, Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary at The Hague, delegate; Mr. Gerrit John Kollen, President Emeritus of Hope College, Professor of Mathematics, delegate.\n\nArgentine Republic: Dr. François de Veyga, delegate.\n\nBelgium: His Excellency Baron Albéric Fallon, Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary at The Hague, delegate.\n\nUnited States of Brazil: His Excellency M. J. Graça Aranha, Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary at The Hague, delegate.\n\nChile: His Excellency M. Jorje Huneeus, Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary at Brussels and at The Hague, delegate.\n\nChina: His Excellency M. W. W. Yen, Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary at Berlin, First Delegate Plenipotentiary; Dr. Wu Lien-Teh, M.A., M.D. (Cambridge), Surgeon-Major, Director of the Medical Service, Physician of the Foreign Office, Delegate Plenipotentiary.\n\nColombia: M. Ch. Hischemöller, Consul at Rotterdam, delegate.\n\nCosta Rica: His Excellency M. Manuel M. de Peralta, Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary at Paris and at The Hague, delegate.\n\nDenmark: M. J. G. de Grevenkop Castenskjold, Minister Resident at Brussels and at The Hague, delegate.\n\nDominican Republic: His Excellency Dr. José Lamarche, Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary, delegate.\n\nEcuador: His Excellency M. Jorje Huneeus, Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary of Chile at Brussels and at The Hague, delegate.\n\nSpain: M. Manuel Garcia de Acilu y Benito, Chargé d'Affaires ad interim at The Hague, delegate.\n\nFrance: His Excellency M. Marcellin Pellet, Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary at The Hague, delegate.\n\nGreat Britain: Mr. William Grenfell Max Müller, C.B., M.V.O., Counsellor of Embassy, delegate; Sir William J. Collins, D.L., M.D., F.R.C.S., former Chairman of the London County Council, delegate.\n\nHayti: M. Stenio Vincent, Chargé d'Affaires at The Hague, delegate.\n\nItaly: Marquis Alexandre Compans de Brichanteau, Chargé d'Affaires ad interim at The Hague, delegate.\n\nJapan: M. Jumpei Shinobu, Chargé d'Affaires ad interim at The Hague, delegate.\n\nLuxemburg: His Excellency Baron Albéric Fallon, Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary at Brussels and at The Hague, delegate.\n\nUnited States of Mexico: His Excellency M. Frederico Gamboa, Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary at Brussels and at The Hague, delegate.\n\nThe Netherlands: M. J. T. Cremer, former Minister for the Colonies, former president of the Netherlands Society of Commerce, Member of the First Chamber of the States-General, first delegate; Dr. C. Th. van Deventer, Member of the First Chamber of the States-General, delegate; M. A. A. de Jongh, former inspector-general, head of the opium monopoly in the Dutch Indies, delegate; Dr. J. G. Scheurer, Member of the Second Chamber of the States-General, delegate.\n\nPortugal: His Excellency M. Antonio Maria Bartholomeu Ferreira, Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary at The Hague, delegate.\n\nRussia: His Excellency M. A. Swétchine, Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary at The Hague, delegate; Professor Stanislas Przibytek, member of the Academy of Medicine at St. Petersburgh, delegate.\n\nSiam: His Excellency Phya Sudham Maitri, Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary at London, Brussels, and The Hague, delegate; Mr. William J. Archer, Counsellor of Legation at London and The Hague, delegate.\n\n[158]\n\nE\n\n56", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-416 - Public Offices - 1914.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 450480, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-416 - Public Offices - 1914", "page_number": 62, "title": "CO129-416 - Public Offices - 1914", "content_text": "LONDON:\n\nPRINTED BY HARRISON AND SONS,\n\nPresented to both Houses of Parliament by Command of His Majesty. February 1914.\n\nDRAFT.\n\nMX 20.\n\n4615/14\n\nForeign Office\n\nMINUTE.\n\n1/2\n\nMr. Collins. Sir G. Fiddes 7 Feb\n\nSir J. Anderson.\n\nLord Emmott.\n\nMr. Harcourt.\n\n17/2/14\n\n7.2.14\n\nCons'd: du minute.\n\nC. D.\n\nA Kong.\n\n1. 9 FEB\n\nThe Secretary ... presents his compliments to the U.S. ...\n\n... is directed by the S.S. to ...\n\n... the note, covering a revised proof of papers respecting the second international opium conference held at the Hague, which it is proposed to lay before Parliament.\n\nSir John Anderson.\n\nMISCELLANEOUS. No. (1014)\n\nProtocol of July 9, 1913. British Delegates, their Report, and the Final Act of July 1913, comprising the Instructions to the British Delegates to the Second International Opium Conference, held at The Hague,\n\nCORRESPONDENCE respecting the Second International Opium Conference.\n\n[In continuation of \"Miscellaneous, No. 3 (1913)\"; Cd. 6605.]", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-416 - Public Offices - 1914.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 450763, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-416 - Public Offices - 1914", "page_number": 345, "title": "CO129-416 - Public Offices - 1914", "content_text": "# [This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government\n\n**OPIUM.** \n**CONFIDENTIAL.**\n\n[57230]\nC. O.\n[October 1.]\n!3187\n\n## SECTION 1.\nGE 11 APR 14 No. 1.\n\n| Sir, |\n| --- |\nBritish Delegates to Second International Opium Conference to Sir Edward Grey. \nForeign Office, October 1, 1913.\n\nWe have the honour to transmit to you herewith the final protocol, signed at The Hague on the 9th July by the delegates to the Second International Opium Conference, and also a volume containing the minutes of the sessions of the Conference. We desire, further, to take this opportunity of submitting a few remarks on the proceedings and results of the Conference.\n\nThe Conference was called together by the Netherland Government in accordance with the terms of the second paragraph of article 23 of the International Opium Convention,* signed at The Hague on the 23rd January, 1912, which runs: \"In the event of the signature of all the Powers invited not having been obtained on the date of the 31st December, 1912, the Government of the Netherlands will immediately invite the Powers who have signed by that date to appoint delegates to examine at The Hague the possibility of depositing their ratifications notwithstanding.\"\n\nThe circumstances which led up to the summoning of the Conference, and the reasons which induced His Majesty's Government to accept with pleasure the invitation of the Netherland Government, are so clearly set out in the instructions which we had the honour to receive from you that it seems unnecessary for us to do more than refer to them.\n\nThe Conference was opened on the 1st July by his Excellency Jonkheer de Marees van Swinderen, Netherland Minister for Foreign Affairs, who delivered a short speech of welcome to the delegates, in which he pointed out that the very fact of the assembling of this second Conference indicated that the issue contemplated by the convention had not been completely attained, inasmuch as of the Powers invited to sign the supplementary protocol all had not replied in the affirmative.\n\nAs a matter of fact, at the date of the opening of the Conference twenty-two Powers out of the thirty-four invited had signed, namely, the Argentine Republic, Belgium, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, the Republic of Cuba, Denmark, the Dominican Republic, the Republic of Ecuador, Guatemala, the Republic of Hayti, Honduras, Luxemburg, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panamá, Paraguay, Salvador, Spain, and the United States of Venezuela. These, with the twelve Powers who participated in the first Conference, made thirty-four Powers which had actually signed the convention, leaving only twelve the signatures of which were still wanting, namely, Austria-Hungary, Bulgaria, Greece, Montenegro, Norway, Peru, Roumania, Servia, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, and Uruguay.\n\nOf the original signatory Powers all except Persia were represented at the second Conference, while of the twenty-two Powers who had signed the supplementary protocol of signature nine only were not represented, viz., Bolivia, the Republic of Cuba, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, Panamá, Paraguay, Salvador, and the United States of Venezuela. The countries, therefore, which actually sent delegates to the second Conference, and which, through them, were parties to the final protocol of the 9th July, 1913, were as follows: Argentine Republic, Belgium, Brazil, Chile, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, France, Germany, Great Britain, Hayti, Italy, Japan, Luxemburg, Mexico, the Netherlands, Portugal, Russia, Siam, Spain, and the United States of America, or exactly twice as many as were represented at the first Conference.\n\nOn the proposal of the French and German delegates, as being the senior members of the Diplomatic Body at The Hague appointed to represent their Governments at the Conference, M. Cremer, the senior Netherland delegate, was unanimously elected president. M. Cremer pronounced a speech in which he pointed out that the task before the present Conference was far lighter than that with which the first Conference was faced.\n\n*\"Miscellaneous, No. 2 (1912).\"*\n\n[1903 a-1] \nB \n341", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-416 - Public Offices - 1914.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 450764, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-416 - Public Offices - 1914", "page_number": 346, "title": "CO129-416 - Public Offices - 1914", "content_text": "# \n342 \n2 \n\nhad found itself confronted, for while the latter had to formulate in a convention the principles which were to solve the international problem arising from the abuse of opium, morphine, and cocaine, the mission of the present Conference was limited to the question of ratification.\n\nA dutiful telegram was despatched to Her Majesty the Queen of the Netherlands, the honorary presidency of the Conference was offered to M. de Marees van Swinderen, the members of the secretariat were appointed, and it was decided that French should be the official language of the Conference, though the use of other languages would be permitted at the sessions, and the Conference then adjourned till the following afternoon. We would therefore beg to point out that the official minutes are to be found in the French text, and that the English version is only an unofficial summary of the minutes kindly prepared by the secretariat.\n\nAt the second session, after some further purely formal preliminaries had been disposed of and delegates had been appointed to serve on the Editing Committee (`Comité de Rédaction`) and the Press Committee, the real work of the Conference was commenced. The president proposed, in view of the terms of article 23 of the convention directing an examination into the possibility of ratifying the Opium Convention, and with the object of ascertaining the intentions of the various Governments represented, to invite each delegation, in alphabetical order, to state whether its Government were prepared to proceed at once to ratification.\n\nEight delegations, namely, those of China, Costa Rica, Denmark, Ecuador, Italy, Luxemburg, Siam, and Spain, declared that their Governments were ready unconditionally to deposit their ratifications, the Italian delegate explaining that the ratification of his Government would cover the colonies of Erythrea, Somaliland, Tripoli, and Cyrene.\n\nMr. Shinobu, the Japanese delegate, declared that his Government had no objection in principle to depositing their ratification.\n\nSeven delegations, namely, those of Belgium, Brazil, Chile, Hayti, Mexico, the Netherlands, and the United States of America, declared that their Governments were ready to proceed to ratification, subject only to the statutory approval of their respective legislative bodies.\n\nThree delegates, those of the Argentine Republic, Colombia, and the Dominican Republic, were absent from the meeting.\n\nThe remaining delegations of the twenty-four constituting the Conference, only five in number, but including the representatives of countries so vitally interested as France, Germany, Great Britain, and Portugal, declared that for various reasons their respective Governments were not at present willing to proceed to the ratification of the Opium Convention.\n\nM. Pellet, the French delegate, explained that his Government were ready to ratify the convention as far as regards France proper, but not as regards French Indo-China, as on the one hand they wished to await the final decision of certain Powers which had not as yet signed the convention, but which were important as producers of opium and coca, and on the other hand they intended beforehand to examine carefully the efficacy of the measures which the Chinese Government proposed to adopt for the suppression of the cultivation of opium and for the prevention of the smuggling of opium over the frontier separating China from French Indo-China. At the fourth session M. Pellet supplemented this statement by reading a telegram from his Government to the effect that, on account of the contraband trade existing on its frontier, Indo-China was for the present unable to sign the convention in its entirety in respect of that colony, although almost all of its provisions were already being enforced, but that it was sincerely desirous of adopting, pari passu with the Chinese Government, further measures in order to eradicate the use of opium as soon as the situation in the southern provinces of China improved. This declaration on behalf of the French Government as regards their possessions in the Far East appears to us to be a matter of such importance that we have hesitated to include France among the countries which were ready to proceed to ratification.\n\nM. von Müller, the German delegate, after referring to the reasons which induced the first Conference to invite all the Powers of Europe and America not represented at that Conference to sign the convention and to make ratification dependent on the replies received, declared that the German Government, considering that ratification by only a proportion of the Powers interested would not achieve the full results aimed at, regretted that they were for the present unable to ratify the Opium Convention.\n\nOn being called on to declare whether His Majesty's Government were prepared to ratify the Opium Convention, we made a detailed statement (vide p. 12, English summary of minutes) based on our instructions, setting forth the reasons for which His Majesty's Government were unable to proceed to immediate ratification. We pointed out that the non-signature of the convention by certain countries, such as Austria-Hungary, Norway, Peru, and Switzerland, would seriously prejudice the effect of the measures proposed for checking the export of morphine and cocaine to the East, and that a not improbable result of the strict control to be exercised in the dominions of the signatory Powers over the manufacture of, and trade in, the drugs in question might be that in non-signatory countries new factories might be started and the output of existing factories increased. Moreover, non-signatory countries would be open to unrestricted importation of the drugs, and their ports could be freely used for their illicit transmission to the Eastern consumer. The abstention of Peru would of itself be sufficient to render useless any effort to regulate the trade in cocaine. His Majesty's Government had therefore come to the conclusion that any attempt to suppress the illicit trade in morphine and cocaine would thus be seriously impeded unless all countries which manufacture or are likely to manufacture these drugs could be induced to agree to proposals on the lines of those laid down in the Opium Convention. The first step, therefore, in the opinion of His Majesty's Government, was not ratification under circumstances unlikely to achieve the real object of such ratification, but a combined attempt on the part of the signatory Powers to secure the signatures of those Powers which had either refused to sign or had for the present abstained from doing so. A study of the replies received from certain of those countries had convinced His Majesty's Government that some of the refusals were due to misapprehensions as to the purport and provisions of the convention, and that these misapprehensions could be removed by explanations. We laid particular emphasis on the fact that our statement was not to be interpreted as a refusal on the part of His Majesty's Government to ratify, but only as a postponement. On the contrary, we explained that His Majesty's Government were most anxious to ratify at the earliest possible moment at which such action on their part would be likely to achieve the fullest effect, and meanwhile our instructions were to seek to hasten that moment by securing the co-operation of all the Governments represented at the Conference in inducing those countries which had for one reason or another abstained to alter their attitude and consent to sign the convention without further delay.\n\nIf we have dwelt at some length on the attitude taken up by us on this occasion we have done so because we feel that on it hinged the whole work accomplished by the Conference and incorporated in the final protocol.\n\nThe Portuguese delegate also declared that ratification by his Government must await the signature of the other Governments; the Powers that had signed the convention had pledged themselves to make economic sacrifices in a humanitarian cause, but these sacrifices should not conduce to the profit of other nations who remained free to continue and even to develop their trade in opium, morphia, and cocaine.\n\nThe Russian delegate also explained that his Government were not ready at present to ratify the convention, and expressed his agreement with the views put forward by the British delegation.\n\nThe Conference was therefore confronted with the position that, while a majority of the Powers represented were ready to proceed to ratification, an important minority declared that, for the present at all events, they were unable to do so. The president expressed the personal opinion that the Governments which were willing to do so might proceed to deposit their ratifications, without waiting until the other Governments had decided to do likewise, but as a matter of fact at this stage of the proceedings no formal action was taken to answer the question submitted to the Conference in the invitation of the Netherland Government, in accordance with article 23 of the convention, namely, whether, notwithstanding the fact that certain of the Powers invited to sign the convention had hitherto failed to do so, the deposit of ratifications could nevertheless take place. It was pointed out subsequently that, unless some definite decision on this point was taken by the Conference, the Government of the Netherlands would have no authority to accept the instruments of ratification from the Governments which were prepared to ratify. This omission was remedied at the fourth session by the unanimous adoption of a resolution by the Conference to the effect that the deposit of ratifications might now take place. Those, therefore, of the signatory Powers which were ready to ratify were authorised to deposit their ratifications at The Hague, and some Powers proceeded forthwith to make the deposit.\n\n3", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-416 - Public Offices - 1914.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 450765, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-416 - Public Offices - 1914", "page_number": 347, "title": "CO129-416 - Public Offices - 1914", "content_text": "## To return to the proceedings at the second session, after all the delegations had declared the views of their Governments as to the possibility of immediate ratification, some informal discussion took place in regard to a solution which had already, at the suggestion of the president, formed the subject of private conversations between representatives of the six delegations of Great Britain, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Russia, and the United States of America, with a view to giving practical effect to the British proposal for the adoption by the Conference of measures to secure the signatures of those countries which had, for one reason or another, hitherto failed to sign the convention.\n\nWe laid stress on the importance of giving careful consideration to the drafting of this resolution (vide p. 14, English summary of minutes) as, in our opinion, it would probably be the chief work of the Conference, and should therefore be worded in such a manner as to command unanimous consent. It was clear that the value and efficacy of the convention depended so largely upon the generality, if not the universality, of agreement that no effort should be spared to secure the solidarity of Europe in regard to this question, and also the co-operation of the countries of South America, especially Peru. In order to afford the delegations who were acting as sponsors of the proposed resolution sufficient time for its elaboration, and to enable members of the other delegations to study it in print, the Conference was adjourned for two days.\n\nThe reasons which guided the representatives of the six delegations in the drafting of the resolution, and the methods which they considered best adapted to the attainment of the object which they had in mind, can be gathered from the wording of the preamble and of the resolution itself as they appear in the volume of the minutes of the Conference. The representatives were at one in considering that, for reasons which need not be repeated here, as they are already explained both in the instructions which you addressed to us and in the statements made at the second session of the Conference, it was essential to the proper working and full effectuation of the measures contemplated in the convention, to secure the co-operation, if not of all, at any rate of the more important of the Governments which had not yet signed.\n\nThe first step towards this was to examine the replies received from those Governments, in so far as they had been communicated to us by the Netherland Government, and to consider (1) how far the tenor of those replies might be traceable to misapprehension as to the provisions and scope of the convention, and (2) by what arguments such misapprehension could best be met and removed.\n\nA summary of the replies of the twelve non-signatory States will be found at the beginning of the volume of the minutes of the Conference; but we should point out that the statement in regard to the reply of the Swedish Government, though correct, is not complete, as we had unofficial information that Sweden's attitude was, like that of Austria-Hungary and Norway, due to the supposed necessity of first introducing fresh legislation.\n\nWe decided to divide the twelve countries into three groups, according to the nature of the further representations which we considered applicable to each case:\n\n| Group | Description | Countries |\n| --- | --- | --- |\n| 1 | Powers which, without actually refusing to sign the supplementary protocol, had explained that they were unable to do so immediately, on the ground that the convention entailed for them fresh legislation, and that they could not sign until the new legislative measures had been passed. | Austria-Hungary, Norway, Sweden |\n| 2 | Powers which had refused on the ground that their domestic laws in regard to the manufacture and sale of opium, morphia, and cocaine were already sufficiently strict to ensure the prevention of abuse, and that their co-operation would therefore be practically valueless. | Switzerland |\n| 3 | (a) Powers which had refused to sign without stating any reason; (b) Powers which had promised to sign, but had not yet done so; (c) Powers which had replied that they were still considering the question and had not yet come to a decision; (d) Powers which had not replied at all. | (a) Greece, Turkey; (b) Bulgaria, Uruguay; (c) Roumania; (d) Montenegro, Peru, Servia |\n\nIt was agreed that the Netherland Government should be requested to make further representations to the various Governments concerned, and that those representations should be framed so as to meet the reasons (if any) advanced by those Governments for their refusal to sign, at all events for the present, the supplementary protocol of the Opium Convention.\n\nIn regard to the first group, Austria-Hungary, Norway, and Sweden, we were of the opinion that the Netherland Government should be requested to explain to those Governments that the fact that the provisions of the convention involved fresh legislation on their part was no obstacle to their immediate signature. Legislation was, as a matter of fact, the last of the stages contemplated by the final provisions of the convention; first came signature, then came ratification; a space of three months was then to elapse between the receipt of the last instrument of ratification and the coming into force of the convention; and yet a further six months was allowed for the elaboration of the laws, regulations, and other measures contemplated by the convention, while, finally, the date on which these laws, regulations, and other measures were to come into force was to form the subject of agreement between the contracting Powers.\n\nIn regard to the reasons advanced by the Swiss Government for their refusal to sign, it was felt that they arose from a failure to appreciate the full scope of the convention and the necessity of general international co-operation in order to render fully effective the domestic regulations of the various nations for the suppression of the illicit trade in morphia and cocaine. In regard to the question raised by the Swiss Government as to respective spheres of the federal and cantonal authorities in the matter of the supervision of factories, we pointed out that similar difficulties had confronted the German delegates in the course of the discussions at the first Conference, that they were fully considered at the time, and that the provisions of the convention were specially drafted to meet those difficulties.\n\nIn regard to group 3, we decided that, though the attitude of the various countries included in this group towards the question of signature was not in all cases the same, it would be simpler to make no difference in the fresh representations to be made between those Powers that had definitely refused to sign without stating any specific reason, those that had agreed to sign but had not actually done so, those that had not yet concluded their examination of the convention, and those that had not replied at all. We merely recommended that the Netherland Government be requested to approach the Governments of all those countries again, to express to them the earnest desire of the Conference that they should sign the convention, and to point out how prejudicial their abstention might prove to the work which the signatory Powers hoped to accomplish.\n\nIn our instructions, you had suggested that any action taken by the Netherland Government might usefully be supplemented by action taken jointly by all the signatory Powers, and that such action, if decided on by the Conference, would have all the greater weight as being the result of the joint deliberations of the Powers assembled at The Hague. This suggestion, which we had already communicated to the Conference, met with the approval of the delegates of France, Germany, the Netherlands, Russia, and the United States of America, who agreed that it would add weight to the representations of the Netherland Government if the diplomatic representatives of the signatory Powers at the various capitals where such representations were to be made were directed to support the action of their Netherland colleagues. A clause was accordingly inserted in the draft resolution inviting the signatory Governments to issue the necessary instructions to their representatives abroad.\n\nThe resolution, as drafted by representatives of the six delegations, was circulated to all the delegates and then formally presented to the Conference at its third session; so entirely did it commend itself to the approval of all the delegations that it gave rise to no discussion and was at once put to the vote and adopted unanimously.\n\nIt is perhaps to be regretted that more time was not given to the discussion of a document which embodies practically the whole work of the Conference. It had, it is true, been the subject of considerable thought and discussion at the hands of the delegates who were instrumental in submitting it to the Conference, but as two of these delegates, who may perhaps claim to have had most to do with its actual drafting, we do not feel that in the form in which it was submitted to the Conference it was insusceptible of further emendation, and we should certainly have welcomed criticism and discussion of its terms.\n\nPage 343", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-416 - Public Offices - 1914.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 450766, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-416 - Public Offices - 1914", "page_number": 348, "title": "CO129-416 - Public Offices - 1914", "content_text": "## 7 G\n\nof the report of the Editing Committee, which incorporated the resolution in the protocol, the Haitian delegate proposed certain alterations of form to which no exception could be taken, but it was ruled that, as the resolution had been unanimously accepted and had been included, unaltered, in the protocol, it was impossible to reopen discussion upon it. There was, indeed, throughout the sittings of the Conference a tendency on the part of certain delegates, whose Governments were only interested in a secondary degree in the subjects we were met together to discuss, unduly to hasten the proceedings and to sacrifice thorough consideration of the questions before us to a speedy termination of our labours. On the other hand, certain other delegations desired to prolong the duration of the Conference until replies had been received from the non-signatory Powers to the new representations which were about to be made. We are not aware, however, that the results attained by the Conference were in any way prejudiced either by too little discussion or by the expedition of the procedure.\n\nWe desire to draw attention to a speech made by Dr. Wu Lien-Teh, one of the Chinese delegates, at the commencement of the third session (4, c., p. 16). Dr. Wu urged the necessity of speedy ratification by all the signatory Powers, and insisted on the efficacy of the measures adopted by the Chinese Government since the signature of the convention and the importance of the results thus obtained. He pointed out that China was especially interested in an early ratification of the convention, as it contains articles specially applying to China. He quoted article 18, which deals with the reduction, pari passu with the adoption of corresponding measures by the Chinese Government, of the number of shops for the sale of raw or prepared opium existing in the leased territories, foreign settlements, and concessions in China, and the restriction and control of the retail trade in opium in the leased territories, settlements, and concessions. He gave instances of the state of affairs in this respect at present prevailing in the international settlement of Shanghai and the French concession at Tien-tsin. We were not in a position either to confirm or contest the accuracy of Dr. Wu's figures, though we reasserted (l. c., p. 18) the belief of His Majesty's Government in the sincerity of the Chinese Government in their opium policy; our object in referring to this particular point is merely to express our opinion that this is one of the matters where action on the part of the signatory Governments need not wait on ratification and enforcement of the convention.\n\nWith the adoption of the resolution prescribing the steps to be taken with the object of inducing the hitherto abstaining Governments to sign, it was felt that the Conference had accomplished its principal task, and that little remained to be done. However, as the President pointed out, it was necessary to decide what should be the next step on the part of the signatory Powers if the fresh representations contemplated failed to produce the desired effect and certain Governments still refused to sign. In the course of the ensuing discussion the Chinese delegate explained (7, c., p. 21) that according to his interpretation of article 23 of the Opium Convention, under which we had been summoned, we were bound to decide before separating, either in the affirmative or the negative, the question of the possibility of ratifying the convention. He contended that, though the delegations had individually declared the ability or inability of their Governments to ratify, no decision on this point had been come to by the Conference as a whole, so that we had not as yet discharged the duty imposed on us by article 23. He suggested that the new representations contemplated by the resolution just adopted be made at once, and that, pending receipt of replies, the Conference do adjourn. He was optimistic enough to believe that the replies would be received by the end of August, and he proposed that the delegates should reassemble by that date, which would coincide with the opening of the Peace Palace, and expressed his firm belief that the Conference would by that time be in a position to decide as a body on the ratification of the Opium Convention.\n\nDr. Hamilton Wright, the first delegate of the United States, seconded the proposal of the Chinese delegate, and expressed his wish that the Conference should not dissolve until the result of the fresh representations had been ascertained. The opinion of the majority of the delegates was against such a proposal. It was felt that the question of the possibility of ratification had already been fully examined into, and it was quite evident, though the minutes do not clearly indicate this, that few, if any, of the delegates shared the optimistic views of their Chinese and American colleagues as to the time necessary to obtain the replies of those Governments which had hitherto failed to sign, several of which were at the time actively engaged in war.\n\nOur opinion was that the event contemplated by article 23 had taken place; the Powers which had signed had met together, and had examined the possibility of depositing their ratifications notwithstanding the absence of certain signatures.\n\nThat mandate was exhausted, and it therefore seemed necessary to amend or extend article 23. We accordingly proposed (l. c., p. 22) the following resolution:-\n\n\"That it be referred to the Editing Committee to prepare and present to the next meeting of the Conference a protocol de clôture, setting out the resolution which has been passed unanimously by the Conference, and also suggesting an amendment of article 23 with a view to meet the situation which has arisen from the signature of the convention by a large number of Powers and the abstention of a certain number.\"\n\nAfter some further discussion our resolution was adopted, and the Conference adjourned in order to allow the Editing Committee to accomplish the duties thus imposed on them.\n\nThe reasons which guided the Editing Committee in drafting the final protocol are fully described in the explanatory statement made by their chairman, M. van Deventer, at the fourth session of the Conference (L. c., p. 31). For the moment it is sufficient to say that their draft protocol was printed and distributed to the delegates in time to permit of its consideration before it came up for discussion at the fourth session.\n\nAt this same session the Chinese delegation submitted a resolution in the following terms:-\n\n\"That the delegates to the Second International Opium Conference advise their Governments to deposit forthwith their ratifications.\"\n\nThis resolution had been previously circulated, and we took an early opportunity of pointing out privately to the Chinese delegates that such a resolution could not be accepted by certain of the delegations; that it was superfluous as far as concerned the Governments which had already declared their readiness to deposit their ratifications; while, as regarded the other Governments, their delegates had, under instructions, stated the reasons for which their Governments were for the present unable to proceed to ratification, and nothing had meanwhile occurred which would justify those delegates in advising their Governments to alter their attitude and deposit their ratifications forthwith. Dr. Yen therefore withdrew this resolution, and agreed to move in its place the resolution to which reference has already been made, and which had been drafted by the Editing Committee, thus providing the Netherland Government with the necessary authority to receive the instruments of ratification from those Governments which were prepared to ratify. This resolution appears in the final protocol in these words: “a décidé que le dépôt des ratifications peut avoir lieu dès maintenant.\"* The resolution was, as already stated, unanimously adopted.\n\nM. van Deventer, chairman of the Editing Committee, in submitting for the approval of the Conference the draft final protocol, referred to the assistance afforded to the Committee by the honorary president of the Conference, M. van Swinderen, who had attended their last meeting and was in full accord with the proposals now submitted. M. van Deventer explained that the Committee had, at the outset of their labours, noticed the omission on the part of the Conference, already referred to by us, to give a direct reply to the question submitted to it under article 23 of the convention, whether, in spite of the fact that certain signatures had not yet been obtained, the deposit of ratifications could nevertheless take place. This omission, M. van Deventer explained, had now been remedied by the resolution just unanimously adopted. The Committee had next dealt with the British resolution adopted at the third session. They had had no difficulty in deciding on the bodily incorporation of the resolution dealing with the steps to be taken to secure the signatures of further Powers, but they had found that the suggestion of a modification of article 23 of the convention of the 23rd January, 1912, presented difficulties. It had appeared to the Committee that to modify in any way the text of the convention was open to exception, especially in view of the fact that one of the original signatory Powers to the convention was not represented at the second Conference; moreover, the chairman of the Committee explained that it was scarcely logical to eliminate a provision which had already been acted upon and to which practical consequences attached. In place of a formal amendment of article 23, the Committee accordingly proposed that the Conference should pass the following resolution, which would then be inserted in the final protocol :—\n\n\"Que dans le cas où la signature de toutes les Puissances invitées en vertu du paragraphe 1 de l'article 23 n'aurait pas été obtenue à la date du 31 décembre, 1913, le ...\n\n* TRANSLATION.—\"Has decided that the deposit of ratifications may now take place.\" \n\n## Page 344", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-416 - Public Offices - 1914.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 450767, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-416 - Public Offices - 1914", "page_number": 349, "title": "CO129-416 - Public Offices - 1914", "content_text": "## 8 \n\nGouvernement des Pays-Bas invite immédiatement les Puissances signataires à cette date de désigner des délégués pour procéder à La Haye à l'examen de la possibilité de faire entrer en vigueur la Convention internationale de l'Opium du 23 janvier, 1912.\"* \n\nThis vote, as M. van Deventer explained, goes farther than a mere prolongation by one year of the period prescribed by paragraph 2 of article 23 of the convention; it recommends that should the signature of all the Powers not be obtained by the end of the present year a further Conference should be summoned, not to examine the possibility of depositing ratifications, because that question has already been dealt with, but to examine the possibility of putting the convention into force. \n\nIn the discussion which ensued Dr. Wu Lien-Teh expressed the opinion that the period of six months allowed for further signatures might well have been reduced to one or two months, but no other delegates spoke in support of this view. \n\nThe convention in the form proposed by the Editing Committee and certain recommendations as to the arrangement of the other votes already agreed to having been adopted, the final protocol was unanimously passed without further discussion. \n\nAt the fifth and closing session on the 9th July the final protocol was signed by all the delegates except those of Brazil and Colombia, who were unavoidably prevented from attending, but who affixed their signatures subsequently. \n\nM. Pellet, the French delegate, and Mr. Lloyd Brice, the American delegate, made short speeches expressing the thanks of their colleagues to Her Majesty the Queen of the Netherlands and to the Government for the hospitality extended to us, and to M. Cremer, our president, for the zeal, patience, and impartiality with which he had conducted the business of our sessions. M. Cremer, in replying, paid a well-deserved tribute to the valuable assistance received from our honorary president, M. van Swinderen, Netherland Minister for Foreign Affairs. \n\nM. van Swinderen said a few words congratulating the delegates on the progress made towards the goal which they had set before them, and accepted on behalf of the Netherland Government the fresh task which they had been invited to undertake and in the execution of which they would count on the active support of the signatory Governments. He then declared the Conference closed. \n\nTo the superficial observer it might perhaps appear that little had been achieved by the Second Opium Conference, but a closer comparison of the position of affairs as they were at the close of the first Conference with the present situation will show that such a conclusion is unwarranted. At the close of the first Conference twelve Powers had signed a convention to regulate the trade in opium, morphia, and cocaine, but had simultaneously come to the conclusion that there could be no idea of any practical enforcement of the provisions of that convention without first securing the co-operation of numerous Governments who had not even been represented at the Conference. At present the position is far different: a large majority of the Governments of the world have signed the convention, several have already signified their readiness to ratify, and only a very small minority, though representing powerful interests, have decided to postpone ratification, in the hope of first securing the co-operation of the Governments which have not yet signed. \n\nIn our report on the work of the first Conference we claimed to have established a new principle of international morality in laying down that, in regard to the traffic in these harmful drugs, it was not sufficient for a particular State to take measures for the protection of its own subjects, but that it must also assist the efforts of other countries by organising international control over the traffic in these drugs; but we pointed out that, in order to give adequate effect to this principle, a substantial degree of unanimity among the nations of the world as to the measures to be adopted was essential. We now claim that a long step has been made towards the attainment of that unanimity. The second Conference has served to review the international position and accelerate the pace. \n\nOur instructions were to direct our efforts to securing the co-operation of the signatory Governments in such measures as, in the opinion of the delegates, were most likely to induce those countries which, for one reason or another, had not yet signed, \n\n## 9 \n\nto sign the convention without further delay, and thus enable His Majesty's Government to ratify. A perusal of the final protocol will, we think, show that we have succeeded in carrying out our instructions to the letter. It would nevertheless be idle to disguise the fact that the refusal of His Majesty's Government to ratify, there and then, was a cause of great disappointment to many of the delegates. We venture, however, to point out that the position is already different from what it was when His Majesty's Government decided that the question of ratification must be postponed. After the summoning of the Conference, but before the opening of its sessions, Chile and Nicaragua had signed; during the Conference Uruguay intimated its intention of signing, though it has not as yet done so, while since its close, according to information received from the Netherland Government, Peru, whose abstention was so fatal to any effective control of the cocaine trade, has come into line; and, more recently, Norway and Sweden have also signed the convention. This reduces the number of non-signatory Powers to nine, viz., Austria-Hungary, Bulgaria, Greece, Montenegro, Roumania, Servia, Switzerland, Turkey, and Uruguay, and of these six have certainly had more vitally important questions to occupy them lately than the regulation of the international trade in certain noxious drugs. There is therefore, we consider, every indication that matters will soon have reached a stage which will justify His Majesty's Government in altering their attitude and ratifying the convention. \n\nM. van Swinderen, in his closing speech, referred to the disappearance of all doubt as to the sincerity of the individual intentions entertained by the Governments concerned as being the great forward step made by the Conference, and he further expressed his conviction that the task of civilisation to which the Conference had devoted its energies would be realised in its widest conception. We sincerely hope, nay, we have every reason to believe, that events will justify M. van Swinderen's confidence. There may be delays and disappointments yet to be encountered; several Powers have still to ratify before the putting into force of the convention; there will then be further difficulties to be surmounted in regard to the enactment of the legislative and other measures entailed, and finally there will be the fixing of the date for the enforcement of those measures. Time must elapse before this final stage is reached, but, without wishing to be unduly optimistic, we may at least say that there seems every indication that we have reached a point from which we cannot go back, but are bound to go forward till the work that the Powers which framed the convention set before them is finally accomplished. \n\nIn view of the fact that the putting into force of the convention by Great Britain must necessitate the enactment of entirely new legislation in respect of the drugs which are the subject of the convention, it would appear desirable that the Department concerned should have in preparation a Bill to give effect to the provisions therein laid down, in anticipation of the next and subsequent stages which must follow upon the deposit of ratification, which has already commenced. \n\nBefore closing, there is one further point to which we wish to draw attention. In the list which accompanied our instructions of the dominions, colonies, dependencies, and protectorates of His Majesty which have refused to sign the convention, we noticed the names of the Union of South Africa, of several of our West Indian colonies, and of British Guiana and British Honduras. The question of the signature of the British colonies was not mentioned at the Conference, and the abstention of those figuring in the above-mentioned list may not, perhaps, be considered to have the same importance as, for instance, the abstention of French Cochin China, to which we have already referred. Nevertheless, it is evident that so long as colonies possessing important ports such as those mentioned above, which could be used for the unrestricted transhipment of opium, morphia, and cocaine to neighbouring countries, refused to be bound by the provisions of the Opium Convention in regard to the international trade in those drugs, we lay ourselves open to the same criticism that we have applied to the refusal of the other countries to sign, namely, that the abstention of those colonies must prove prejudicial to the full and effective enforcement of international measures for the suppression of the illicit trade in opium, morphia, and cocaine. \n\nFinally, we wish again to give public expression to our grateful sense of the obligation under which the Netherland Government have laid all the Governments interested in this humanitarian work, not only by affording us the opportunity of meeting together for discussion, but also for so readily undertaking for the second time the task of securing further signatures to the convention. We feel that the whole world owes a debt of gratitude to the Government of the Netherlands for the repeated proofs they have given of their readiness to promote international settlement of \n\n## Page 345 \n\nTRANSLATION. \"That if the signature of all the Powers invited in accordance with paragraph 1 of article 28 be not obtained by the 31st December, 1913, the Government of the Netherlands do immediately invite the signatory Powers to appoint delegates to proceed to The Hague to examine the possibility of putting in force the International Opium Convention of the 23rd January, 1912.\"", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-416 - Public Offices - 1914.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 451126, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-417 - Public Offices - 1914", "page_number": 53, "title": "CO129-417 - Public Offices - 1914", "content_text": "# Coming \n\nThe Gov. of Hong Kong,\n\nQ \ncopy of your \nremit \nto \nQua \nlatter \nAre \nis being \nfor responsibility \n\n50 \nthe \nof making \nChinese \nclaims \nagainst \nA- \nGovt. \nwith respect \nof this \npurpose \nhas been \nadvised \nbut \nconcur with Sei E. Grey, \nForeign \nhe is inclined to regarding \nthe \nfraudulent \nClaims \nadmissions \nanalogous \nto \nJai \n\nclaim \nwould lie \nagainst \nGovt \n\nIt is decided \nthat \nChinese \nclaims \nagainst \nGovt \nare \nto be \n2/ \nAr \nHarcourt \naction \nis \nto be taken \nbeing \naware \nof \nother \nwho \nhave \nsustained \nloss \nas a \nresult \nof time \n\n(8gned) Hd. READ. \nfor the Under Secretary of State \n1914 \n6 July \n\nHONG KONG EASTERN \n24501 \nC.O. \n24504 \n7 JUL 14 \nOxum Conference \n\nSeems copy deep from title. \nI.ak previous Paper. Delegates end = copy of final protocol \nHAP \n24229 signed 25 June by all delegates \nJu Mo. 24505 \n\nIn \nCollori \nfor 9. F.m \nJL \nfirst 'Ami \nand second 'Ami \nare very well \nwith the \nprinciple \nof \nfour \nhard \nnot wait for \nPurley \n\nNext subsequent Paper. \n70 \n24505 \n(89,106) W1.31,D68—13. 45,000. 12/13. A REW. \n\nIt first expresses agreement \nthat \nConvention \nsignature \nLatification \nis the aim \nthat \nall the \nPowers invited: \nConvention will not \nbe defeated by the incalcitance \nof Turkey. \nlaying down \nthat ratification \nby Powers which have at present signed \nwill \nprovide \nthe necessary \nfor adhering...", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-417 - Public Offices - 1914.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 451127, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-417 - Public Offices - 1914", "page_number": 54, "title": "CO129-417 - Public Offices - 1914", "content_text": "# FOREIGN OFFICE \n## July 1914. London, \n### REC'd 7 JUL 14\n\nSir:- \nI am directed by Secretary Sir E. Grey to transmit to you herewith copy of a despatch from the British delegates to the recent Opium Conference, enclosing a copy of the Final Protocol which was signed on the 25th ultimo by the Delegates of the Governments represented.\n\nA copy of the Delegates' report will be communicated to you as soon as it is received.\n\nI am, \nSir, \nYour most obedient, humble Servant, \nWangley\n\nIn any further communication on the subject, please quote `29240/14`.\n\nThe Under-Secretary of State, \nForeign Office.\n\n| Date | Reference |\n| --- | --- |\n| Jun 25, 1914 | ... |\n| 7/7/14 | ... |\n| 9.7.14 | ... |\n| 10.7.14 | $10.7.14 |\n| ... | C.O. 24504 |\n\n... to press the Netherlands for ... which they ... for ... The Harbour ... 8 ... 14 ... hr. ... \n\n# Convention with ... beyond ... fact ... A ... Power have not ... do the like ... yet engaged ... 12 naming ... Perhaps By hope that ... \n\nIl ... Ao ... Avis in ... adwana ... comutat ... Para which has ratiquid ... 1914 ... Power ... Bay ... futil. * 31% y De. Convention into force. I know them is no Astach to ... passing form fork with ... \n\n... `X` ... thas ...", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-417 - Public Offices - 1914.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 451128, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-417 - Public Offices - 1914", "page_number": 55, "title": "CO129-417 - Public Offices - 1914", "content_text": "## \n1.2. \n$9240)\nC.O.\n52\nTHE HAGUE,\n24504\nJune 25th,\n1914.\nREC `Pe 7 JUL 14`\n\nSir:-\n\nWe have the honour to transmit to you herewith a copy of the Final Protocol of the Third Opium Conference which was signed to-day by the Delegates of the Governments represented at the Conference.\n\n(Signed)\n\nWe have, &c.,\nW. G. Max Müller.\nW. J. Collins.\n\nSir Edward Grey, Bart., K.G.\n&c.,\n&c.,\n&c.", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-417 - Public Offices - 1914.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 451253, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-417 - Public Offices - 1914", "page_number": 180, "title": "CO129-417 - Public Offices - 1914", "content_text": "## CONFIDENTIAL\n\n### SECTION 1\n\n**(No. 2.) Sir,**\n\nNo. 1.\n\n**British Opium Delegates to Sir Edward Grey.--(Received June 29.)**\n\nThe Hague, June 25, 1914. We have the honour to transmit to you herewith a copy of the Final Protocol of the Third Opium Conference, which was signed to-day by the delegates of the Governments represented at the Conference.\n\nWe have, &c.\n\nW. G. MAX MÜLLER. W. J. COLLINS.\n\n### Enclosure in No. 1.\n\n**Final Protocol of Third Opium Conference, 1914.**\n\nLa troisième Conférence internationale de l'Opium, convoquée par le Gouvernement des Pays-Bas en vertu du vœu No. 3 émis par la deuxième Conférence, s'est réunie à La Haye, dans le Palais des Comtes, le 15 juin, 1914.\n\nLes Gouvernements dont l'énumération suit ont pris part à la Conférence, pour laquelle ils avaient désigné les délégués nommés ci-après:\n\n| Government | Delegate(s) |\n| --- | --- |\n| L'Allemagne | Son Excellence M. Félix de Müller, Conseiller intime actuel, Envoyé extraordinaire et Ministre plénipotentiaire à La Haye, Délégué. |\n| Les États-Unis d'Amérique | Son Excellence Mr. Henry van Dyke, Envoyé extraordinaire et Ministre plénipotentiaire à La Haye, Délégué; Mr. Charles Denby, Consul général à Vienne, Délégué. |\n| La République argentine | M. le Dr. François de Veyga, Professeur honoraire à la Faculté de Médecine de Buenos-Ayres, Inspecteur général du Service de Santé de l'armée argentine (S.R.), Délégué. |\n| La Belgique | Son Excellence M. le Baron Albéric Fallon, Envoyé extraordinaire et Ministre plénipotentiaire à La Haye, Délégué. |\n| Les Etats-Unis du Brésil | Son Excellence M. José Pereira da Graça Aranha, Envoyé extraordinaire et Ministre plénipotentiaire à La Haye, Délégué. |\n| Le Chili | Son Excellence M. Jorje Huneeus, Envoyé extraordinaire et Ministre plénipotentiaire à Bruxelles et à La Haye, Délégué. |\n| La Chine | Son Excellence Mr. Yen Hui-Ching, Envoyé extraordinaire et Ministre plénipotentiaire à Berlin, Délégué; son Excellence Mr. T'ang Tsai-fou, Envoyé extraordinaire et Ministre plénipotentiaire à La Haye, Délégué. |\n| Le Danemark | M. J. G. de Grevenkop Castenskjold, Ministre-Résident à Bruxelles et à La Haye, Délégué. |\n| La République dominicaine | Son Excellence M. le Dr. José Lamarche, Envoyé et Ministre plénipotentiaire, Délégué. |\n| L'Equateur | M. Miguel A. Seminario, Chargé d'Affaires à Bruxelles, Délégué. |\n| L'Espagne | Son Excellence D. Fernando Osorio y Elola, Envoyé extraordinaire et Ministre plénipotentiaire à La Haye, Délégué. |\n| La France | Son Excellence M. Marcellin Pellet, Envoyé extraordinaire et Ministre plénipotentiaire à La Haye, Délégué. |\n| La Grande-Bretagne | Mr. William Grenfell Max Müller, C.B., M.V.O., Conseiller d'Ambassade, Consul général à Budapest, Délégué; Sir William J. Collins, K.C.V.O., M.D., F.R.C.S., ancien Président du Conseil municipal de Londres, Délégué. |\n| Le Guatemala | M. José María Lardizabal, Chargé d'Affaires à Paris et à La Haye, Délégué. |\n| L'Haïti | M. Stenio Vincent, Chargé d'Affaires à La Haye, Délégué. |\n| L'Italie | Son Excellence M. le Comte Joseph Sallier de la Tour, Duc de Calvello, Envoyé extraordinaire et Ministre plénipotentiaire à La Haye, Délégué. |\n\n...\n\n2. or abstention of Northern and Southern Rhodesia may be regarded as a matter of small importance from the point of view of the international control of the trade in opium, morphia, and cocaine, yet it would be advantageous from the point of view of the universality of agreement which is being aimed at.\n\n2. I propose also, if you concur, to inform the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs that the convention may be signed on behalf of Basutoland, Swaziland, and the Bechuanaland Protectorate.\n\nI have, &c.\n\nL HARCOURT.\n\n[This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.]\n\nC.O. 175 [B] 30645 OPIUM. RECO REC 17 AUG 14 June 29.\n\nPage 180\nPage 181", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-417 - Public Offices - 1914.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 451469, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-417 - Public Offices - 1914", "page_number": 396, "title": "CO129-417 - Public Offices - 1914", "content_text": "## C.O. 49307\n## REC\n## REGII DEC 14\n\nForeign Office, \n389 \n\nSir, \n\nOctober 1, 1914. \n\nWe have the honour of transmitting to you herewith the final protocol of the third International Opium Conference, held at The Hague on the 15th-25th June, 1914. No volume containing the official records of the sessions has yet been issued; the delay is doubtless attributable to the European war. In continuation of the accounts already furnished of the first and second Conferences `[Cd. 6448 and 7276]` we beg to report to you on the proceedings and results of the third Conference. \n\nThe position of affairs in June of this year was duly summarised in our instructions. The invitation to the third Conference by the Netherlands Government stated that its object would be to institute an enquiry concerning the possibility of putting the convention in force, although all the Powers invited to sign the convention had not agreed to do so. This invitation was in obedience to a resolution passed by the second Conference, the terms of which appeared to contemplate the possibility of the coming into force of the convention, not only without the signature of all the invited Powers, but without the deposit of ratifications by all the signatory Powers; otherwise the coming into force appeared to be provided for automatically by article 24 of the convention. \n\nOur instructions authorised us to announce that the reasons which had precluded ratification by His Majesty's Government had ceased to exist, and that the deposit of the instrument of ratification would be made as soon as the necessary formalities had been carried out; we were further advised to press for similar ratification by all the signatory Powers which had not yet done so. \n\nThe first session, on the 15th June, was opened by a speech from His Excellency M. Loudon, Minister for Foreign Affairs to the Netherlands Government. He referred to the first Conference of 1911-12, at which only twelve Powers were represented, but which drew up the Opium Convention; and to the second of 1913, which proceeded from the first, and which decided that, although certain Powers who had been invited to sign the convention had not then done so, the deposit of ratifications might nevertheless take place. He then stated that the chief task of the third Conference would be to reply to the question formulated by a resolution of the second Conference, viz., whether it was possible for the convention to come into force, although the signature of all the invited Powers had not been obtained. M. Loudon then proceeded to explain the manner in which the Netherlands Government had carried out the duty with which they had been entrusted under the protocol of the second Conference. Peru, Sweden, Norway, Montenegro, Roumania, Switzerland, Bulgaria, and Uruguay had adhered. Austria-Hungary had in principle adhered; and though for constitutional reasons the Dual Monarchy had not signed, it had declared, nevertheless, its firm intention to adhere to the convention, and to take the necessary steps to put it in force. Greece had signed, with a reservation in respect of her newly-acquired territory. Turkey and Servia had categorically refused signature, the latter because she had not been able to study the question sufficiently, the former for economic reasons. Up to the present time eight ratifications had been deposited, and Great Britain was about to ratify shortly. The question, then, now before the Conference was to determine whether the convention can come into force notwithstanding the attitude of Turkey and Servia and the partial reserve of Greece. Agreement among all the Powers of the world with the object of subduing, for the good of humanity, a passion excited by the lust of lucre was, said M. Loudon, a new", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-417 - Public Offices - 1914.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 451473, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-417 - Public Offices - 1914", "page_number": 400, "title": "CO129-417 - Public Offices - 1914", "content_text": "8 \n\nthat he regarded the proceedings of the Conference as lacking in practicality, and the resolutions submitted by the committee as academic. He however recognised the importance of the resolution which had been carried unanimously on the proposition of the American and British delegations.\n\nM. van Deventer presented the Committee's Report, prefacing his remarks by stating that both the Chambers of the States-General had approved the ratification of the convention.\n\nThe report laid stress on the fact that the second resolution carried in an amended form at the previous sitting by 16 votes to 2 (with 11 abstentions) dealt with the mode of coming into force of the convention in the case of signatory Powers co-operating for that purpose. The Chinese proposition contained two principles, one dealing with the putting into force of the convention by certain only of the signatory Powers, and the other attempting a differentiation as between those Powers whose ratification was delayed solely for constitutional reasons, and those who deferred ratification for other than constitutional reasons. Although the Committee had prepared and submitted a formula embodying the latter principle, it did not, in view of the previous criticism which the proposal had encountered, advise its further consideration by the Conference. To meet the other principle contained in the Chinese proposition, it submitted the following vœu:--\n\nIII. The Conference is of opinion that if, at a date to be determined by the Conference, all the signatory Powers have not deposited their ratifications, it shall be lawful (\"loisible\") for the signatory Powers whose ratifications shall have been deposited by that date to put the convention in force. The same power shall be open to those signatory Powers who shall successively deposit their ratifications after that date.\n\nAnd as consecutive to this vœu, it submitted also the following proposals:\n\nIV. That the date contemplated under III shall be...\nV. That the \"Comité de Rédaction\" be authorised to prepare a special protocol in which the signatory Powers which are prepared to make use of the power referred to under III shall be able to declare their intention of putting the convention in force.\nVI. That the power of acceding to the convention shall continue open to those Powers which have not yet signed it.\n\nIn the discussion which ensued, we supported the Committee, in the preparation of whose report we had taken an active part, remarking that there was now a unanimous desire that the signatory Powers should ratify as soon as possible, that there was all but unanimity that the convention might be enforced by the signatories notwithstanding the abstention of two or three Powers. With so much manifestation of good-will, it appeared that this Conference would have satisfactorily reviewed the situation, in which no fewer than forty-three Powers found themselves in agreement, and would serve the purpose of quickening progress towards the end in view.\n\nResolution III was then carried unanimously.\n\nThe date inserted in resolution IV was the 31st December, 1914, and in this form, it was carried—16 voting for and 10 abstaining (viz., Germany, Denmark, Spain, France, Persia, Portugal, Roumania, Russia, Sweden, and Switzerland).\n\nResolutions V and VI were transposed in order, No. V being amended by providing that the special protocol should be prepared by the Minister of Foreign Affairs at The Hague instead of by the Committee. They were both carried unanimously.\n\nThe final session of the Conference was held on June 25th, when the welcome announcement was made by M. Loudon that Greece had signed the convention without any reserve. The Protocol de Clôture, which had been drafted by the Comité de Rédaction, was approved and subsequently signed by all the delegates without any reservation whatever.\n\nIt recited that in a series of meetings held from the 15th-25th June, the Conference had examined the question submitted to it by the vœu of the second Conference, and had placed on record the following opinions (\"a émis les avis suivants\") :—\n\nA.-I. That it is possible for the International Opium Convention of the 23rd January, 1912, to be brought into force, notwithstanding the fact that some Powers invited in accordance with paragraph 1 of article 23 had not yet signed the convention,\n\nII. That the coming into force of the convention between all the signatory Powers shall take place when the Powers which have already signed, and those which have expressed their intention of adhering to it, shall have ratified it. The date of coming into force shall be that fixed by paragraph 1 of article 24.\n\nIII. That if by a date to be determined by the Conference, all the signatory Powers have not yet deposited their ratifications, it will be lawful for the signatory Powers whose ratifications shall have been deposited by that date to put the convention in force. The same power shall obtain for the signatory Powers who shall successively deposit their ratifications after that date.\n\nIV. That the date indicated in No. III be the 31st December, 1914.\n\nV. That the possibility of acceding to the convention do remain open to the Powers which have not yet signed.\n\nB. The Conference has decided :—\n\n\"That a protocol by which the signatory Powers desirous of acting in accordance with the provision under No. III shall be able to declare their intention of putting the convention in force shall be opened at The Hague.\n\nHis Excellency the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Netherlands being satisfied that the desire has been unanimously expressed by the Conference, has consented to prepare this protocol, which will remain open for signature.\"\n\nC. The Conference has unanimously carried the following resolution :—\n\n\"The Conference invites his Excellency the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Netherlands to transmit, in the name of the Conference, an urgent and respectful representation to the signatory Powers which have not yet ratified the Convention nor expressed their intention of doing so, with a view to inducing them to declare their readiness shortly to deposit their ratifications, in order that the convention may come into force as soon as possible.\"\n\nThen follow the signatures of the plenipotentiaries of thirty Powers.\n\nA perusal of the final protocol and the procès-verbaux will, we think, serve to show that we have carried out, literatim and verbatim, the instructions with which we were favoured.\n\nWe can claim, as we did at the close of the second Conference, that this third Conference has \"served to review the international position and accelerate the pace.\"\n\nBefore summarising the results which we think have been attained as the results of the third Conference, we will report the position of the several Powers concerned as regards ratification of this convention at the close of the Conference, based on information which we obtained from the secretariate :—\n\n## Status of Ratification\n\n### A. Signatory Powers that had Ratified\n\n| No. | Power |\n| --- | --- |\n| 1 | United States of America |\n| 2 | Belgium |\n| 3 | China |\n| 4 | Denmark |\n| 5 | Guatemala |\n| 6 | Italy |\n| 7 | Portugal |\n| 8 | Siam |\n| 9 | Sweden |\n| 10 | Venezuela |\n| 11 | Honduras |\n\n### B. Signatory Powers Ready to Ratify\n\n| No. | Power |\n| --- | --- |\n| 1 | Great Britain |\n| 2 | Japan |\n| 3 | Netherlands |\n| 4 | Persia |\n\nPage 393", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-417 - Public Offices - 1914.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 451475, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-417 - Public Offices - 1914", "page_number": 402, "title": "CO129-417 - Public Offices - 1914", "content_text": "# 395 \n## 1914 \n### 15. Dea \n\n**Esst previous Paper.** \n\n`F49307` \nfor mo \nCreas \n\n**HONG KONG** \n\n50256. \n\nW \nThere opress Comference \n\n`REC2` \n\nсо \n50256 \n**(Res 17 DEC 14)** \n\nLends corr note from Netherland Ministis forwarding Comy of Final lootocol & drawing attention to fact the protocol has been opened ti receri equationes of lowers who intins (i) enforce Conve\": Has replies states does not brokers li take any further action \n\nsum `70/58257`. \n\n71872714 \n\nری \nChuad 4 Jav \n\n**It subsequent Paper.** \n\n3-025-7 \n1.17.476-83. 20,000. 8/14. ¿ME.W.", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-417 - Public Offices - 1914.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 451476, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-417 - Public Offices - 1914", "page_number": 403, "title": "CO129-417 - Public Offices - 1914", "content_text": "In any further communication on the subject, please quote No. 78816/14 and address— \n\nThe Under-Secretary of State, Foreign Office, London. \n\n396 C.O 50256 \nFOREIGN OFFICE \nDecember 15th, 1914. \n549307 \n\nSir:- \n\nWith reference to the letter from this Office of the 10th instant, I am directed by Secretary Sir E. Grey to transmit herewith copy of a note from the Netherland Minister, forwarding copy of the Final Protocol of the 3rd International Opium Conference, and drawing the attention of His Majesty's Government to the fact that, in accordance with the opinions expressed by the Conference, a protocol has been opened at the Hague to receive the signatures of those Powers who intend to put the Convention into force without waiting for the ratification by all the signatory Powers. \n\nSir E.Grey has informed Monsieur van Swinderen that His Majesty's Government have taken note of this arrangement, but, subject to the concurrence of the Colonial Office, he does not propose to take any further \n\nThe Under Secretary of State, Colonial Office.", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-417 - Public Offices - 1914.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 451484, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-417 - Public Offices - 1914", "page_number": 411, "title": "CO129-417 - Public Offices - 1914", "content_text": "# \n\nIn any further communication on the subject, please quote `No.78816/14` and address to The Under Secretary of State, Foreign Office, London.\n\n**REC C 50257** \nRest 17 DEC \n**FOREIGN OFFICE** \n404 \n7 \nDecember 16th 1914.\n\n38% 93076 \nSir:- \nWith reference to the letters from this Office of the 10th and the 15th instant, forwarding copies, respectively, of the report of the British Delegates to the Third International Conference and of the Final Protocol of that Conference, I am directed by Secretary Sir E. Grey to inform you that he proposes to lay a Parliamentary Paper comprising the Delegates' instructions, their report, and the Final Protocol of the Conference. \nBefore doing so, however, he would be glad to learn whether the Colonial Office have any observations or suggestions to offer on the subject. \nA similar letter has been addressed to the Home Office, Board of Trade, and India Office.\n\nI am, Sir, \nYour most obedient, humble Servant, \nMaro \nThe Under Secretary of State, Colonial Office.", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-417 - Public Offices - 1914.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 456882, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-426 - Public Offices - 1915", "page_number": 198, "title": "CO129-426 - Public Offices - 1915", "content_text": "[This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.]\n\nC\n\nOPIUM.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL.\n\n[69769]\n\nNo. 1.\n\n194\n\n4156\n\nPac\n\nREG 27 JAN 15)\n\n[October 1.\n\nSECTION 1.\n\nSir,\n\nBritish Delegates to International Opium Conference to Sir Edward Grey.\n\nForeign Office, October 1, 1914.\n\nWE have the honour of transmitting to you herewith the final protocol of the third International Opium Conference, held at The Hague on the 15th-25th June, 1914. No volume containing the official records of the sessions has yet been issued; the delay is doubtless attributable to the European war. In continuation of the accounts already furnished of the first and second Conferences [Cd. 6448 and 7276] we beg to report to you on the proceedings and results of the third Conference.\n\nThe position of affairs in June of this year was duly summarised in our instructions. The invitation to the third Conference by the Netherlands Government stated that its object would be to institute an enquiry concerning the possibility of putting the convention in force, although all the Powers invited to sign the convention had not agreed to do so. This invitation was in obedience to a resolution passed by the second Conference, the terms of which appeared to contemplate the possibility of the coming into force of the convention, not only without the signature of all the invited Powers, but without the deposit of ratifications by all the signatory Powers; otherwise the coming into force appeared to be provided for automatically by article 24 of the convention.\n\nOur instructions authorised us to announce that the reasons which had precluded ratification by His Majesty's Government had ceased to exist, and that the deposit of the instrument of ratification would be made as soon as the necessary formalities had been carried out; we were further advised to press for similar ratification by all the signatory Powers which had not yet done so.\n\nThe first session, on the 15th June, was opened by a speech from his Excellency M. Loudon, Minister for Foreign Affairs to the Netherlands Government. He referred to the first Conference of 1911-12, at which only twelve Powers were represented, but which drew up the Opium Convention; and to the second of 1913, which proceeded from the first, and which decided that, although certain Powers who had been invited to sign the convention had not then done so, the deposit of ratifications might nevertheless take place. He then stated that the chief task of the third Conference would be to reply to the question formulated by a resolution of the second Conference, viz., whether it was possible for the convention to come into force, although the signature of all the invited Powers had not been obtained. M. Loudon then proceeded to explain the manner in which the Netherlands Government had carried out the duty with which they had been entrusted under the protocol of the second Conference. Persia, Sweden, Norway, Montenegro, Roumania, Switzerland, Bulgaria, and Uruguay had adhered. Austria-Hungary had in principle adhered; and though for constitutional reasons the Dual Monarchy had not signed, it had declared, nevertheless, its firm intention to adhere to the convention, and to take the necessary steps to put it in force. Greece had signed, with a reservation in respect of her newly-acquired territory. Turkey and Servia had categorically refused signature, the latter because she had not been able to study the question sufficiently, the former for economic reasons. Up to the present time eight ratifications had been deposited, and Great Britain was about to ratify shortly. The question, then, now before the Conference was to determine whether the convention can come into force notwithstanding the attitude of Turkey and Servia and the partial reserve of Greece. Agreement among all the Powers of the world with the object of subduing, for the good of humanity, a passion excited by the lust of lucre was, said M. Loudon, a new\n\n[2301 a-1]\n\nB", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-426 - Public Offices - 1915.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 456886, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-426 - Public Offices - 1915", "page_number": 202, "title": "CO129-426 - Public Offices - 1915", "content_text": "that he regarded the proceedings of the Conference as lacking in practicality, and the resolutions submitted by the committee as academic. He however recognised the importance of the resolution which had been carried unanimously on the proposition of the American and British delegations.\n\nM. van Deventer presented the Committee's Report, prefacing his remarks by stating that both the Chambers of the States-General had approved the ratification of the convention.\n\nThe report laid stress on the fact that the second resolution carried in an amended form at the previous sitting by 16 votes to 2 (with 11 abstentions) dealt with the mode of coming into force of the convention in the case of all the signatory Powers co-operating for that purpose. The Chinese proposition contained two principles, one dealing with the putting into force of the convention by certain only of the signatory Powers, and the other attempting a differentiation as between those Powers whose ratification was delayed solely for constitutional reasons, and those who deferred ratification for other than constitutional reasons. Although the Committee had prepared and submitted a formula embodying the latter principle it did not, in view of the previous criticism which the proposal had encountered, advise its further consideration by the Conference. To meet the other principle contained in the Chinese proposition it submitted the following vau :—\n\nIII. The Conference is of opinion that if, at a date to be determined by the Conference, all the signatory Powers have not deposited their ratifications, it shall be lawful (\"loisible\") for the signatory Powers whose ratifica-tions shall have been deposited by that date to put the convention in force. The same power shall be open to those signatory Powers who shall successively deposit the ratifications after that date.\n\nAnd as consecutive to this vaut it submitted also the following proposals:\n\nIV. That the date contemplated under III shall be.\n\nV. That the 'Comité de Rédaction be authorised to prepare a special protocol in which the signatory Powers which are prepared to make use of the power referred to under III shall be able to declare their intention of putting the convention in force.\n\nVI. That the power of acceding to the convention shall continue open to those Powers which have not yet signed it.\n\nIn the discussion which ensued we supported the Committee, in the preparation of whose report we had taken an active part, remarking that there was now a unanimous desire that the signatory Powers should ratify as soon as possible, that there was all but unanimity that the convention might be enforced by the signatories notwithstanding the abstention of two or three Powers. With so much manifestation of good-will it appeared that this Conference would have satisfactorily reviewed the situation, in which no fewer than forty-three Powers found themselves in agreement, and would serve the purpose of quickening progress towards the end in view.\n\nResolution III was then carried unanimously.\n\nThe date inserted in resolution IV was the 31st December, 1914, and in this form it was carried—16 voting for and 10 abstaining (viz., Germany, Denmark, Spain, France, Persia, Portugal, Roumania, Russia, Sweden, and Switzerland).\n\nResolutions V and VI were transposed in order, No. V being amended by providing that the special protocol should be prepared by the Minister of Foreign Affairs at The Hague instead of by the Committee. They were both carried unanimously.\n\nThe final session of the Conference was held on June 25th, when the welcome announcement was made by M. Loudon that Greece had signed the convention without any reserve.\n\nThe Protocol de Clôture, which had been drafted by the Comité de Rédaction, was approved and subsequently signed by all the delegates without any reservation whatever.\n\nIt recited that in a series of meetings held from the 15th-25th June the Conference had examined the question submitted to it by the vau of the second Conference, and had placed on record the following opinions (\"a émis les avis suivants\") :–\n\nA.-I. That it is possible for the International Opium Convention of the 23rd January, 1912, to be brought into force, notwithstanding the fact that some Powers invited in accordance with paragraph 1 of article 23 had not yet signed the convention.\n\nII. That the coming into force of the convention between all the signatory Powers shall take place when the Powers which have already signed, and those which have expressed their intention of adhering to it, shall have ratified it. The date of coming into force shall be that fixed by paragraph 1 of article 24.\n\nIII. That if by a date to be determined by the Conference all the signatory Powers have not yet deposited their ratifications, it will be lawful for the signatory Powers whose ratifications shall have been deposited by that date to put the convention in force. The same power shall obtain for the signatory Powers who shall successively deposit their ratifications after that date.\n\nIV. That the date indicated in No. III be the 31st December, 1914.\n\nV. That the possibility of acceding to the convention do remain open to the Powers which have not yet signed.\n\nB. The Conference has decided :-\n\nThat a protocol by which the signatory Powers desirous of acting in accordance with the provision under No. III shall be able to declare their intention of putting the convention in force shall be opened at The Hague,\n\n\"His Excellency the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Netherlands being satisfied that the desire has been unanimously expressed by the open for Conference, has consented to prepare this protocol, which will remain signature.\"\n\nC. The Conference has unanimously carried the following resolution :—\"The Conference invites his Excellency the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Netherlands to transmit, in the name of the Conference, an urgent and respectful representation to the signatory Powers which have not yet ratified the Convention nor expressed their intention of doing so, with a view to inducing them to declare their readiness shortly to deposit their ratifications, in order that the convention may come into force as soon as possible.\"\n\nThen follow the signatures of the plenipotentiaries of thirty Powers.\n\nA perusal of the final protocol and the procès-verbaux will, we think, serve to show that we have carried out, literatim and verbatim, the instructions with which we were favoured.\n\nWe can claim, as we did at the close of the second Conference, that this third Conference has served to review the international position and accelerate the pace.\"\n\nBefore summarising the results which we think have been attained as the results of the third Conference, we will report the position of the several Powers concerned as regards ratification of this convention at the close of the Conference, based on information which we obtained from the secretariate :\n\nA. The following signatory Powers had ratified the convention :\n\n1. United States of America.\n\n2. Belgium.\n\n3. China.\n\n4. Denmark.\n\n5. Guatemala.\n\n6. Italy.\n\n7. Portugal.\n\n8. Siam.\n\n9. Sweden.\n\n10. Venezuela.\n\n11. Honduras.\n\nB. The following signatory Powers were ready to ratify :\n\n1. Great Britain.\n\n2. Japan.\n\n3. Netherlands.\n\n4. Persia.\n\nPage 9\n\n[2301 a-1]\n\nPage 198\n\nD", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-426 - Public Offices - 1915.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 457114, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-426 - Public Offices - 1915", "page_number": 430, "title": "CO129-426 - Public Offices - 1915", "content_text": "Page 425\n\nC.O.\n\nTREATY SERIES, No. 612\n\n22359\n\nREC CONVENTION AND FINAL PROTOCOL, 17 MAY 15)\n\nBETWEEN THE\n\nUNITED STATES AND OTHER POWERS\n\nSuppression of the Abuse of Opium and Other Drugs\n\nSIGNED AT THE HAGUE, JANUARY 23, 1912, AND JULY 9, 1913\n\nRATIFICATION ADVISED BY THE SENATE, OCTOBER 18, 1913\n\nRATIFIED BY THE PRESIDENT, OCTOBER 27, 1913\n\nRATIFICATION OF THE UNITED STATES DEPOSITED WITH THE\n\nNETHERLANDS GOVERNMENT, DECEMBER 10, 1913\n\nPROCLAIMED, MARCH 3, 1915\n\nWASHINGTON\n\n1915\n\nPage 426", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-426 - Public Offices - 1915.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 457122, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-426 - Public Offices - 1915", "page_number": 438, "title": "CO129-426 - Public Offices - 1915", "content_text": "435\n\n16\n\npar la voie diplomatique à toutes les Puissances représentées à la Conférence,\n\nPour l'Allemagne.\n\nPour les Etats-Unis d'Amerique.\n\nPour la Chine. Pour la France....\n\nPour la Bretagne\n\nPour l'Italie.\n\nPour le Japon Grande-\n\nPour les Pays-Bas\n\nPour la Perse.. Pour le Portugal. Pour la Russie.. Pour le Siam –\n\n(F, DE MÜLLER. DELBRÜCK. GRUNENWALD.\n\n(CHARLES H. BRENT. HAMILTON WRIGHT. HENRY J. FINGER. LIANG CHENG.\n\nH. BRENIER.\n\nW. S. MEYER.\n\nW. G. MAX MÜLLER. WILLIAM JOB COLLINS. G. DE LA TOUR CALVELLO.\n\n[ÁIMARO SATO.\n\nTOMOE TAKAGI.\n\nKOTARO NISHIZAKI.\n\n[J. T. CREMER.\n\nC. TH, VAN DEVENTER.\n\nJA. A DE JONGH.\n\nJ. G. SCHEURER.\n\nMIRZA MAHMOUD KHAN.\n\nANTONIO MARIA BARTHOLOMEU FERREIRA,\n\nA. SAVINSKY.\n\n[AKHARAJ VARADHARA.\n\nWM. J. ARCHER.\n\nCertifié pour copie conforme:\n\nLe Secrétaire-Général du Ministère des Affaires Etrangères des Pays-Bas\n\nHANNEMA\n\nAnd whereas a Final Protocol making certain recommendations was signed by their respective Plenipotentiaries at The Hague, on the ninth day of July, one thousand nine hundred and thirteen, a certified copy of which Final Protocol, being in the French language, is word for word as follows:\n\nPROTOCOLE DE CLÔTURE de la Deuxième Conférence Internationale de l'Opium-1913.\n\nLa Deuxième Conférence Internationale de l'Opium, convoquée par le Gouvernement des Pays-Bas en vertu de l'article 23 de la Convention Internationale de l'Opium, s'est réunie à La Haye, dans le Palais des Comtes, le 1 juillet 1913.\n\nLes Gouvernements, dont l'énumération suit, ont pris part à la Conférence, pour laquelle ils avaient désigné les Délégués nommés ci-après:\n\nL'ALLEMAGNE:\n\nSon Exc. M. FÉLIX DE MÜLLER, Conseiller intime actuel, Envoyé Extraordinaire et Ministre Plénipotentiaire à La Haye, Délégué.\n\nLES ETATS-UNIS D'AMÉRIQUE:\n\nM. Le Dr. HAMILTON WRIGHT, Commissaire spécial au Département d'Etat, Délégué;\n\nSon Exc. M. Lloyd BRYCE, Envoyé Extraordinaire et Ministre Plénipotentiaire à La Haye, Délégué:\n\nM. GERRIT JOHN KOLLEN, Président Emérite du Hope-College, Professeur de mathématiques, Délégué.\n\nLA RÉPUBLIQUE ARGENTINE:\n\nM. le Dr. FRANÇOIS DE VEYGA, Délégué.\n\nLA BELGIQUE:\n\nSon Exc. M. le Baron ALBERIC FALLON, Envoyé Extraordinaire et Ministre Plénipotentiaire à La Haye, Délégué.\n\nLES ETATS-UNIS DU BRÉSIL:\n\nSon Exc. M. J. GRAÇA ARANHA, Envoyé Extraordinaire et Ministre Plénipotentiaire à La Haye, Délégué.\n\nLE CHILI:\n\nSon Exc. M. JORJE HUNELUS, Envoyé Extraordinaire et Ministre Plénipotentiaire à Bruxelles et à La Haye, Délégué.\n\n(17)", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-426 - Public Offices - 1915.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 457125, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-426 - Public Offices - 1915", "page_number": 441, "title": "CO129-426 - Public Offices - 1915", "content_text": "436\n\n22\n\nAnd whereas, the said Convention and Final Protocol have been ratified by the Government of the United States of America, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate thereof, and by the Governments of China and the Netherlands, and the ratifications of the said Governments were deposited by their respective Plenipotentiaries with the Government of the Netherlands;\n\nNow, therefore, be it known that I, Woodrow Wilson, President of the United States of America, have caused the said Convention and Final Protocol, to be made public, to the end that the same and every article and clause thereof may be observed and fulfilled with good faith by the United States and the citizens thereof.\n\nIn testimony whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of the United States to be affixed.\n\nDone at the City of Washington this third day of March in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and fifteen, and of the Independence of the United States of America the one hundred and thirty-ninth.\n\nBy the President:\n\nW. J. BRYAN\n\nSecretary of State.\n\n[SEAL]\n\nWOODROW WILSON\n\nINTERNATIONAL OPIUM CONVENTION.\n\nHis Majesty the German Emperor, King of Prussia in the name of the German Empire; The President of the United States of America; His Majesty the Emperor of China; The President of the French Republic; His Majesty the King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland and of the British Dominions beyond the Seas, Emperor of India; His Majesty the King of Italy; His Majesty the Emperor of Japan; Her Majesty the Queen of the Netherlands; His Imperial Majesty the Shah of Persia; the President of the Portuguese Republic; His Majesty the Emperor of All the Russias; His Majesty the King of Siam\n\nbeing desirous to take one step further in the way marked out by the International Commission at Shanghai in 1909;\n\nresolved to pursue progressive suppression of the abuse of opium, morphine, cocaine as well as drugs prepared or derived from these substances giving rise or which may give rise to analogous abuses;\n\ntaking into consideration the necessity and the mutual profit of an international understanding on this point;\n\nbeing convinced that they will meet in this humanitarian effort the unanimous adhesion of all the nations interested,\n\nhave resolved to conclude a Convention for this purpose and have appointed as their Plenipotentiaries, to wit:\n\nHis Majesty the German Emperor, King of Prussia:\n\nHis Excellency Mr. Félix de Müller, His present Privy Counsellor, His Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary at The Hague;\n\nMr. Delbrück, His Superior Privy Counsellor;\n\nDr. Grunenwald, His Counsellor of Legation;\n\nDr. Kerp, His Privy Counsellor, Director at The Imperial Health Office;\n\n23\n\nDr. Rössler, Imperial Consul at Canton.\n\nPresident of the United States of America: Bishop Charles H. Brent;\n\nDr. Hamilton Wright;\n\nMr. H. J. Finger.\n\nHis Majesty the Emperor of China:\n\nHis Excellency Mr. Liang Cheng, His Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary at Berlin;\n\nThe President of the French Republic:\n\nMr. Henry Brenier, Inspector of the Agricultural and Commercial Services of Indo-China;\n\nMr. Pierre Guesde, Administrator of the Civil Services of Indo-China.\n\nHis Majesty the King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland and the British Dominions Beyond the Seas, Emperor of India:\n\nThe Right Honorable Sir Cecil Clementi Smith, G.C.M.G., Member of the Privy Council;\n\nSir William Stevenson Meyer, K.C.I.E., Chief Secretary of the Government of Madras;\n\nMr. William Grenfell Max-Müller, C.B., M.V.O., His Counsellor of Embassy;\n\nSir William Job Collins, M.D., Deputy Lieutenant of the County of London.\n\nHis Majesty the King of Italy:\n\nHis Excellency Count J. Sallier de la Tour, Duke of Calvello, His Ambassador Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary at The Hague.\n\nHis Majesty the Emperor of Japan:\n\nHis Excellency Mr. Aimaro Sato, His Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary at The Hague;\n\nDr. Tomoe Takagi, Engineer of the General Government of Formosa;\n\nDr. Kotaro Nishizaki, Technical Specialist attached to the Laboratory of Hygienic Service.\n\nHer Majesty the Queen of the Netherlands:\n\nMr. J. T. Cremer, Her Former Minister of the Colonies, President of the Dutch Commercial Company;\n\nMr. C. Th. van Deventer, Member of the First Chamber of the States General;\n\nMr. A. A. de Jongh, Former Inspector General and Chief of the Opium Régie Service in the Dutch Indies;\n\nMr. J. G. Scheurer, Member of the Second Chamber of the States General;\n\nMr. W. G. van Wettum, Inspector of the Opium Régie in the Dutch Indies.\n\nHis Imperial Majesty the Shah of Persia:\n\nMirza Mahmoud Khan, Secretary of the Persian Legation at The Hague;\n\nThe President of the Portuguese Republic:\n\nHis Excellency Mr. Antonio Maria Bartholomeu Ferreira, Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary at The Hague;\n\nHis Majesty the King of All the Russias:\n\nHis Excellency Mr. Alexandre Savinsky, His Master of Ceremonies, His present Counsellor of State, His Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary at Stockholm.", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-426 - Public Offices - 1915.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 457128, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-426 - Public Offices - 1915", "page_number": 444, "title": "CO129-426 - Public Offices - 1915", "content_text": "439\n\n28\n\nArticle 17.\n\nThe Contracting Powers having treaties with China shall undertake to adopt the measures necessary for the restraint and control of the opium-smoking habit in their leased territories, \"settlements\" and concessions in China, for the suppression pari passu with the Chinese Government of the opium divans or similar establishments which may still exist there, and for the prohibition of the use of opium in houses of amusement and of prostitution.\n\nArticle 18.\n\nThe Contracting Powers having treaties with China shall take effective measures for the gradual reduction, pari passu with the effective measures which the Chinese Government shall take to the same end, of the number of shops, intended for the sale of raw and prepared opium, which may still exist in their leased territories, settlements and concessions in China. They shall adopt efficacious measures for the restraint and control of the retail trade in opium in the leased territories, settlements and concessions, unless existing measures have already regulated the matter.\n\nArticle 19.\n\nThe Contracting Powers who have post-offices in China shall adopt efficacious measures to prohibit the illegal importation into China, in the guise of a postal package, as well as the illegal transmission from one locality to another in China through the intermediary of these post-offices, of opium, whether raw or prepared, of morphine and of cocaine and their respective salts, and of other substances indicated in article 14 of the present Convention.\n\nCHAPTER V.\n\nArticle 20.\n\nThe Contracting Powers shall examine into the possibility of enacting laws or regulations making the illegal possession of raw opium, prepared opium, morphine, cocaine and their respective salts liable to penalties, unless existing laws or regulations have already regulated the matter.\n\nArticle 21.\n\nThe Contracting Powers shall communicate to each other, through the Netherlands Ministry for Foreign Affairs:\n\na. the text of the laws and the administrative regulations in existence which concern matters aimed at by the present convention or enacted by virtue of its clauses;\n\nb. statistical information with respect to that which concerns the traffic in raw opium, prepared opium, morphine, cocaine and their respective salts, as well as all other drugs or their salts or preparations aimed at by the present Convention.\n\nThese data shall be furnished with as much detail and in as short a time as shall be deemed possible.\n\n29\n\nCHAPTER VI.\n\nFinal Provisions.\n\nArticle 22.\n\nThe Powers not represented at the Conference shall be permitted to sign the present Convention.\n\nTo this end, the Netherlands Government shall invite, immediately after the Convention shall have been signed by the Plenipotentiaries of the Powers who have taken part in the Conference, all the Powers of Europe and of America not represented at the Conference, to wit, the Argentine Republic; Austria-Hungary; Belgium; Bolivia; Brazil; Bulgaria; Chile; Colombia; Costa Rica; Republic of Cuba; Denmark; Dominican Republic; Republic of Ecuador; Spain; Greece; Guatemala; Republic of Haiti; Honduras; Luxemburg; Mexico; Montenegro; Nicaragua; Norway; Panama; Paraguay; Peru; Roumania; Salvador; Servia; Sweden; Switzerland; Turkey; Uruguay, United States of Venezuela, to designate a Delegate armed with the full powers necessary for the signing of the Convention at The Hague.\n\nThe Convention shall be furnished with these signatures by means of a \"Protocol of signature of Powers not represented at the Conference,\" to be added after the signatures of the Powers represented and indicating the date of each signature.\n\nThe Netherlands Government shall give notice every month, to all the Signatory Powers, of each supplementary signature.\n\nArticle 23.\n\nAfter all the Powers, as much for themselves as for their possessions, colonies, protectorates and leased territories, shall have signed the Convention, or the supplementary Protocol hereinbefore indicated, the Netherlands Government shall invite the Powers to ratify the Convention together with this Protocol.\n\nIn case the signature of all the Powers invited shall not have been secured by December 31, 1912, the Netherlands Government shall immediately invite all the Powers who have signed by that date, to designate Delegates to proceed to The Hague to examine into the possibility of nevertheless depositing their ratifications.\n\nRatification shall be executed within as short a time as possible and shall be deposited at once at The Hague in the Ministry for Foreign Affairs.\n\nThe Netherlands Government shall give notice every month to the Signatory Powers of the ratifications which it shall have received in the interval.\n\nAs soon as the ratifications of all the signatory Powers, as much for themselves as for their colonies, possessions, protectorates and leased territories, shall have been received by the Netherlands Government, this government shall give notice to all the Powers who shall have ratified the Convention, of the date on which the last of such acts of ratification shall have been received.", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-426 - Public Offices - 1915.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 457129, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-426 - Public Offices - 1915", "page_number": 445, "title": "CO129-426 - Public Offices - 1915", "content_text": "440\n\n30\n\nArticle 24.\n\nThe present Convention shall go into effect three months after the date mentioned in the Netherlands Government's notification, as indicated in the last paragraph of the preceding article.\n\nWith regard to the laws, regulations and other measures provided for by the present Convention, it is agreed that the drafts necessary to this end shall be drawn up not later than six months after the going into effect of the Convention. With regard to the laws, these shall also be proposed by the Governments to their parliaments or legislative bodies within this same period of six months, and in any case at the first session which shall follow the expiration of this period.\n\nThe date from which these laws, regulations, or measures shall go into effect shall be the subject of an agreement between the signatory Powers, at the instance of the Netherlands Government.\n\nIn case questions shall arise relative to the ratification of the present Convention, or relative to the going into effect of the Convention, or of the laws, regulations and measures which such Convention involves, the Netherlands Government, if these questions cannot be decided by other means, shall invite all the Signatory Powers to designate delegates who shall assemble at The Hague to come to an immediate agreement on these questions.\n\nArticle 25.\n\nIf it should happen that one of the Contracting Powers should wish to denounce the present Convention, such denunciation shall be notified in writing to the Netherlands Government, who shall immediately communicate a certified copy in conformity with such notification to all the other Powers, informing them at the same time as to the date on which it received such notification.\n\nThe denunciation shall have no effect except with respect to the Power who shall have given notice thereof and one year after such notice shall have reached the Netherlands Government.\n\nIn witness whereof, the Plenipotentiaries have affixed their signatures to the present Convention.\n\nDone at The Hague, January 23, 1912, in one single copy, which shall remain deposited in the archives of the Government of the Netherlands and copies of which, certified in conformity, shall be delivered through diplomatic channels to all the Powers represented at the Conference.\n\n[Here follow signatures.]\n\n[Translation.]\n\nPROTOCOLE DE CLÔTURE OF THE INTERNATIONAL OPIUM CONFERENCE.\n\nThe International Opium Conference, proposed by the Government of the United States of America and convoked by the Government of the Netherlands, assembled at The Hague in the Palace of the Knights, December 1, 1911.\n\nThe Governments, the enumeration of which follows, have taken part in the Conference, to which they had designated the Delegates hereafter named.\n\n[Here follow names of Governments and Delegates.]\n\n31\n\nIn a series of meetings held from the 1st of December, 1911, to the 23rd of January, 1912, the Conference determined upon the text of Convention hereto annexed:\n\nThe Conference has further expressed the following wishes:\n\nI. The Conference is of the opinion that there is reason to draw the attention of the Universal Postal Union:\n\n1° to the urgency of regulating the transmission by post of raw Opium;\n\n2° to the necessity of regulating, so far as possible, the transmission by post of Morphine and Cocaine and their respective salts, and of the other substances contemplated by Article 14 of the Convention;\n\n3° to the necessity of prohibiting the transmission of prepared Opium by the post.\n\nII. The Conference is of the opinion that it is advisable to study the question of Indian Hemp from the statistical and scientific standpoint, with a view to regulating its misuse, should the necessity therefor make itself felt, by domestic legislation or by an international agreement.\n\nIn testimony whereof, the Plenipotentiaries have affixed their signatures to the present Protocol.\n\nDone at The Hague, the 23rd day of January, 1912, in a single copy, which shall remain deposited in the Archives of the Government of the Netherlands, and copies of which, certified and conforming thereto, shall be delivered through the diplomatic channel to all the Powers represented at the Conference.\n\n[Here follow signatures.]\n\n[Translation.]\n\nFINAL PROTOCOL OF THE SECOND INTERNATIONAL OPIUM CONFERENCE-1918.\n\nThe Second International Opium Conference, convoked by Government of the Netherlands in virtue of Article 23 of the International Opium Convention, met at The Hague, in the Palace of the Counts, July 1, 1913.\n\nThe Governments enumerated below took part in the Conference, for which they had designated the following-named delegates.\n\n[Here follow names of Governments and delegates.]\n\nIn a series of meetings held from the 1st to the 9th the conference after examination of the question put before it by paragraph 2 of Article 23 of the International Opium Convention of January 23, 1912-\n\nI. Decided that ratifications may be deposited from this moment.\n\nII. Unanimously adopted the following resolution:\n\nRESOLUTION.\n\nDesirous of following up in the path opened by the international commission of Shanghai of 1909 and the first conference of 1912 at The Hague, the progressive suppression of the abuse of opium, morphine, cocaine, as well as of drugs prepared with or derived from those substances, and deeming it more than ever necessary and mutually advantageous to have an international agreement on that point, the Second International Conference-\n\n1. Utters a wish that the Government of the Netherlands be pleased to call to the attention of the Governments of Austria-Hungary, Norway, and Sweden the fact that the signature, ratification, drawing up of legislative measures, and putting the convention into force constitute four distinct stages which permit of those powers giving their supplemental signatures even now.", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-426 - Public Offices - 1915.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 457137, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-426 - Public Offices - 1915", "page_number": 453, "title": "CO129-426 - Public Offices - 1915", "content_text": "This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.]\n\nOPIUM.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL,\n\n[78816]\n\nNo. 1.\n\n23745\n\n24 AY 15 [December 15.]\n\nSECTION 1.\n\n448\n\nSir,\n\nForeign Office to Board of Trade.*\n\nForeign Office, December 15, 1914. With reference to the letter from this Office of the 10th instant, I am directed by Secretary Sir E. Grey to transmit herewith copy of a note from the Netherlands Minister, forwarding copy of the final protocol of the 3rd International Opium Conference, and drawing the attention of His Majesty's Government to the fact that, in accordance with the opinions expressed by the Conference, a protocol has been opened at The Hague to receive the signatures of those Powers who intend to put the Convention into force without waiting for ratification by all the signatory Powers.\n\nSir E. Grey has informed M. van Swinderen that His Majesty's Government have taken note of this arrangement, but, subject to the concurrence of the Board of Trade, he does not propose to take any further action in the matter.\n\nA similar letter has been addressed to the India Office, Colonial Office, and Home Office.\n\nI am, &c.\n\nW. LANGLEY.\n\n* Also to India Office, Colonial Office, and Home Office, mutatis mutandis.\n\nDutch Minister, December 3, 1914.\n\n[2320 p-1]", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-426 - Public Offices - 1915.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 457138, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-426 - Public Offices - 1915", "page_number": 454, "title": "CO129-426 - Public Offices - 1915", "content_text": "[This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.]\n\n449\n\n28/45\n\nOPIUM.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL.\n\n[78816]\n\nNo. 1.\n\n24 MAY 15\n\n[December 16.]\n\nSECTION 1.\n\nSir,\n\nSir Edward Grey to M. van Swinderen.\n\nForeign Office, December 16, 1914.\n\nI HAVE the honour to express to you my thanks for the note which you were good enough to address to me on the 3rd instant, enclosing copy of the final protocol of the 3rd International Opium Conference.\n\nHis Majesty's Government have taken note of the fact that a protocol has been opened at The Hague, in accordance with the opinions expressed by the Conference, to receive the signatures of those Powers who intend to put the International Opium Convention into force without waiting for ratification by all the Powers.\n\nI have, &c.\n\nE. GREY.\n\n[2320 g-1]", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-426 - Public Offices - 1915.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 457140, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-426 - Public Offices - 1915", "page_number": 456, "title": "CO129-426 - Public Offices - 1915", "content_text": "This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government\n\n451 23745\n\nOPIUM.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL.\n\nJ)\n\n[88717]\n\nNo. 1.\n\n24 JAN 15\n\n[December 31.]\n\nSECTION 2.\n\nSir,\n\nBoard of Trade to Foreign Office. (Received December 31.)\n\nBoard of Trade, December 30, 1914.\n\nI AM directed by the Board of Trade to refer to your letters of the 15th and 16th December relative to the Third International Opium Conference.\n\nAs regards your letter of the 15th December, the Board concur in Sir E. Grey's proposal to take no further action in regard to the arrangement for putting the convention into force without waiting for ratification by all the signatory Powers.\n\nAs regards your letter of the 16th December, the Board note that Sir E. Grey proposes to lay a Parliamentary paper comprising the delegates' instructions, their report, and the final protocol of the conference; but they do not desire to offer any observations or suggestions on the subject.\n\nI am,\n\n&c.\n\n[2320 Ah-2]\n\nH. FOUNTAIN.", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-426 - Public Offices - 1915.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 457142, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-426 - Public Offices - 1915", "page_number": 458, "title": "CO129-426 - Public Offices - 1915", "content_text": "[This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.]\n\nOPIUM.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL.\n\n452A\n\n23/45\n\n[January 8. 1924]\n\n[2755]\n\nNo. 1.\n\nSECTION 1.\n\nSir,\n\nIndia Office to Foreign Office. (Received January 8.)\n\nIndia Office, January 7, 1915.\n\nWITH reference to your letter of the 16th December, I am directed by the Secretary of State for India in Council to inform you that he does not wish to offer any observations on the proposal to lay a parliamentary paper comprising the instructions to the British delegates to the Third International Opium Conference, their report, and the final protocol of the conference.\n\nI am, &c.\n\nE. J. TURNER.\n\n[2362-1]", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-426 - Public Offices - 1915.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 457246, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-426 - Public Offices - 1915", "page_number": 562, "title": "CO129-426 - Public Offices - 1915", "content_text": "C.O.\n\n30608\n\n[This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.]\n\n? 5 JUL 15)\n\nOPIUM.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL.\n\n[3316]\n\nNo. 1.\n\n554\n\n[January 9.]\n\nSECTION 1.\n\nHome Office to Foreign Office. (Received January 9.)\n\nSir,\n\nHome Office, January 7, 1915. IN reply to your letters of the 15th and 16th ultimo, with reference to the note received from the Netherlands Minister, dated the 3rd December, forwarding a copy of the final protocol of the 3rd International Opium Conference, I am directed by Mr. Secretary McKenna to say that he notes the reply returned to the Minister's communication, and concurs in Secretary Sir Edward Grey's proposal that no further steps be taken in the matter, beyond presenting the papers to Parliament.\n\nI am, &c.\n\nA. J. EAGLESTON.\n\n[2362 i-1]", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-426 - Public Offices - 1915.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 457247, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-426 - Public Offices - 1915", "page_number": 563, "title": "CO129-426 - Public Offices - 1915", "content_text": "(This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.)\n\nC.O.\n\n30608\n\nOPIUM.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL.\n\n[37625]\n\nNo. 1.\n\nRac\n\nRef 5 JUL 15\n\n[March 31.]\n\n555\n\nSECTION 2.\n\nPage 376\n\nSir J. Jordan to Sir Edward Grey.-(Received March 31.)\n\n(No. 53.) Sir,\n\nPeking, March 9, 1915.\n\nI HAVE the honour to forward copy of a note, dated the 20th February, received from the Wai-chiao Pu, expressing the intention of the Chinese Government to put into effect The Hague Opium Convention of the 23rd January, 1912, in accordance with the terms of the Final Protocol of the third Hague Opium Conference of June 1914.\n\n(Copy to India.)\n\nEnclosure No. 1.\n\nI have, &c.\n\nJ. N. JORDAN.\n\n(Translation.)\n\nWai-chiao Pu to Sir J. Jordan.\n\nSir,\n\nFebruary 20, 1915.\n\nIT is laid down in the Final Protocol of the third Hague Opium Conference of June 1914 that if by the 31st December, 1914, all the Powers have not found it possible to deposit their ratifications, it shall be lawful for the Powers whose ratifications have at that date been deposited and who wish to put the convention into effect, to declare their intention to do so by signing the protocol opened at the Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs.\n\nHis Excellency the Minister for the Netherlands, M. Beelaerts, informed me officially that this protocol had been prepared by the Netherlands Ministry for Foreign Affairs, and this Ministry thereupon telegraphically instructed Mr. Tang Tsai-fu, the Chinese Minister to The Hague, to sign the protocol formally declaring the sincere intention of China to put into effect the principles set forth in the convention. I am now in receipt of a telegram from Mr. Tang Tsai-fu, informing me that on the 11th instant he signed the protocol formally declaring the putting into effect of the convention as from the date of this signature.\n\nThe various signatory Powers having rendered China valuable assistance in effecting the prohibition of opium, morphia, and cocaine, the Chinese Government has now, in accordance with the method decided on by the Opium Conference, signed the protocol opened at The Hague declaring the putting into effect of the convention, and I have therefore the honour to inform your Excellency that any question relating to these drugs which may arise in the future will be dealt with in accordance with the convention.\n\nI avail, &c.\n\n(Seal of the Wai-chiao Pu.)\n\nPage 377\n\n[2371 hh-2]", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-426 - Public Offices - 1915.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 485760, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-465 - Public Offices & Others - 1920", "page_number": 114, "title": "CO129-465 - Public Offices & Others - 1920", "content_text": "4\n\nto bring the said convention into force, and for this purpose to enact the necessary legislation without delay, and in any case within a period of twelve months from the coming into force of the present treaty. Furthermore, they agree that ratification of the present treaty should, in the case of Powers which have not yet ratified the Opium Convention, be deemed in all respects equivalent to the ratification of that Convention\n\n> and to the signature of the special protocol,* which was opened at The Hague in accordance with the resolutions adopted by the Third Opium Conference in 1914 for bringing the said convention into force. For this purpose the Government of the French Republic will communicate with the Government of the Netherlands & certified copy of the protocol of the deposit of ratifications of the present treaty, and will invite the Government of the Netherlands to accept and deposit the said certified copy as it were a deposit of ratifications of the Opium Convention and a signature of the additional protocol of 1914.\" \n\nAccording to article 23 (c) of the Covenant of the League of Nations the members of the League\" will entrust the League with the general supervision over the execution of arrangements with regard to the traffic in women and children, and the traffic in opium and other dangerous drugs.\" \n\nSimilar provisions appear in the treaties with Austria (Treaty of Saint-Germain, article 247), with Hungary (Treaty of the Trianon, article 230), with Bulgaria (Treaty of Neuilly, article 174), and with Turkey (Treaty of Sevres, article 280). \n\nThis last is of special interest, as Turkey was one of the Powers which had refused to sign the original Opium Convention. \n\nWith reference to the last sentence in article 295 of the Versailles Treaty quoted above, His Majesty's Government has not been officially notified that the French Government has taken the necessary steps to bring the Opium Convention into force. Lord Derby has been informed verbally that the French Minister at The Hague was instructed on the 18th August last to approach the Dutch Government in the sense desired, but that no reply had yet been received. \n\nSignatories of the Opium Convention. \n\nThe following Powers have signed the Opium Convention :— \n\nOriginal signatories: \nGermany, United States of America, China, France, Great Britain, Italy, \n\nJapan, Netherlands, Persia, Portugal, Russia, Siam. \n\nSigned at the invitation of the Dutch Government: \nArgentine Republic, Belgium, Bolivia, Brazil, Bulgaria, Chile, Columbia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Spain, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Luxemburg, Mexico, Montenegro, Nicaragua, Norway, Panamá, Paraguay, Peru, Roumania, Salvador, Sweden, Switzerland, Uruguay, Venezuela. \n\nThe following Powers, which had not signed before, became signatories through the signing of one or more of the Treaties of Versailles, Saint-Germain, Trianon, Neuilly and Sevres :- \nThe Hedjaz, Liberia, Poland, the Serb-Croat-Slovene State, Czecho-Slovakia, Armenia, Turkey, Austria, Hungary, Greece, \n\nRatification of the Opium Convention. \n\nThe following Powers have ratified the Opium Convention :- \n\nUnited States of America, Belgium, China, Denmark, Ecuador, Guatemala, Italy, Portugal, Siam, Brazil, Sweden, Venezuela, Honduras, Netherlands, Spain, Norway, Uruguay, Great Britain, Nicaragua. \n\nThe following Powers have ratified the Opium Convention through ratification of \none or more of the Treaties of Versailles, Saint-Germain and Neuilly \n\nFrance, Japan, Bolivia, Cuba, Greece, Haiti, Liberia, Peru, Poland, Roumania, the Serb-Croat-Slovene State, Czecho-Slovakia, Germany, Austria, Bulgaria. \n\n* See p. 3. Results obtained by the 1914 Conference, section 3. \n\n5\n\nAll the Powers have, therefore, now signed the Opium Convention in one form or another, but the following do not yet appear to have ratified :- \n\nThe Hedjaz, Panamá, Persia, Chile, Argentine Republic, Luxemburg, Mexico, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, Salvador, Columbia, Paraguay, Turkey, Hungary, Armenia, Switzerland, \n\nSignatories of the Protocol for bringing the Convention into force. \n\nIn August 1919, the only Powers who had signed this Protocol were:- \n\nUnited States of America, China, Netherlands, Honduras, Norway, \n\nBelgium, Luxemburg. \n\nBut the following signatories may now be added in consequence of the ratification of the Treaties of Versailles, Saint-Germain and Neuilly:- \n\nBritish Empire, France, Italy, Japan, Bolivia, Brazil, Cuba, Greece, Guatemala, Haiti, Nicaragua, Liberia, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Roumania, Serb-Croat-Slovene State, Siam, Czecho-Slovakia, Uruguay, Germany, Austria, Bulgaria. \n\nThe following Powers do not yet appear to have signed the final protocol in form :- \n\nChile, Columbia, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, Paraguay, Salvador, Argentine Republic, Denmark, Spain, Mexico, Persia, Sweden, Switzerland, Venezuela, Ecuador, the Hedjaz, Honduras, Hungary, Turkey, Armenia, Panamá. \n\nThe following newly-recognised or not yet recognised Powers have not signed the Opium Convention or the protocol :— \n\nFinland, Latvia, Lithuania, Esthonia, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Soviet Russia. \n\n1920. The Dangerous Drugs Act. \n\nSo far as the United Kingdom is concerned, legislative sanction was obtained for enforcing the terms of the Opium Convention by the Dangerous Drugs Act (10-11 Geo. V, Ch. 46), which came into operation on the 1st September, 1920. The principal articles of the Act are as follows:- \n\n1. Raw Opium.-Export and import forbidden except under licence and through approved ports. Power to make regulations for controlling or restricting production, possession, sale and distribution of raw opium. \n\n2. Prepared Opium. Export and import entirely forbidden; the manufacture, possession, sale and use of prepared opium, and possession of opium-smoking utensils, made a penal offence. \n\n3. Cocaine, Morphine, &c.*-Import and export prohibited except under licence. Power to make regulations for controlling manufacture, sale, possession and distribution, &c., of these drugs. \n\nHeavy penalties are provided for infringement of the Act, and provision is made for inspection of the premises and books of those engaged in the manufacture, sale, &c., of the drugs. \n\nThis Act, which will be administered by the Home Office, supersedes the temporary legislation on the subject introduced during the war, viz., No. 40 B, Defence of the Realm Regulations, which dealt with the internal traffic in opium and cocaine; the Cocaine and Opium (Prohibition of Import) Proclamations, by which the importation of all opium and cocaine was prohibited except under licence; and the powers granted to the Board of Trade by the general Export Proclamations for prohibiting the export of these drugs (with morphine and heroin) except under licence. \n\nAction taken in the British Empire. \n\nFurthermore, regulations for restricting the traffic are being brought into effect and strengthened, where necessary, in the self-governing dominions and other parts of \n\n• The drugs to which this part of the Act applies are morphine, cocaine, ecgonine and diamorphine (commonly known as heroin), and their respective salts, and medicinal opium, and any preparation, admixture, extract or other substance containing not less than one-fifth per cent. of morphine or one-tenth per cent. of cocaine, ecgonine or diamorphine.", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-465 - Public Offices & Others - 1920.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 485820, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-465 - Public Offices & Others - 1920", "page_number": 174, "title": "CO129-465 - Public Offices & Others - 1920", "content_text": "4\n\nto bring the said convention into force, and for this purpose to enact the necessary legislation without delay, and in any case within a period of twelve months from the coming into force of the present treaty. Furthermore, they agree that ratification of the present treaty should, in the case of Powers which have not yet ratified the Opium Convention, be deemed in all respects equivalent to the ratification of that Convention and to the signature of the special protocol, which was opened at The Hague in accordance with the resolutions adopted by the Third Opium Conference in 1914 for bringing the said convention into force. For this purpose the Government of the French Republic will communicate with the Government of the Netherlands a certified copy of the protocol of the deposit of ratifications of the present treaty, and will invite the Government of the Netherlands to accept and deposit the said certified copy as if it were a deposit of ratifications of the Opium Convention and a signature of the additional protocol of 1914.\"\n\nAccording to article 23 c) of the Covenant of the League of Nations the members of the League \"will entrust the League with the general supervision over the execution of arrangements with regard to the traffic in women and children, and the traffic in opium and other dangerous drugs.\"\n\nSimilar provisions appear in the treaties with Austria (Treaty of Saint-Germain, article 247), with Hungary (Treaty of the Trianon, article 230), with Bulgaria (Treaty of Neuilly, article 174), and with Turkey (Treaty of Sevres, article 280),\n\nThis last is of special interest, as Turkey was one of the Powers which had refused to sign the original Opium Convention.\n\nWith reference to the last sentence in article 295 of the Versailles Treaty quoted above, His Majesty's Government has not been officially notified that the French Government has taken the necessary steps to bring the Opium Convention into force. Lord Derby has been informed verbally that the French Minister at The Hague was instructed on the 18th August last to approach the Dutch Government in the sense desired, but that no reply had yet been received.\n\nSignatories of the Opium Convention.\n\nThe following Powers have signed the Opium Convention\n\nOriginal signatories:\n\nGermany, United States of America, China, France, Great Britain, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, Persia, Portugal, Russia, Siam.\n\nSigned at the invitation of the Dutch Government:\n\nArgentine Republic, Belgium, Bolivia, Brazil, Bulgaria, Chile, Columbia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Spain, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Luxemburg, Mexico, Montenegro, Nicaragua, Norway, Panamá, Paraguay, Peru, Roumania, Salvador, Sweden, Switzerland, Uruguay, Venezuela,\n\nThe following Powers, which had not signed before, became signatories through the signing of one or more of the Treaties of Versailles, Saint-Germain, Trianon, Neuilly and Sevres :-\n\nThe Hedjaz, Liberia, Poland, the Serb-Croat-Slovene State, Czecho-Slovakia, Armenia, Turkey, Austria, Hungary, Greece.\n\nRatification of the Opium Convention.\n\nThe following Powers have ratified the Opium Convention :\n\nUnited States of America, Belgium, China, Denmark, Ecuador, Guatemala, Italy, Portugal, Siam, Brazil, Sweden, Venezuela, Honduras, Netherlands, Spain, Norway, Uruguay, Great Britain, Nicaragua.\n\nThe following Powers have ratified the Opium Convention through ratification of one or more of the Treaties of Versailles, Saint-Germain and Neuilly :\n\nFrance, Japan, Bolivia, Cuba, Greece, Haiti, Liberia, Peru, Poland, Roumania, the Serb-Croat-Slovene State, Czecho-Slovakia, Germany, Austria, Bulgaria.\n\n* See p. 8. Results obtained by the 1914 Conference, section 3.\n\n5\n\nAll the Powers have, therefore, now signed the Opium Convention in one form or another, but the following do not yet appear to have ratified :—\n\nThe Hedjaz, Panamá, Persia, Chile, Argentine Republic, Luxemburg, Mexico, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, Salvador, Columbia, Paraguay, Turkey, Hungary, Armenia, Switzerland.\n\nSignatories of the Protocol for bringing the Convention into force.\n\nIn August 1919, the only Powers who had signed this Protocol were:---\n\nUnited States of America, China, Netherlands, Honduras, Norway, Belgium, Luxemburg.\n\nBut the following signatories may now be added in consequence of the ratification of the Treaties of Versailles, Saint-Germain and Neuilly :-\n\nBritish Empire, France, Italy, Japan, Bolivia, Brazil, Cuba, Greece, Guatemala, Haiti, Nicaragua, Liberia, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Roumania, Serb-Croat-Slovene State, Siam, Czecho-Slovakia, Uruguay, Germany, Austria, Bulgaria.\n\nThe following Powers do not yet appear to have signed the final protocol in any form:--\n\nChile, Columbia, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, Paraguay, Salvador, Argentine Republic, Denmark, Spain, Mexico, Persia, Sweden, Switzerland, Venezuela, Ecuador, the Hedjaz, Honduras, Hungary, Turkey, Armenia, Panamá.\n\nThe following newly-recognised or not yet recognised Powers have not signed the Opium Convention or the protocol :-\n\nFinland, Latvia, Lithuania, Esthonia, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Soviet Russia.\n\n1920. The Dangerous Drugs Act.\n\nSo far as the United Kingdom is concerned, legislative sanction was obtained for enforcing the terms of the Opium Convention by the Dangerous Drugs Act (10-11 Geo. V, Ch. 46), which came into operation on the 1st September, 1920. The principal articles of the Act are as follows:\n\n1. Raw Opium.-Export and import forbidden except under licence and through approved ports, Power to make regulations for controlling or restricting production, possession, sale and distribution of raw opium.\n\n2. Prepared Opium.-Export and import entirely forbidden; the manufacture, possession, sale and use of prepared opium, and possession of opium-smoking utensils, made a penal offence.\n\n3. Cocaine, Morphine, &c.*-Import and export prohibited except under licence. Power to make regulations for controlling manufacture, sale, possession and distribution, &c., of these drugs.\n\nHeavy penalties are provided for infringement of the Act, and provision is made for inspection of the premises and books of those engaged in the manufacture, sale, &c., of the drugs.\n\nThis Act, which will be administered by the Home Office, supersedes the temporary legislation on the subject introduced during the war, viz., No. 40 B, Defence of the Realm Regulations, which dealt with the internal traffic in opium and cocaine; the Cocaine and Opium (Prohibition of Import) Proclamations, by which the importation of all opium and cocaine was prohibited except under licence; and the powers granted to the Board of Trade by the general Export Proclamations for prohibiting the export of these drugs (with morphine and heroin) except under licence.\n\nAction taken in the British Empire.\n\nFurthermore, regulations for restricting the traffic are being brought into effect and strengthened, where necessary, in the self-governing dominions and other parts of\n\nThe drugs to which this part of the Act applies are morphine, cocaine, ecgonine and diamorphine (commonly known as heroin), and their respective salts, and medicinal opium, and any preparation, admixture, extract or other substance containing not less than one-fifth per cent. of morphine or one-tenth per cent. of cocaine, ecgonine or diamorphine.\n\n173", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-465 - Public Offices & Others - 1920.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 489067, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-470 - Public Offices - 1921", "page_number": 215, "title": "CO129-470 - Public Offices - 1921", "content_text": "## 4 \n\nthe Marconi Company, to be designated by that company, shall be entitled to an additional vote. \n\n## 10.--(a.) \nThe Chinese Company shall utilise materials produced in China in preference to imported materials in all cases in which such materials are neither lower in quality nor higher in price than the imported materials. \n\n**(b.)** The Chinese Company shall employ Chinese on its personnel, so far as may be found possible from the point of view of competency and economy. \n\n**(c)** So soon as the Chinese Company's works are in operation a school shall be established near the works for the technical education of students, whereby they may obtain a practical, as well as theoretical, training to enable them to fill important positions in the Chinese Company. The expenses of the school shall be borne by the Chinese Company. \n\n## 11. \nSo soon as this agreement comes into effect the parties hereto shall proceed to the selection of a suitable site for the works of the Chinese company and to the appointment of the board of directors, who shall forthwith proceed to the settlement of arrangements for the acquisition of the site so selected and for the erection and equipment of the works. \n\n## 12. \nThe Marconi Company hereby covenants that during the period when the Chinese Company shall, under the terms of clause 3 above, be entitled to the use of the patent rights, designs, drawings, and secret processes of the Marconi Company, the Marconi Company will not grant similar rights to any other person for use in China in whole or in part, and during the period of this agreement the Marconi Company and their associated companies shall not sell wireless telegraph and telephone apparatus, material, and supplies in China except through the Chinese Company, and the Government, on its part, covenants that it will use all its power during the said period to prevent any other person within China infringing any of these rights causing loss to the Chinese Company, provided that previous application is made by the Chinese Company to the Government asking for the necessary protection. \n\n## 13. \nIn the event of dispute between the parties hereto regarding the amount to be paid to the Marconi Company under clause 2**(b)** or any other clause in this agreement, the matter shall be referred to a court of arbitrators consisting of two nominees of the Government, two nominees of the Marconi Company, and a fifth to be selected by these four, making in all five members, the majority vote thereof to be final. \n\n## 14. \nThe Government agrees hereby that forthwith upon the execution of this agreement it will cause this agreement to be communicated to His Britannic Majesty's Minister at Peking by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, whereupon this agreement shall come into full force and effect. \n\n## 15. \nThis agreement shall be executed in two exemplars, each of Chinese and English versions. In case of discrepancy, or in the event of doubt arising regarding the interpretation of this agreement, the English version shall rule. \n\nIn witness whereof this agreement is signed on behalf of the Government of the Republic of China by the Ministry of War, and sealed with the seal of the Ministry of War, and is signed on behalf of Marconi's Wireless Telegraph Company (Limited) by its duly authorised attorney. \n\nIn the presence of: \nSOHTSU G. KING. \n\nIn the presence of: \nGEO. W. FRODSHAM. \n\n(Signed and chopped in Chinese), \nTING CHING, \n(Duly authorised by the Minister of War.) \n(Marconi's Wireless Telegraph Company (Limited)), \nA. H. ĞINMAN, \n(Attorney-in-fact.) \n\n**DRAFT** \n\n## Mr. \n## MINUTE. \n## 17. June 4/2/21 \nBeckett \nMr. \nMr. \nMr. Grindle. \nSir H. Lambert. \nSir H. Read. \nSir Q. Fiddes. \nCol. Amery. \nLord Milner. \n\nPage 459 \n\n... your \nSokong \nJe \n\n## 213 \n7 Tebal \nam rc. to ack. the receipt of \nletter of the 26 form, No. \n4. 3166 2570/10 with regard to \nDe proposals for the increase \no \ncables moveless facilities \nalong the Qwere cast. \n\nSurefly, \nam to request you to inf. \nSarl Curzon of Redlesion \nthat Lord Milner has \nno \nobous to offer on the profocale \nanfounts of detail,", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-470 - Public Offices - 1921.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 489238, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-470 - Public Offices - 1921", "page_number": 386, "title": "CO129-470 - Public Offices - 1921", "content_text": "# to bring the said convention into force, and for this purpose to enact the necessary legislation without delay, and in any case within a period of twelve months from the coming into force of the present treaty. Furthermore, they agree that ratification of the present treaty should, in the case of Powers which have not yet ratified the Opium Convention, be deemed in all respects equivalent to the ratification of that Convention and to the signature of the special protocol, which was opened at The Hague in accordance with the resolutions adopted by the Third Opium Conference in 1914. For this purpose the Government of the French Republic will communicate with the Government of the Netherlands a certified copy of the protocol of the deposit of ratifications of the present treaty, and will invite the Government of the Netherlands to accept and deposit the said certified copy as if it were a deposit of ratifications of the Opium Convention and a signature of the additional protocol of 1914.”\n\nAccording to article 23 (c) of the Covenant of the League of Nations the members of the League \"will entrust the League with the general supervision over the execution of arrangements with regard to the traffic in women and children, and the traffic in opium and other dangerous drugs.\"\n\nSimilar provisions appear in the treaties with Austria (**Treaty of Saint-Germain**, article 247), with Hungary (**Treaty of the Trianon**, article 230), with Bulgaria (**Treaty of Neuilly**, article 174), and with Turkey (**Treaty of Sevres**, article 280).\n\nThis last is of special interest, as Turkey was one of the Powers which had refused to sign the original Opium Convention.\n\nWith reference to the last sentence in article 295 of the **Versailles Treaty** quoted above, His Majesty's Government has not been officially notified that the French Government has taken the necessary steps to bring the Opium Convention into force. Lord Derby has been informed verbally that the French Minister at The Hague was instructed on the 18th August last to approach the Dutch Government in the sense desired, but that no reply had yet been received.\n\n## Signatories of the Opium Convention\n\nThe following Powers have signed the Opium Convention :--\n\n### Original signatories\n\n| Power |\n| --- |\n| Germany |\n| United States of America |\n| China |\n| France |\n| Great Britain |\n| Italy |\n| Japan |\n| Netherlands |\n| Persia |\n| Portugal |\n| Russia |\n| Siam |\n\n### Signed at the invitation of the Dutch Government\n\n| Power |\n| --- |\n| Argentine Republic |\n| Belgium |\n| Bolivia |\n| Brazil |\n| Bulgaria |\n| Chile |\n| Columbia |\n| Costa Rica |\n| Cuba |\n| Denmark |\n| Dominican Republic |\n| Ecuador |\n| Spain |\n| Guatemala |\n| Haiti |\n| Honduras |\n| Luxemburg |\n| Mexico |\n| Montenegro |\n| Nicaragua |\n| Norway |\n| Panamá |\n| Paraguay |\n| Peru |\n| Roumania |\n| Salvador |\n| Sweden |\n| Switzerland |\n| Uruguay |\n| Venezuela |\n\nThe following Powers, which had not signed before, became signatories through the signing of one or more of the Treaties of Versailles, Saint-Germain, Trianon, Neuilly and Sevres :-\n\n| Power |\n| --- |\n| The Hedjaz |\n| Liberia |\n| Poland |\n| the Serb-Croat-Slovene State |\n| Czecho-Slovakia |\n| Armenia |\n| Turkey |\n| Austria |\n| Hungary |\n| Greece |\n\n## Ratification of the Opium Convention\n\nThe following Powers have ratified the Opium Convention :-\n\n| Power |\n| --- |\n| United States of America |\n| Belgium |\n| China |\n| Denmark |\n| Ecuador |\n| Guatemala |\n| Italy |\n| Portugal |\n| Siam |\n| Brazil |\n| Sweden |\n| Venezuela |\n| Honduras |\n| Netherlands |\n| Spain |\n| Norway |\n| Uruguay |\n| Great Britain |\n| Nicaragua |\n\nThe following Powers have ratified the Opium Convention through ratification of one or more of the Treaties of Versailles, Saint-Germain and Neuilly :-\n\n| Power |\n| --- |\n| France |\n| Japan |\n| Bolivia |\n| Cuba |\n| Greece |\n| Haiti |\n| Liberia |\n| Peru |\n| Poland |\n| Roumania |\n| the Serb-Croat-Slovene State |\n| Czecho-Slovakia |\n| Germany |\n| Austria |\n| Bulgaria |\n\nAll the Powers have, therefore, now signed the Opium Convention in one form or another, but the following do not yet appear to have ratified :--\n\n| Power |\n| --- |\n| The Hedjaz |\n| Panamá |\n| Persia |\n| Chile |\n| Argentine Republic |\n| Luxemburg |\n| Mexico |\n| Costa Rica |\n| Dominican Republic |\n| Salvador |\n| Columbia |\n| Paraguay |\n| Turkey |\n| Hungary |\n| Armenia |\n| Switzerland |\n\n## Signatories of the Protocol for bringing the Convention into force\n\nIn August 1919, the only Powers who had signed this Protocol were-\n\n| Power |\n| --- |\n| United States of America |\n| China |\n| Netherlands |\n| Honduras |\n| Norway |\n| Belgium |\n| Luxemburg |\n\nBut the following signatories may now be added in consequence of the ratification of the Treaties of Versailles, Saint-Germain and Neuilly:\n\n| Power |\n| --- |\n| British Empire |\n| France |\n| Italy |\n| Japan |\n| Bolivia |\n| Brazil |\n| Cuba |\n| Greece |\n| Guatemala |\n| Haiti |\n| Nicaragua |\n| Liberia |\n| Peru |\n| Poland |\n| Portugal |\n| Roumania |\n| Serb-Croat-Slovene State |\n| Siam |\n| Czecho-Slovakia |\n| Uruguay |\n| Germany |\n| Austria |\n| Bulgaria |\n\nThe following Powers do not yet appear to have signed the final protocol in any form :--\n\n| Power |\n| --- |\n| Chile |\n| Columbia |\n| Costa Rica |\n| Dominican Republic |\n| Paraguay |\n| Salvador |\n| Argentine Republic |\n| Denmark |\n| Spain |\n| Mexico |\n| Persia |\n| Sweden |\n| Switzerland |\n| Venezuela |\n| Ecuador |\n| the Hedjaz |\n| Honduras |\n| Hungary |\n| Turkey |\n| Armenia |\n| Panamá |\n\nThe following newly-recognised or not yet recognised Powers have not signed the Opium Convention or the protocol :—\n\n| Power |\n| --- |\n| Finland |\n| Latvia |\n| Lithuania |\n| Esthonia |\n| Georgia |\n| Azerbaijan |\n| Soviet Russia |\n\n## 1920. The Dangerous Drugs Act\n\nSo far as the United Kingdom is concerned, legislative sanction was obtained for enforcing the terms of the Opium Convention by the **Dangerous Drugs Act** (`10-11 Geo. V, Ch. 46`), which came into operation on the 1st September, 1920. The principal articles of the Act are as follows:\n\n1. **Raw Opium**. - Export and import forbidden except under licence and through approved ports. Power to make regulations for controlling or restricting production, possession, sale and distribution of raw opium.\n\n2. **Prepared Opium**.-Export and import entirely forbidden; the manufacture, possession, sale and use of prepared opium, and possession of opium-smoking utensils, made a penal offence.\n\n3. **Cocaine, Morphine, &c.**-Import and export prohibited except under licence. Power to make regulations for controlling manufacture, sale, possession and distribution, &c., of these drugs.\n\nHeavy penalties are provided for infringement of the Act, and provision is made for inspection of the premises and books of those engaged in the manufacture, sale, &c., of the drugs.\n\nThis Act, which will be administered by the Home Office, supersedes the temporary legislation on the subject introduced during the war, viz., `No. 40 B`, **Defence of the Realm Regulations**, which dealt with the internal traffic in opium and cocaine; the **Cocaine and Opium (Prohibition of Import) Proclamations**, by which the importation of all opium and cocaine was prohibited except under licence; and the powers granted to the Board of Trade by the general **Export Proclamations** for prohibiting the export of these drugs (with morphine and heroin) except under licence.\n\n## Action taken in the British Empire\n\nFurthermore, regulations for restricting the traffic are being brought into effect and strengthened, where necessary, in the self-governing dominions and other parts of the British Empire. The drugs to which this part of the Act applies are morphine, cocaine, ecgonine and diamorphine (commonly known as heroin), and their respective salts, and medicinal opium, and any preparation, admixture, extract or other substance containing not less than one-fifth per cent. of morphine or one-tenth per cent. of cocaine, ecgonine or diamorphine.\n\nPage 384", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-470 - Public Offices - 1921.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 489812, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-471 - Public Offices - 1921", "page_number": 303, "title": "CO129-471 - Public Offices - 1921", "content_text": "# 302 \n\n## 2 \n\neasy route to Chinese markets. The good name of America was thus damaged by the actions of an unpatriotic few.\n\nChina is today facing a political crisis. The Central Government powerless before the lawless audacity of a handful of military leaders, or Tuchuns. These usurpers are playing fast and loose with the good name of China and utterly destroying the credit she had won through the energy and good faith with which she had carried out her obligations. These despots have ridden rough-shod alike over China's agreement with India and the still wider international obligations assumed by China at The Hague.\n\nIndia, in bitterness of spirit, assails China's insincerity and the flagrant breaking of her treaty. She asks, perhaps not unjustly, why India should sacrifice a much-needed revenue for the purpose of allowing China to control the opium market, which, unless China be checked in her downward course, is inevitable, as China's poppy cultivation can greatly exceed that of India. By underselling the Indian product she at once controls the world's market.\n\nThis is the menace.\n\nBut it must not be taken too seriously. China demonstrated her capacity when, in a few years, she practically wiped the poppy from her fields. With a stable Government her laws can once more be enforced and the will of her people be given expression, as it was in 1919, when the Government in Peking openly burned opium to the value of 15,000,000 dollars.\n\nThe Netherlands Government has turned over to the League of Nations the duties hitherto carried out by that Government, in so far as they relate to the Governments which are parties to the League. In February last a committee was appointed by the Assembly to advise the Council as to its future programme. This committee was composed of representatives from the eight countries particularly interested in the opium question - Great Britain, France, Holland, Portugal, China, Japan, Siam and India. To this committee were added three assessors or experts, chosen because of their knowledge of the subject and irrespective of nationality.\n\nAccording to article 595 of the Versailles Treaty, the signing of that treaty was equivalent to the signing of the protocol opened at The Hague. This refers to the signatory and belligerent Powers alone. The neutral and non-signatory Powers, however, having either signed or ratified the opium convention of 1912, being, therefore, still under the jurisdiction of the Netherlands Government, have been asked by that Government to fulfil their further obligations by signing the protocol at The Hague, which will bring them in line with the treaty Powers.\n\nAs for the recent meeting of the opium committee held in Geneva, there is a feeling that the League failed to take advantage of the great opportunity presented. The opium question is free from politics. It deals primarily with the welfare of humanity. And it was generally understood that the League would express specifically its intention of pressing this problem to its ultimate conclusion, irrespective of material interests involved. But there seemed to be a determined effort on the part of the majority of the committee to restrict the convention to a most rigid interpretation - to stick to the letter alone.\n\nIf the League is to take the responsibility of this great humanitarian movement, it should lose no time in stating definitely its position. The report of the committee was satisfactory so far as it went - but it must be frankly stated that the ground covered was extremely limited. In the final analysis there is but one solution to the opium problem - the suppression of the cultivation of the poppy save for medicinal purposes. The Hague Convention calls for legislation to restrict and regulate the trade, and no country has passed more rigid legislation than the United States. But no rules or regulations can protect a country from opium or its kindred drugs so long as the source of the trouble is not removed.\n\nThe Indian Government is prepared to abide by the strict letter of the convention, and agrees to prohibit the exportation of opium to countries which have laws against its importation, but it refuses to curtail its trade to countries accepting the drug. This means that opium inevitably makes its way through illicit channels to countries which prohibit, thus defeating the purpose of the convention of 1912.\n\nFor a hundred and fifty years opium has been a curse to humanity. It has all but undermined one of the greatest nations of the East - and, unless checked, presents a menace of increasing seriousness to the West. The opium monopolies of the East must be abandoned.\n\nThe giving up of slavery entailed great financial sacrifice. The Congress of Vienna in 1815 was the first to propose its abolition. It took, in America, an appalling civil war to accomplish the same end.\n\nBut Great Britain, at the same time, was working towards abolition.\n\nThe opium habit is worse than slavery. The drug should no longer be tolerated as a basis of revenue, an obsolete practice inherited from a primitive and unethical past. The opium problem presents to the League of Nations an extraordinary opportunity. If it can bring about its solution, that alone would justify its being. But it must be prepared to see it through to the end irrespective of material interests involved.\n\nIt is not necessary or desirable to pull down ruthlessly the financial structure of India or the colonies of the East, which at present rests upon this unwise source of revenue. But the principle of its eventual abolition must be accepted, and other means of raising revenue substituted. That opium is of incalculable value to humanity when legitimately used is undeniable. But, once released from these bounds, it becomes an instrument for immeasurable evil.\n\nThe opium-raising countries of the world today are India, Turkey, Persia and China. It is not just that the burden of sacrifice should fall alone upon the shoulders of India. Persia is already a party to the convention of 1912 - though with reservations. And Turkey, through the Treaty of Sèvres, must eventually submit to similar restrictions. China will do again what she has done before; public opinion there will demand this when she once more has a Government capable of enforcing laws. India, the best governed of all Eastern countries, can see her laws enforced at will. Therefore, with India rests the greatest responsibility of all.\n\nOpium should be placed on a plane with radium, as something of infinite worth to humanity, and of great monetary value. As the cultivation of the poppy is restricted to what is needed for medicinal use, the price must automatically ascend, and opium will still remain a large factor in the revenue of the East, but its value will be based on the legitimate need for it, not on its power to corrupt.", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-471 - Public Offices - 1921.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 490216, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-471 - Public Offices - 1921", "page_number": 707, "title": "CO129-471 - Public Offices - 1921", "content_text": "# The Macao Question.\n\n## A REPLY TO THE PORTUGUESE VERSION.\n\n**(Cantea Information Bureau)**\n\nCanton: September 26—A Hongkong paper has published what, we take it, is to be read as the official Portuguese version of the recent incident at Macao. The statement opens with the admission that \"various incidents have occurred recently relating to the question of Portuguese and Chinese jurisdiction all of which have been determined with more or less difficulty by the authorities at Canton and Macao\". We concur. But what follows in the Portuguese version is an obvious falsification of history. \"These incidents or conflicts\", it is said, \"far from being due to a desire to enlarge Portuguese authority—a desire which does not exist—are rather due to a want of comprehension of the right, duties and obligations of nations in their relations to each other, on the part of sundry or junior Chinese officials, who maintain a doubtful discipline amongst their subordinates,”\n\n## A CONCLUSIVE ANSWER.\n\nThe conclusive answer to this attempt to find the cause for these \"incidents or conflicts\" in Chinese truculency rather than in the Portuguese desire to grab more Chinese territory, is to point out that whereas in 1848, the area of Macau was actually less than 3 square miles, it is to-day considerably more than 11 square miles and, if the Portuguese claim were allowed, it would exceed 50 sq. m.!\n\nAs the Portuguese statement has plunged into history, and bad history at that, it is necessary to rehearse the relevant historical facts involved in the case. The settlement of Macao originally comprised the tip of the tongue of land jutting out at the southern extremity of the West River delta, known as the District of Heung-Shau. The Portuguese were at first no more than squatters and, according to a well-known book of reference, they \"first obtained a footing on a vacant lot near the shore under the pretext of drying wet cargo, and in 1557 were permitted by the Chinese Government, then under the Ming Dynasty, to erect factories on the payment of $20,000\". Later, the Portuguese made a new arrangement with the Manchu Government, which required them to pay an annual land tax of Tls. 500 and prohibited their movements beyond two barrier gates. These gates \"were opened 5 times a month, when the Portuguese were supplied with rice and other necessaries\".\n\n## \"A SCRAP OF PAPER\"\n\nThe land tax of Tls. 500 was paid until 1848, when the Portuguese—taking advantage of the weakened state of China brought about by the first Opium War—violated the agreement, refused to pay the land tax and expelled the Chinese authorities. It was about this time that the \"desire to enlarge Portuguese authority\" found its first notable expression. The northern boundary of Macao, which then ran across the centre of the tongue of land, was pushed back to include the entire peninsula, right up to the barrier on the sandy isthmus connecting the settlement with the rest of the delta. This illegal state of things, created by the Portuguese, continued down to 1887, when the Protocol of Lisbon and the Treaty of Peking legalised the Portuguese occupation of Macao in return for the Portuguese undertaking to aid in suppressing the smuggling trade in opium—which, by the way, is still vigorous and flourishing in the settlement.\n\nThe Portuguese statement appears to invoke article 2 of the Treaty of Peking. The article stipulates that \"Commissioners appointed by both Governments shall proceed to the delimitation of the boundaries (of Macao), which shall be determined by a special Convention; but so long as the delimitation of the boundaries is not concluded, everything in respect of them shall continue as at present without addition, diminution, or alteration by either of the parties,\"\n\n## LAPPA'S SPRING WATERS.\n\nAt the date of this Treaty of Peking of 1887, the water-boundary between Macao and the Chinese territory known as Lappa Island, lying opposite to it, was not an acute issue—if it were an issue at all because (a) the Portuguese authorities at the time had a more or less correct comprehension of the right, duties and obligations of nations in their relations to each other\" in the matter of an inlet-boundary, such as that existing between Macao and Lappa Island, i.e. the boundary line lies along the centre of the main channel; (b) it was only in 1909 that the Portuguese began dredging work with the view of making the Port of Macao available for the largest river-boats and ultimately oversea shipping; and (c) in 1887, the Portuguese had not yet contemplated the seizure of Lappa Island for the twofold purpose of enclosing the port entirely by Portuguese territory and securing for Macao the best navigable water in that section of the delta region. There is little doubt that the Lusitanians are thirsting for Lappa's spring-waters. But they are also wanted by the rightful and immemorial owners of the soil. (Continued on Page 8.)\n\n## The Macao Question.\n\n(Continued from Page 1.)\n\n### THE STATUS QUO OF 1887.\n\nIn these circumstances, the Portuguese statement wholly begs the question when it contends that, in view of the maintenance of the STATUS QUO of 1887 as stipulated by article 2 of the Treaty of Peking, \"it follows that if the port of Macao was solely under Portuguese jurisdiction in 1887, China cannot exercise any Authority in the waters of the port\". The entire point at issue is what are \"the waters of the port of Macao\". The historical evidence is completely against the present Portuguese contention that those waters included, in 1887, the Chinese side of the inlet separating Macao from Lappa Island. And even if the evidence—which is not the case—were less conclusive as to what were the \"waters of the port\" of Macao in 1887, the briefest consideration of the question, under the guidance of settled law, would show the STATUS QUO of 1887 to be precisely what is affirmed by the historical facts of the case. We cast this treatment of the issue into the form of a series of numbered statements:-\n\n1. It is to be noted that the inlet or waters between Macao and the Chinese island of Lappa were once exclusively Chinese.\n2. Prior to 1848, the Portuguese occupied Macao as yearly tenants of the Chinese Government.\n3. The refusal of the Portuguese to pay the annual land-rent of Tls. 500 rendered their occupation of Macao, from 1848 to 1887, tortious and illegal.\n4. The Treaty of Peking legalized the Portuguese occupation of Macao in terms tantamount to a cession of the territory of the settlement FROM THE DATE OF THE TREATY.\n5. While there was no general rule of International Law which could automatically fix the land frontier of Macao, there was, at the date of the Treaty of Peking (and it is still the rule of law), such a principle of the Law of Nations which determined the frontier line of two states bordering on waters, viz., the Macao harbour being an inlet matter has stationed a launch near Ngan Hang in order to compel Chinese fishing-boats to go to the Macao side of the river or to take out licences issued by him. There, however, limits even the tolerance of the Chinese with their inherited belief in compromise and common sense. Hence, the recent incident.\n6. As Macao was LEGALLY ceded to the Portuguese by the Treaty of 1887, it necessarily follows that the boundary line between it and the Chinese territory of Lappa Island then lay along the middle of the inlet separating the two.\n7. Hence, the STATUS QUO of 1887 was that the \"waters of the port\" of Macao bordered on to the centre of the inlet, the Lappa side being entirely under Chinese jurisdiction. On this view, the case against the Portuguese contention is complete both in law and in fact.\n\n## \"MONTE CARLO OF THE ORIENT.\"\n\n8. The recent incident at Macao is admittedly the direct outcome of the Portuguese attempt to extend the \"waters of the port\" right up to the Lappa side of the inlet, it is clear that the Portuguese are and must be in the wrong and wholly responsible for the origin and consequences of the incident.\n\nThe language of the Portuguese communique compels us to make a necessary reference to Macao as a centre of pernicious human activities which no government, definable as civilised, ought to tolerate far less legalise. \"Macao\", we read in a popular guide-book in a passage devoted to the Amenities of the place, \"is popularly known as the Monte Carlo of the Orient—there being several large gambling establishments, conducted, under Government control, the licences bringing in a large revenue to the Colonial Treasury. Besides licensed gambling houses, there is a lottery conducted by the Government. The lots are drawn once a month, the highest prize being as large as $150,000\". From these illegitimate monopolies and traffic in human frailties, the revenue derived is apausi surplus of 6-7 million dollars. Practically the whole of this sum is remitted to government, although the process of colonial milking is masked by a method of appropriation exclusively for the assistance of the Portuguese colony of Tin. off the N. W. coast of Australia.\n\n## ANOTHER \"SCRAP OF PAPER.\"\n\nIt is unnecessary to go afresh into the particular facts of the incident, except to state that—besides being due generally to the persistent violation of the Treaty of 1887 on the part of the Portuguese—it was specifically provoked by another characteristic Portuguese violation of a written agreement made between the Canton and Macao authorities as a MODUS VIVENDI pending the final settlement of the matter. It is one of the terms of the agreement that the Portuguese shall not interfere with Chinese fishing-boats which may be beached for cleaning or repairs near Ngan Hang, a Chinese village on the Lappa Island, in Chinese territory.", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-471 - Public Offices - 1921.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 491264, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-473 - Individuals - 1921", "page_number": 257, "title": "CO129-473 - Individuals - 1921", "content_text": "254\n\nLa médecine estime que ces produits peuvent devenir nocifs, parce que, au lieu d'être le résultat des sucs élaborés dans la plante pendant son lent développement et sa fructification, les éléments en sont rapidement placés par la synthèse chimique en présence les uns des autres. Or, tout le monde sait que la chimie naturelle, c'est-à-dire celle que le soleil crée dans la plante, n'a pas des effets absolument identiques à ceux de la chimie industrielle. Par conséquent, double danger.\n\nEnfin, Messieurs, ceux qui s'adonnent à l'usage de ces drogues, qui se les inoculent, qui les sentent, en un mot, qui les absorbent, éprouvent une satisfaction nouvelle à susciter chez d'autres personnes les mêmes désirs. C'est ici qu'apparaît le plus grand péril. Ce n'est pas seulement l'adulte qui est tenté, c'est l'adolescent qu'on essaie de convertir. La contagion se répand, le mal gagne de proche en proche. Aujourd'hui, dans nos sociétés modernes, un nombre considérable d'individus sont atteints par cette étrange passion qui non seulement les menace eux-mêmes dans leur santé et dans leur activité, mais encore qui menace l'avenir de la race.\n\nLe Gouvernement français, soucieux de conjurer le péril, a estimé qu'il était nécessaire de proposer à la cinquième Commission de recommander à l'Assemblée de prier le Conseil de demander aux gouvernements — car c'est bien là notre procédure compliquée — de réunir une nouvelle conférence. C'est la thèse que j'ai eu l'honneur de soutenir devant la cinquième Commission. Vous connaissez ses ardents sentiments humanitaires et vous savez, Messieurs, qu'elle n'hésite pas, parfois, à lire la Convention du Pacte d'un œil très indulgent.\n\nMalheureusement, ma thèse n'a pas rencontré l'appui que j'escomptais. On m'objecta que la question n'était pas encore suffisamment étudiée. Les grandes organisations humanitaires auxquelles nous sommes redevables de ces magnifiques mouvements d'opinion publique qui déterminent les Assemblées à se prononcer, ne s'étaient pas encore saisies de la question. C'est pourquoi l'intégralité de ma thèse ne fut pas soutenue par les orateurs féminins de la Commission.\n\nEn cette occurrence, nous avons entendu la très heureuse suggestion qui nous vint de M. van Swinderen. Comme la Commission n'estimait pas que la réunion d'une Conférence immédiate s'imposât, comme elle ne croyait pas que les ravages qui s'exercent en Occident fussent assez étendus, comme il lui paraissait suffisant d'étudier d'une façon plus approfondie le seul problème oriental, une résolution fut rédigée.\n\nElle demande :\n\n1. Que la Commission consultative déjà nommée étende son action, non seulement à ce qui est prévu dans la convention, c'est-à-dire aux produits végétaux ou à leurs dérivés, mais aussi aux produits chimiques dont nous déplorons l'extension et la vente. Cette Commission, qui a déjà établi un questionnaire, qui s'efforce de connaître le problème dans son entier et de poursuivre l'enquête scientifique, s'appliquera à réunir les éléments nécessaires.\n\n2. Que la cinquième Commission délègue, ou plus exactement, prie l'Assemblée de déléguer le soin à la Commission consultative de considérer s'il n'est pas nécessaire de réunir une conférence nouvelle, à l'effet de modifier la Convention de telle manière qu'elle puisse s'appliquer aux produits chimiques.\n\nSur les sages conseils de M. Hanotaux, la délégation française accepta cette résolution. Quand la France se décide à soutenir une proposition de ce genre, c'est qu'elle a pleine confiance dans son succès final. La Commission accepte le principe que nous avons posé : cela nous suffit. Nous sommes certains que, très rapidement, la Commission consultative — et je n'en veux pour preuve que l'attention avec laquelle vous m'écoutez, car vous sentez combien ce sujet est inquiétant pour ceux que préoccupe l'existence de l'humanité tout entière —, la Commission consultative, dis-je, dès qu'elle aura poussé ses investigations, reconnaîtra l'étendue du mal. Nous sommes certains qu'elle recommandera alors immédiatement au Conseil de provoquer la réunion d'une conférence nouvelle, en vue de transformer les conditions de la Convention, de telle manière que l'Assemblée de la Société des Nations...\n\n...les organismes qui sont chargés de poursuivre dans le monde entier les abus et les dangers de ce fléau fassent tout leur possible pour le détruire, car il menace l'Occident de la même façon que le fléau de l'opium menace l'Orient.\n\nCe fléau a depuis longtemps constitué une habitude dans les pays orientaux. Au fur et à mesure que ceux-ci se sont développés, dans une philosophie plus subtile que la nôtre, leur civilisation a semblé soudain suspendue et arrêtée par l'usage abusif de ces drogues.\n\nIl ne faut pas que ce mal s'étende à d'autres civilisations ; il faut, en même temps que nous cherchons à guérir en Asie ceux qui en souffrent, et alors que la jeune génération de la Chine tout entière n'hésite pas à réprouver ce qui se passe dans ce pays et à combattre les abus de l'opium, il faut, dis-je, que nous montrions l'exemple et que nous poursuivions d'une façon complète toutes ces drogues, quelles qu'elles soient, quelle que soit leur origine. (Vifs applaudissements).\n\nM. FERREIRA (Portugal), rapporteur.\n\nMessieurs,\n\nJe vous demande la permission d'ajouter encore quelques mots à l'exposé que j'ai eu l'honneur de vous faire tout à l'heure, afin de combler une lacune.\n\nA propos de la sixième recommandation de la cinquième Commission : « L'Assemblée prie instamment ceux des Etats, membres de la Société, qui n'ont pas encore signé et ratifié la Convention de l'opium, qu'ils le fassent aussitôt que possible, »\n\nJe dois dire que les membres suivants de la Société n'ont pas encore ratifié la Convention sur l'opium de 1912, ni signé le Protocole de 1914 : Albanie, Argentine, Chili, Colombie, Costa-Rica, Esthonie, Finlande, Lettonie, Lithuanie, Paraguay, Perse, Salvador, Suisse.\n\nLe Danemark et le Venezuela ont ratifié la Convention, mais n'ont pas encore signé le Protocole de 1914.\n\nJe crois exprimer notre désir à tous en priant ces pays d'apporter aussitôt que possible leur collaboration effective à l'œuvre humanitaire de la Société des Nations.\n\nJe désire ajouter encore deux mots en réponse au discours que vient de prononcer l'honorable délégué de la France, M. Hennessy, pour le tranquilliser en ce qui concerne la huitième recommandation du rapport de la cinquième Commission qui a fait l'objet de ses observations.\n\nIl me reste à répondre aux observations que M. Jean Hennessy a présentées au sujet de la huitième recommandation du rapport de la cinquième Commission. Je puis assurer à notre honorable collègue que l'esprit qui a présidé à l'élaboration de la Convention de La Haye et qui a inspiré les travaux de la Commission consultative guidera encore celle-ci dans l'examen des idées qui ont été développées par lui et qui tendent à libérer l'humanité des fléaux qui la ravagent. (Approbation).\n\nM. le PRÉSIDENT. — Personne ne demande plus la parole ?...\n\nPersonne ne demande qu'il soit procédé à l'appel nominal sur les propositions de la Commission ?...\n\nDans ces conditions, je puis considérer que les propositions sont adoptées à l'unanimité. (Assentiment).\n\nII.\n\nCOMMUNICATION DE M. LE PRÉSIDENT.\n\nM. le PRÉSIDENT. — M. le Président de la troisième Commission me prie de vous signaler une erreur qui a été commise dans le Journal. Une réunion de cette Commission est annoncée pour cet après-midi. La troisième Commission ayant terminé ses travaux, cette réunion n'aura pas lieu.\n\nII.—COMMUNICATION BY THE PRESIDENT\n\nThe PRESIDENT. — Gentlemen, I wish to point out a misprint in to-day's copy of the Official Journal. It is stated that Committee No. 3 will meet this afternoon, but that Committee has concluded its labours, and therefore will not meet.", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-473 - Individuals - 1921.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 493942, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-478 - Public Offices & Others - 1922", "page_number": 333, "title": "CO129-478 - Public Offices & Others - 1922", "content_text": "[This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.]\n\nCONFIDENTIAL.\n\n(11724.) (AMENDED.)\n\n328\n\nC. U\n\n7\n\n9085\n\nREC :\n\nREG25 FB22\n\nRemission of the Boxer Indemnity.\n\nAFTER the Boxer rising of 1900 the Chinese Government were called upon to pay an indemnity to the Powers concerned for damage sustained or military expenditure incurred.* By article 6 of the Final Protocol of 1901 the amount was fixed at 450,000,000 Haikwan taels. This sum constituted a gold debt calculated for the different currencies at rates of exchange fixed in the protocol (e.g., in calculating the amount of the gold debt the tael is to be taken as representing 3s. 71⁄2d gold dollars, 3.750 fr., 1.407 yen, &c.).\n\nThe gold debt was to bear interest at the rate of 4 per cent., and was to be redeemed in annual instalments spread over thirty-nine years, terminating at the end of 1940. A proportionate amount was to be paid monthly to a commission of bankers representing the interested Powers, and certain revenues were assigned as security.\n\nThe indemnity was made up between the different Powers as follows:--\n\n \n Taels\n Per cent of Total\n \n \n Russia\n 180,371,120\n 29.0\n \n \n Germany\n 90,070,515\n 20.0\n \n \n France..\n 70,878,240\n 15.75\n \n \n Great Britain\n 50,620,545\n 11.23\n \n \n Japan\n 94,793,100\n 7.7 (?)\n \n \n United States\n 32,939,055\n 7.8 (?)\n \n \n Italy\n 26,617,005\n 5.8\n \n \n Belgium..\n 8,484,345\n 1.8\n \n \n Austria..\n 4,008,920\n 0.9\n \n \n Netherlands\n 782,100\n 0.2\n \n \n Spain\n 185,315\n \n \n \n Portugal\n 92,250\n \n \n \n Sweden..\n 62,820\n \n \n \n Other claims\n 149,670\n \n \n \n Total\n 450,000,000\n 100.0\n \n\nIn 1908 the United States Government had the amount of their indemnity claim reviewed by a special claim's court, and according to a statement prepared by Mr. Morse, the author of the standard work, \"The International Relations of the Chinese Empire,\" for the China Association, it was decided to demand from China not the entire cost of the expeditionary force, but a sum to cover the difference between the war cost in the field and the peace cost in garrison. This difference added to the private claims amounted to about 2,800,000l., as compared with the estimate of about 5,000,000l. provisionally made in 1901. The balance of 2,200,000l. was remitted by proportionate deductions from future payments. This was done without any conditions being imposed.\n\nThe United States Minister at Peking, Mr. Rockhill, a persona gratissima with the Chinese Government, induced them to continue voluntarily to issue the American quota of the indemnity without deduction and to pay that portion which was renounced by the United States Government to a Commission of Education for the purpose of sending Chinese students to American Universities. The net result, therefore, was that the Chinese Government devoted the amount by which the original American claim was over-estimated to the education of Chinese students in America.\n\n* For fuller details and for some account of the machinery for the payment of the indemnity instalments, see Appendix I.\n\nTo nearest decimal.\n\n477.6 [6823]\n\nB", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-478 - Public Offices & Others - 1922.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 493943, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-478 - Public Offices & Others - 1922", "page_number": 334, "title": "CO129-478 - Public Offices & Others - 1922", "content_text": "On China's declaration of war against the Central Powers in 1917, all payments to Germany and Austria were suspended. At the same time, the Allied Powers agreed to defer for five years without interest the payments of the Boxer indemnity, with the exception that Russia officially remitted only one-third of these payments. The Powers interested agreed to spread the repayment of the suspended portions of the indemnity, which would otherwise have fallen due between the 1st December, 1917, and the 1st December, 1922, over the following years :-\n\n \n Great Britain\n 1940-45\n \n \n Japan\n 1923-40\n \n \n France\n 1922-27\n \n \n Belgium\n 1922-27\n \n\nItaly held out for repayment in full after five years, but intimated that the matter might be further considered later.\n\nThe arrangement agreed to by His Majesty's Government was that the payment of instalments falling due between the 1st December, 1917, and the 1st December, 1922, should be made between 1941 and 1945. Instalments falling due between the 1st December, 1922, and the 1st December, 1940, are to be made at due date in accordance with the existing amortisation table without alteration.\n\nThe terms granted by His Majesty's Government were, therefore, far the most generous of those given by the Allied Powers.\n\nIn view of the position in Russia, China has since ceased to make any payments on account of the indemnity due to Russia. Prior to the discontinuance of any payments, she had been paying the Russian instalments after the collapse of any recognised Government in that country only on condition that the money remained in the Russo-Asiatic Bank at Shanghai.\n\nFollowing the precedent of the Allied Powers, the United States Government also agreed to the postponement of their share of the indemnity, but left the period of postponement indefinite and terminable at any moment. No arrangements were made for the eventual redemption of the suspended payments. The suspension seems to have been made rather informally, but the United States Government stipulated for the continued application to specified educational objects of half the indemnity claim which they had previously remitted.\n\nIn August last the Senate passed a resolution, introduced by Senator Lodge, authorising the remission of the final balance of the indemnity, amounting to 1,236,858 dollars, such remission to begin as from the 1st October, 1917, and to be at such times and in such manner as the President shall deem just.\" The resolution was not expected to come before the House of Representatives before the following session.\n\nThe neutral Indemnity Powers were not concerned with the question of remission, and have presumably continued to receive their shares of the indemnity as they did before China declared war against Germany.\n\nThe machinery for the collection and payment of the indemnity instalments has remained unaffected by the suspension.* The only change made was that the funds obtained from the revenues assigned to the service of the indemnity, which would otherwise have been credited to the different foreign Governments, were remitted by the banks charged with the service of the indemnity to the Chinese Government, by cheque in taels equivalent at the rate of exchange of the day to the gold sum which would have been payable in accordance with the Protocol of 1901.\n\nUnder existing arrangements, on the 1st December, 1922, the instalments due on that date will once more be credited to the countries concerned by the banks instead of being paid over to China. Additional payments will also have to be begun in order to pay off the suspended portions of the indemnity. We must, therefore, be prepared for a plea to be put forward by China, or on her behalf, that she should not be required to resume indemnity payments.\n\nIn October 1918 His Majesty's Ambassador at Tokio reported that the Japanese Minister for Foreign Affairs had informed the Chinese Minister that the Japanese Government had decided in principle to remit the Japanese portion of the indemnity, but that as payment by China had been deferred in 1917 for five years, there was plenty of time for the Japanese to decide whether remission should be an unconditional gift or whether the money should be applied to special objects. In July 1919 the Chinese Minister in London enquired whether His Majesty's Government were proposing to remit on certain conditions their share of the indemnity. He mentioned that the Japanese had announced their intention of doing so, and that he believed the French were also considering remission.\n\nThe balance due by instalments to this country in May 1921 was £9,740,600. The question of the remission of the British share has been frequently raised in connection with proposals for the education of Chinese students on British lines.* The Treasury view has been that the British claim, in contradistinction to the American claim, was rigidly scrutinised and correctly assessed; it was enacted by Parliament that the receipts should be applied in reduction of debt; the money thus represents the repayment of expenditure originally met from the proceeds of debt created for the purpose and cannot without a violation of all the established principles of rational finance be diverted to another use.\n\nThe question of the education of Chinese students on British lines will be considered by a committee which is being appointed for the purpose under the chairmanship of Sir John Jordan.\n\nThe desirability of financing any educational proposals out of the indemnity will no doubt be examined by the committee, but it must meanwhile remain open to doubt whether Chinese education in itself would be a sufficient reason for remitting any substantial part of the indemnity in the present state of our finances. There is, however, one important reason in favour of the remission of the indemnity. Other arguments which may be cited are the opposition to be expected from the Chinese Government themselves, who will plead that they are unable to pay, and the objections to be urged against the continued mulcting of a democratic country and former ally for the sins of the absolutist Manchu Government by means of an indemnity which has the appearance of an inheritance from the days of militant imperialism, and seems to be out of keeping with the changed spirit of the times.\n\nFinally, there is bound to be a tendency to play one Power off against another, especially as the first Power to renounce its claim will secure the lion's share of the credit for such action. Each Power may feel that although the sacrifice of the remainder of the indemnity is not in itself justified on the intrinsic merits of the case, yet it cannot afford the risk of being forestalled by another Power.\n\nIt should not be difficult to meet this danger by prior consultation between the Powers chiefly concerned. The proper course would seem to be to consider what policy is desirable on the merits of the case and then to consult with the other Powers in order to decide upon the adoption of a common attitude.\n\nThe arguments so far put forward in favour of remission are stated above. The arguments against remission can make less appeal to sentiment, but are also strong. Because China was treated with generosity in 1917 to enable her to meet the expenses of joining in the war, is it reasonable that she should use this generosity as a means of securing further and greater concessions in 1922? This country has already made a gift to China of the difference between the value of the payments due in the years 1917-21 and the present value of those sums when the dates of payment are postponed for twenty-three years without interest. Why should this very substantial present be made a pretext for further gifts?\n\nThe plea that China cannot afford to pay is more specious than real. Remission will certainly not rehabilitate her finances, which are disordered by her own incompetence and corruption, seeing that despite the suspension of the payments since 1917 her finances are no better but worse than they were then. China can resume payment, at any rate, of the instalments normally due (the extra payments which will be required to redeem the suspended portions of the indemnity are another matter which may require special consideration) without undue disturbance, as the revenues assigned to the service of the indemnity have continued to be collected.\n\nPage 329", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-478 - Public Offices & Others - 1922.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 493945, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-478 - Public Offices & Others - 1922", "page_number": 336, "title": "CO129-478 - Public Offices & Others - 1922", "content_text": "331\n\n6\n\n9. Accordingly, under the Rules of Trade signed with the Chinese Government by Lord Elgin and his French and American colleagues in November 1858, similar custom offices were opened at Canton in 1859; Swatow in 1860; Ningpo, Foochow, Chinkiang, Tien-tsin and Kiukiang in 1861; Amoy and Hankow in 1862; Chefoo in 1863; and Newchwang in 1864.\n\n10. Under the Treaties of Peking of 1860 with France and Great Britain, China agreed to pay indemnities to those two countries. These were secured upon the custom receipts. To ensure due payment, Mr. Lay, who had succeeded Mr. Wade as one of the three \"foreign inspectors of customs\" just a year after the institution of the new system, was appointed first Inspector-General of Customs on the 21st January, 1861, but he soon quarrelled with the Chinese Government and was dismissed from Chinese service. His successor as Inspector-General of Customs was Mr. (later Sir Robert) Hart. In 1865 Mr. Hart established his office at Peking, which has since remained the headquarters of the maritime customs service.\n\n11. In 1898 His Majesty's Government received an assurance from China that\n\n\"the Inspector-General of Maritime Customs shall in the future, as in the past, be of British nationality.\n\nBut if at some future time the trade\n\nof some other country should become greater than that of Great Britain, China will then of course not be bound to necessarily employ an Englishman as inspector-general.\"\n\n12. The service, though international as to staff, has always been, and still remains, pre-eminently a British institution. English is the official language, and the administration is moulded on British lines.\n\n13. Sir R. Hart died in 1911, and was succeeded by Sir F. Aglen, the present Inspector-General.\n\nBoxer Indemnity.\n\n14. After the Boxer rising of 1900 the Chinese were called upon to pay a heavy indemnity to the Powers for damage sustained or military expenditure incurred. The claims filed amounted to about 67,500,000l., say 450,000,000 taels; and at that sum the indemnity was eventually fixed by article 6 of the Final Protocol of 1901. Interest was to be at 4 per cent.; amortisation was to begin on the 1st January, 1902, and to end on the 31st December, 1940; annual payments (in gold at a fixed rate of exchange) were to amount to 18,829,500 taels in 1902, 19,899,300 taels from 1911, 23,383,300 taels in 1915, 24,483,800 taels from 1916, and 35,350,152 taels from 1932 until the end, the whole amount for principal and interest being 982,238,150 taels. A proportionate amount was to be paid monthly to a commission of bankers representing the interested Powers, and to secure these payments certain revenues were assigned: (1) the balance of the maritime customs revenues after payment of all prior obligations secured upon them, plus the proceeds of an enhanced customs tariff of an effective 5 per cent.; (2) the native customs at each treaty port to be administered henceforth by the maritime customs; (3) the balance of the salt revenue not already pledged.\n\n15. The total indemnity was made up as follows:-\n\n \n Taels.\n Per Cent.* of Total.\n \n \n Russia\n 130,371,120\n 29.0\n \n \n Germany\n 90,070,515\n 20.0\n \n \n France\n 70,878,240\n 15.75\n \n \n Great Britain\n 50,620,545\n 11.25\n \n \n Japan\n 34,793,100\n 7.7\n \n \n United States\n 32,939,055\n 7.3\n \n \n Italy\n 26,517,005\n 5.9\n \n \n Belgium\n 8,184,345\n 1.9\n \n \n Austria\n 4,008,920\n 0.9\n \n \n Netherlands\n 782,100\n 0.2\n \n \n Spain\n 135,315\n \n \n \n Portugal\n 92,250\n 0.1\n \n \n Sweden\n 62,820\n \n \n \n Other claims\n 149,670\n \n \n \n Total\n 450,000,000\n 100.0\n \n\n*To nearest decimal.\n\nThe Pre-Boxer Loans.\n\n16. Prior to the imposition of the Boxer indemnity, certain earlier foreign obligations had been already secured upon the maritime customs revenue.\n\n \n Date.\n Title, Source, &c.\n Interest.\n Amount.\n Term of Redemption.\n Redeemed.\n \n \n 1894\n Hong Kong and Shanghai Bank. (War Loan)\n 7\n 10,000,000 taels\n 1914\n 1913\n \n \n 1895\n Hong Kong and Shanghai Bank. (War Loan)\n 6\n 3,000,000l.\n 1915\n 1914\n \n \n 1895\n Chartered Bank. (Cassel Loan)\n \n 1,000,000l.\n 1915\n 1915\n \n \n 1895\n Arnhold, Karberg & Co. (Nanking Loan)\n 6\n 1,000,000l.\n 1915\n 1915\n \n \n 1895\n Franco-Russian\n 4\n 400,000,000 fr.\n 1931\n \n \n \n 1896\n Anglo-German\n 5\n 16,000,000l.\n 1932\n \n \n \n 1898\n Anglo-German\n 4½\n 16,000,000l.\n 1948\n \n \n\n17. Of these loans only three are now outstanding, namely, the Franco-Russian Loan of 1895, the Anglo-German Loan of 1896 and the Anglo-German Loan of 1898. These three loans are conveniently referred to as the \"pre-Boxer loans.\"\n\nNo. 439,\n\nLoan Service and Indemnity Payments as affected by the Revolution of 1911.\n\n18. Among the subsidiary questions raised by the revolutionary movement that broke out in China in 1911 was that of the disposal of the customs revenue at the various treaty ports, and of how to maintain it intact for the service of the foreign debt (\"China,\" Part LXIX, No. 23/1911.\n\n19. Under the system till then existing these revenues had been paid into Chinese Government banks and disposed of by the Chinese superintendents of customs at the ports, the Maritime Customs Service having no responsibility beyond that of verifying and filing the bank receipts in proof of the payment of duties, and not handling the actual cash at any stage. But with the advance of the revolution the funds collected at one treaty port after another fell under revolutionary control, and there was a serious risk of their being diverted to military purposes or to other forms of support of the revolutionary movement. The first port at which this question arose was Changsha; later the same problem presented itself at Hankow; and as a temporary measure it was arranged with the revolutionaries that the revenue should be held to the order of the Inspector-General of Customs, on the ground that it was really the property of the foreign bondholders and that complications with foreign Powers might well arise if it were seized.\n\n20. At Shanghai this raised a fresh issue. The Commissioner of Customs proposed that the revenue should be lodged with the Hong Kong and Shanghai Bank to the credit of the Inspector-General. This at once brought various of the foreign representatives at Peking into the field with the suggestion that the already existing machinery of the Indemnity Commission of Bankers (see paragraph 14) should be utilised. But this again was open to certain objections. The customs revenues being firstly pledged in the first place for the service of the pre-Boxer loans in regular order of priority, Mr. (now Sir Francis) Aglen, the Inspector-General of Customs, suggested that a special commission of the bankers interested in these pre-Boxer loans should be formed to deal with these funds. The merit of this proposal lay in that the customs revenues would thus be entrusted to those banks actually responsible to the bondholders for the due service of the loans secured by a first charge upon them. These loans amounted to a nominal capital of 54,455,000l.; and whilst almost all the Powers had become creditors of China since 1900, only Great Britain, Germany, Russia and to a small extent France, were interested in the loans prior to that date. The Boxer indemnity was only a second charge on the customs revenue (see paragraph 14).\n\n21. The foreign representatives at Peking had difficulty in coming to any agreement as to the arrangements to be made, the United States, Japanese and Belgian Ministers in particular (although none of them had any interest in the pre-Boxer loans) being insistent upon a revival of the powers of the Indemnity Commission of Bankers.\n\nNo. 400.)", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-478 - Public Offices & Others - 1922.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 493946, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-478 - Public Offices & Others - 1922", "page_number": 337, "title": "CO129-478 - Public Offices & Others - 1922", "content_text": "Peking, No. 494, Dec. 5, 1911. (\"China,\" Part LXIX. No. 601.)\n\nPeking, No. 55, (\"China,\" Part LXX. No. 216.)\n\nPeking, No. 196, Apr. 20, 1912, (China Part LXX, No. 581.)\n\n8\n\nFinally, it was decided to refer the matter to all the banks at Shanghai connected with any of the obligations secured on the customs for their views.\n\n22. Meantime the Chinese Government had defaulted upon the monthly payment of interest on the Anglo-German Loan of 1896, and Sir J. Jordan without more ado insisted that they should take immediate steps to place the whole revenue receipts of the Maritime Customs both at those treaty ports still in their possession and at those in revolutionary hands under the direct control of the Inspector-General of Customs. The Chinese Government officially assured Sir John that they had already decided upon this course, and that the customs revenue receipts at all ports throughout the country were henceforth entirely under the control of Mr. Aglen for the purpose of meeting China's foreign loans and indemnity obligations.\n\nInstitution of Control of Maritime Customs by the Diplomatic Body at Peking.\n\n23. After consulting the managers of the banks at Shanghai a formal arrangement was eventually agreed upon between the Chinese Government and the Diplomatic Body. Under this arrangement the Diplomatic Body were practically appointed by China as trustees to see that all the obligations secured upon the customs revenue were duly met. This arrangement, though modified subsequently in one or two matters of detail which will be explained later, is still in force, and constitutes the authority under which the Diplomatic Body to-day exercise their control over the Chinese customs revenue.\n\n24. The text of the agreement between the Diplomatic Body and the Chinese Government of the 30th January, 1912, runs as follows:--\n\n\"1. The International Commission of Bankers shall consist of the managers of the banks interested in the service of all outstanding loans secured by the customs revenue contracted previous to 1900 and/or the indemnity payments. The said commission shall decide all questions of priority of claim between foreign loan payments, and shall draw up a schedule of the various payments to be made in this connection for the guidance of the commissioner of customs at Shanghai.\n\n\"2. The banks chiefly interested, viz., the Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Corporation, the Deutsch-Asiatische Bank and the Russo-Asiatic Bank, shall be custodians of the customs funds at Shanghai. [Since amended, see paragraphs 32, 34 and 40.]\n\n\"3. The inspector-general of customs shall account to the commission appointed for the net customs revenue until such time as the Chinese Government are in a position to resume payments of loans and indemnity.\n\n\"4. The inspector-general of customs shall arrange for weekly remittance of net revenue from all collecting points to Shanghai.\n\n\"5. The inspector-general of customs shall arrange that the net revenue accumulated at Shanghai shall be divided weekly in as nearly as possible equal amounts between the Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Corporation, the Deutsch-Asiatische Bank and the Russo-Asiatic Bank for account of the loans concerned and indemnity payments, and the commissioner of customs shall be authorised to draw upon these accounts for loan payments as they fall due, according to the priority of such loans as determined by the commission of bankers in terms of clause No. 1,\n\n\"6. If normal conditions are not restored by the end of 1912, then at that time an account shall be taken of the surplus available for the indemnity, and such account shall be sent to the Diplomatic Body for their decision as to its disposal. [Since cancelled, see paragraph 32.]\n\n\"7. The commission shall furnish to the Diplomatic Body at Peking, through the consuls at Shanghai, a quarterly report showing the appropriation of the revenue received.\n\n\"8. The above arrangement is subject to future revision should circumstances require it.\"\n\n25. A fresh point arose almost at once. Certain portions of the native customs revenue had been assigned by the Final Protocol of 1901 as security for the indemnity (see paragraph 14). Under the new arrangements these native customs revenues, collected by the Maritime Customs, were to be treated in the same manner as the maritime customs revenue proper and to be divided for custody amongst the three custodian banks (the Hong Kong and Shanghai Bank, the Deutsch-Asiatische Bank and the Russo-Asiatic Bank, i.e., the three banks principally interested in the pre-Boxer loans (see clause 2 of the Agreement of the 30th January, 1912 - paragraph 24, supra)).\n\nThe Yokohama Specie Bank pointed out that this native customs revenue should properly be divided amongst all the banks interested in the Boxer indemnity, and not merely between the three custodian banks, seeing that this revenue was one of the securities for the indemnity under the Final Protocol of 1901 and was not affected by the pre-Boxer loans. The claim was reasonable, and it was decided that this native Peking customs revenue should be divided amongst all the indemnity banks in proportion to each bank's share in the indemnity. These banks were at that time -\n\n \n Hong Kong and Shanghai Bank.\n \n \n *Deutsch-Asiatische Bank.\n \n \n Russo-Asiatic Bank.\n \n \n Yokohama Specie Bank.\n \n \n Banque de l'Indo-Chine.\n \n \n International Bank.\n \n \n Banque sino-belge.\n \n\nMay 7, 1912.\n\nDefault on Indemnity Payments consequent on Revolution.\n\nPeking, No. 862, Sept. 6, 1912. (\"China,\" Part LXXI, No. 211.)\n\nMay 9, 1912. No. 217. (\"Chius,\" Part LXX, No. 664.)\n\n26. In the meantime, owing to the disturbances in the country, default on indemnity payments by the Chinese Government had occurred as from the 30th September, 1911. Payment was not resumed until October 1912, when the October 1911 instalment was paid.\n\nTo Treasury. H. & S. Bank, Oct. 26, 1912. (\"China,\" Part LXXI, No. 392.)\n\nPeking, No. 853 A.) Dec. 21, 1912. (\"China,\" Part LXXI, No. 853 A.)\n\n27. Later the Chinese Government, acting upon the advice of the Inspector-General of Customs, proposed to devote the whole surplus customs revenue, after meeting all loan service, towards payment of the indemnity arrears due from November 1911 to December 1912 (£3,400,000), before meeting current indemnity payments as they fell due. But eventually this proposal was dropped and the suggestion made that payment of indemnity arrears should be postponed. To this His Majesty's Government were ready to assent.\n\nPeking, No. 265, Tel., Nov. (\"China,\" No. 560)\n\nPeking, Jan 4, 1913. (\"China,\" Part LXXII, Nos. 16 and 18.)\n\nNo. 512, Tel. Part LXXII, No. 38.\n\n28. Both Russia and France, the former of whom was interested as to 29 per cent. and the latter as to 15 per cent. of the whole indemnity, were less complacent. Russia even hinted that she might take active measures to obtain possession of the salt or some other source of revenue in default of the indemnity payments. The Russian Minister notified the Chinese Government that Russia insisted on full payment of the indemnity due, and in view of this attitude Sir J. Jordan proposed to withhold British consent to the proposed postponement if other Powers adopted that attitude. To this His Majesty's Government reluctantly agreed.\n\nPeking, Dec. 28, 1912, (\"China,\" Part LXXII, No. 18, Tel.)\n\nTo Peking, No. 12, Tel., Jan. 16, 1913. (\"China,\" Part LXXII, No. 48.)\n\n29. On the 1st February, 1913, the November 1911 and December 1911 arrears of indemnity were paid; on the 3rd February the January 1912 arrears; on the 4th February the February 1912; and later arrears were all eventually paid up out of the proceeds of the Reorganisation Loan which was signed on the 26th April, 1913.\n\nH. & S. Bank, Feb 1, 1913. (\"China,\" Part LXXII, No. 116.)\n\nH. & S. Bank, Feb. 8, 1913. (\"China,\" Part LXXII, No. 128.)\n\nH. & S. Bank, Feb. 4, 1913. (\"China,\" Part LXXII, No. 134.)\n\nPeking, No. 149, Tel., June 30, 1913. (\"China,\" Part LXXII, No. 627.)\n\nH. & S. Bank, July 22, 1913.\n\n* The Deutsch-Asiatische Bank dropped out in 1917 on the suspension of relations between China and Germany.\n\n[6823]", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-478 - Public Offices & Others - 1922.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 493948, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-478 - Public Offices & Others - 1922", "page_number": 339, "title": "CO129-478 - Public Offices & Others - 1922", "content_text": "Peking, No. 32, Feb. 1, 1918. (\"Loans and Concessions.\" Part III, No. 10.)\n\nPeking No. 177, July 22, 1915. (\"Loans and Concessions, Part III, No. 43.)\n\nPeking, No. 25, Jan. 24, 1916. (\"Loans and Concessions,\" Part IV, No. 5.)\n\nPeking, No. 41, Jan 27, 1917. (\"Loans and Concessions,\" Part V, No. 38)\n\n12\n\n13\n\n40. Owing to the breakdown which had occurred in the \"concurrent loan and indemnity service (see paragraph 37), the Diplomatic Body proposed to the Chinese Government, early in 1915, a further revision of article 2 of the original agreement (see paragraph 24). This would have practically amounted to a reversion to its original form under which the balance of customs revenue was to be retained by the custodian banks until all the pre-Boxer loan service for the year was provided for. But the Inspector-General of Customs now assured the Diplomatic Body that such revision was no longer necessary, and the Diplomatic Body, in view of his assurances, agreed to drop the proposal. In short, the Diplomatic Body agreed to the continuance of the \"concurrent\" system of loan and indemnity payments from customs revenue assisted from salt funds which had been arranged at the end of 1913 (see paragraph 34). Their consent was, however, subject to the right of any interested Power to insist that, in the event of doubt arising as to the sufficiency of the maritime customs revenue and salt revenue to defray all charges secured thereon in respect of the loan and indemnity services, payments of customs revenue to the indemnity banks should be deferred until full provision had been made for meeting the services of the pre-Boxer loans.\n\n41. From 1915 onwards this \"concurrent\" service has worked well and smoothly. With the rise in exchange, the salt revenues were called upon to contribute less and less, until at one moment the customs revenue unaided was sufficient to meet both services. This is no longer the case, but the position is still satisfactory.\n\n Cancellation of German and Austrian Indemnities and Suspension of German Loan Service.\n\n42. On the 12th August, 1917, China declared war upon Germany. It is unnecessary to go into the negotiations that preceded that event, but one of the considerations that led her to take the step was the consent of the Allied Powers to the suspension of the indemnity without interest for a period of five years from the 1st December, 1917.\n\n43. The terms for repayment of the suspended portions since agreed upon by the Allied Powers are as follows:-\n\nTo Great Britain\n\nTo Japan\n\nTo France\n\n1940-45 1923-40\n\n1922-27\n\n13\n\n46. The incident arose as follows: After all calls upon the customs revenues had been met, there was still an estimated surplus for the year 1917 of at least 4,000,000 taels. The Chinese Government accordingly applied for a release to them of 2,000,000 taels. The Diplomatic Body were disposed to agree, as was clearly only right, but the Italian Minister (Baron Aliotti) made difficulties and refused his sanction to the release unless the Chinese Government, on their part, agreed first to repay certain debts due to Italian nationals. Baron Aliotti was pressed to modify his attitude, but refused to do so. He explained that not only did he wish to show the Chinese Government that the Italian Minister was in a position to make good his threats, but that he intended to obtain a \"rectification\" of the Italian concession at Tien-tsin. He subsequently withdrew his opposition, but the incident had irritated the Chinese Government and made them critical of a system which placed it in the power of an individual Minister to block perfectly legitimate releases of Chinese Government money in order to gain his own ends.\n\n334\n\n47. Profiting by this incident, the French and Japanese Ministers again sought to reopen the question of the position of the custodian banks and the custody of the customs funds. The Deutsch-Asiatische Bank having dropped out on the outbreak of war, they represented that, as the service of the German portion of the loans of 1896 and 1898 had now ceased, the whole distribution of the customs revenue should be reconsidered. They failed to carry their point, and the matter dropped for the time being. But in December 1917, in company with the Belgian Minister, they again broached the subject. Dec. 29, 1917.\n\nNo. 453,\n\n17\n\nChina,\" Part LXIII, No. 48.)\n\n48. It will be remembered that, under the existing procedure, any surplus of customs revenue, after all prior claims have been met, is divided up in proportion amongst the various banks charged with the indemnity service, but only up to the amount of the indemnity instalments due to those banks each month. The residue, if any, remained with the two custodian banks (the Hong Kong and Shanghai Bank and the Russo-Asiatic Bank) as to two-thirds with the British, and one-third with the Russian Bank. The French, Japanese, and Belgian Ministers, seizing the opportunity afforded by the necessity of making definite arrangements with the Chinese Government for the refund to China of the suspended indemnity to which the Powers had all agreed for the term of five years, now proposed that the whole customs surplus, after all other obligations had been met, should be divided up in proportion between all the indemnity banks, thus depriving the custodian banks of their right to handle the residue after the monthly indemnity instalments had been provided for.\n\n49. At that time, owing to high exchange and other causes, the customs revenues had risen considerably, and the point was one of great importance to the two custodian banks. The British and Russian Ministers argued the question out with their colleagues and succeeded in maintaining the existing procedure.\n\nNo. 432,\n\n{\"Loans and Concessions,\" Part VI, No. 48.)\n\n30. The arrangement reached was formally recorded in two memoranda signed by all the Allied representatives except the Italian Minister, but as no Italian bank was concerned, his abstention was of no importance. The first of these was drawn up for purposes of record and not for communication to the Chinese Government. It ran as follows:-\n\nPeking, No. 356,\n\nwhile Italy holds out for repayment in full after five years, i.e., in 1922.\n\nThe total amount of indemnity due to Great Britain before the end of 1945 - the date of final payment is 11,186,547l. This, of course, includes interest as provided under the 1901 protocol.\n\n44. As regards the German and Austrian loan and indemnity payments, the following arrangements have been adopted: On the rupture of diplomatic relations with Germany on the 14th March, 1917, China's indemnity payments to her (about 732,810l. a year) ceased, but the service of the loans of 1896 and 1898 continued. The latter payments were met until the 12th August, the date of the declaration of war. The German and Austrian indemnity payments were thenceforth placed at the disposal of Sir F. Aglen to meet the services of the two domestic Chinese Government loans, with which he is associated. The service due to Germany on the 1896 and 1898 loans were lodged with the Hong Kong and Shanghai Bank in London and used for purchasing Chinese securities on behalf of the Chinese Government to the amount of about 50,000l. a month.\n\nPeking, No. 276,\n\nAbuse of Control vested in Diplomatic Body. Position of Custodian Banks.\n\n45. It was almost on top of the declaration of war by China that there occurred the first abuse of the control over customs revenues vested in the Diplomatic Body. Jan. 27, 1917.\n\n{\"Loans and Concessions,\" Part 7, No. 109.)\n\n1. The procedure laid down by the Diplomatic Body in December 1913 states as follows:-\n\n\"The banks chiefly interested, viz., the Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Corporation, the Deutsch-Asiatische Bank, and the Russo-Asiatic Bank shall be custodians of the customs funds at Shanghai; at the end of each month, beginning with January 1914, the surplus, after all payments due each month on account of loans secured by the customs revenue and contracted previous to 1900 have been fully met, shall be divided pro rata amongst the banks having charge of the indemnity service up to the amount of the instalments respectively due to them each month.\"\n\n2. In a letter dated the 10th January, 1914, the International Bankers' Commission pointed out to the doyen that as the service of the Russian 4 per Cent. Gold Loan of 1895 was by the terms of the Loan Agreement payable in half-yearly and not in monthly instalments, it would be excluded under the above arrangement from participation in the monthly provision for loans secured.\n\n* The third custodian bank - the Deutsch-Asiatische Bank - had dropped out on China's declaration of war.", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-478 - Public Offices & Others - 1922.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 495852, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-481 - Governor Sir Stubbs - 1923 [8-12]", "page_number": 518, "title": "CO129-481 - Governor Sir Stubbs - 1923 [8-12]", "content_text": "80% \n\nof \n\n.2961,20 duocat d#RI \n\n. vgc Copy. \n\n510 \n\nEnclosure No. 6. \n\nTELEGRAM \n\nFrom \n\nH. B. M. Minister, Peking. \n\nTo \n\nH. B. M. Consul-General, Canton. \n\nDate \n\n11th December, 1923. \n\n... \n\nFollowing sent at the request of Acting Doyen; - \n\n\"Corps Diplomatique agreed this morning on following text of a letter from Acting Doyen to you as Senior Consul copy to follow by post\". \n\n\"Sir, \n\nWith reference to your letters dated September 7 and October 24 last on the subject of the claim put forward by the Government of Dr. Sun Yat-sen in Canton to a share in the Customs surplus after foreign obligations charged on Customs revenues are paid I have the honour to inform you that this question was duly considered by the Corps Diplomatique. The conclusion arrived at which I am desired to request you to bring to the notice of Canton Authorities concerned was to the effect that granting or refusal of such a claim does not lie within province of Corps Diplomatique. \n\nThe Signatory Powers of the final Protocol of September 7, 1901 derive from that Protocol the right to ensure priority of payment of interest and amortisation of certain foreign loans secured on Customs revenues previous to 1901 and of payment of interests amortisation of indemnity mentioned in Article 6 thereof but no treaty right has been conferred upon them to decide for what purpose the Chinese Government shall use funds which at end of each year shall remain at disposal of that Government after service of said loans and indemnity shall have been entirely provided for. \n\nMoreover by agreement between Diplomatic Body and Chinese Government of January 30, 1912, the former were practically appointed trustees of Maritime Customs' revenues...", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-481 - Governor Sir Stubbs - 1923 [8-12].txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 496987, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-483 - Others & Individuals - 1923", "page_number": 233, "title": "CO129-483 - Others & Individuals - 1923", "content_text": "## Resolution and Letter\n\nIt was by the Fifth Committee considered as urgent that both Conferences should be held as soon as possible, the more limited Conference concerning the Far East to be held first, while the other should follow, if possible, immediately after the former.\n\nIn accordance with the above considerations, the Fifth Committee recommends the Assembly to pass the following resolutions:\n\n### Resolutions\n\n#### Resolution I\nThe Assembly expresses its deep appreciation of the very valuable work done by the Advisory Committee on Traffic in Opium and other Dangerous Drugs, adopts its report and resolutions, taking note of the reservations contained therein, and asks the Council to take the necessary steps to put these resolutions into effect.\n\n#### Resolution 2\nThe Assembly, in view of Turkey having agreed, by the Treaty of Lausanne, to adopt and to enforce the International Opium Convention of 1912, and in view of its importance as an opium-producing country, expresses the wish that the Turkish Government be invited to nominate a representative to serve on the Advisory Committee on its ratification of the Convention and signature of the final Protocol of 1914.\n\n#### Resolution 3\nThe Assembly asks the Council to repeat its request to the Governments of Albania, Argentine, Colombia, Costa Rica, Lithuania, Paraguay, Persia, and Switzerland, that they should take all possible measures with a view to the prompt ratification and application of the Opium Convention.\n\n#### Resolution 4\nThe Assembly, taking note with regret of the fact that a number of countries have not yet adopted the import certificate system as recommended by the Assembly in 1921 and 1922, reiterates the opinion expressed by the Assembly in 1922, that this system is the most practical method yet suggested for controlling the import and export of the drugs in accordance with the provisions of the International Opium Convention and that its success depends on its adoption by all countries engaged in importing or exporting the drugs: and in view of the serious difficulties created by the non-adoption up to the present, of the system by several important countries, requests that the Advisory Committee may be instructed to proceed with the consideration of the suggestion contained in the second resolution adopted by the Assembly in 1922, and to report specially to the next Assembly on the whole situation.\n\n#### Resolution 5\nThe Assembly approves the proposal of the Advisory Committee that the Governments concerned should be invited immediately to enter into negotiations with a view to the conclusion of an agreement as to the measures for giving effective application in the Far Eastern territories to Part II of the Convention and as to a reduction of the amount of raw opium to be imported for the purpose of smoking in those territories where it is temporarily continued, and as to the measures which should be taken by the Government of the Republic of China to bring about the suppression of the illegal production and use of opium in China, and requests the Council to invite those Governments to send representatives with plenipotentiary powers, to a conference for the purpose and to report to the Council at the earliest possible date.\n\n#### Resolution 6\nThe Assembly, having noted with satisfaction that, in accordance with the hope expressed in the fourth resolution adopted by the Assembly in 1922, the Advisory Committee has reported that the information now available makes it possible for the Governments concerned to examine, with a view to the conclusion of an agreement, the question of the limitation of the amounts of morphine, heroin, or cocaine and their respective salts to be manufactured; of the limitation of the amounts of raw opium and the coca leaf to be imported for that purpose and for other medicinal and scientific purposes; and of the limitation of the production of raw opium and the coca leaf for export to the amount required for such medicinal and scientific purposes, requests the Council, as a means of giving effect to the principles submitted by the representatives of the United States of America, and to the policy which the League, on the recommendation of the Advisory Committee, has adopted, to invite the Governments concerned to send representatives with plenipotentiary powers to a conference for this purpose, to be held, if possible, immediately after the conference mentioned in Resolution 5.\n\nThe Assembly also suggests, for the consideration of the Council, the advisability of enlarging this conference so as to include within its scope all countries which are Members of the League, or Parties to the Convention of 1912, with a view to securing their adhesion to the principles that may be embodied in any agreement reached.\n\n### Letter\n\nDear Paskin,\n\nHotel Metropole,\nGeneva.\n29 September, 1923.\n\nI got your letter of the 27th. Just in time to enable me to act on it.\n\nI have accordingly sent off, addressed to the Under Secretary of State, Colonial Office, a huge parcel in the British Consul's bag to the Foreign Office; it contains twenty copies each of the Minutes and Report of the Advisory Committee, of the Fifth Committee's Report to the Assembly, and of the Resolutions adopted by the Assembly; you did not ask for the last two, but they may be useful.\n\nYours ever,\nM.E. Antreno.\n\nP.S. I shall be back at the Office on the 8th; if there is anything else that you want to know, in any case, I will look in and see you.\n\nPage 227", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-483 - Others & Individuals - 1923.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 501828, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-491 - Public Offices - 1925", "page_number": 74, "title": "CO129-491 - Public Offices - 1925", "content_text": "# ANNEX (B).\n\n## Board of Reference.\n\nThe representatives of the Powers assembled at the present conference at Washington, to wit:\n\nThe United States of America, Belgium, the British Empire, China, France, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands and Portugal;\n\nDesiring to provide a procedure for dealing with questions that may arise in connection with the execution of the provisions of articles 3 and 5 of the treaty to be signed at Washington on the 6th February 1922, with reference to their general policy designed to stabilise conditions in the Far East, to safeguard the rights and interests of China, and to promote intercourse between China and the other Powers upon the basis of equality of opportunity;\n\nResolve that there shall be established in China a Board of Reference to which any questions arising in connection with the execution of the aforesaid articles may be referred for investigation and report.\n\nThe special conference provided for in article 2 of the treaty to be signed at Washington on the 6th February, 1922, with reference to the Chinese Customs tariff, shall formulate, for the approval of the Powers concerned, a detailed plan for the constitution of the board.\n\n# ANNEX (C).\n\n## Treaty between Great Britain and China of September 5, 1902 (Mackay Treaty).\n\n### ARTICLE 8.\n\n#### PREAMBLE\n\nAbolition of Li-kin and other Dues.\n\nThe Chinese Government, recognising that the system of levying li-kin and other dues on goods at the place of production, in transit, and at destination, impedes the free circulation of commodities and injures the interests of trade, hereby undertake to discard completely those means of raising revenue with the limitation mentioned in Section 8.\n\n#### Surtax.\n\nThe British Government, in return, consent to allow a surtax in excess of the Tariff rates for the time being in force to be imposed on foreign goods imported by British subjects and a surtax in addition to the export duty on Chinese produce destined for export abroad or coastwise.\n\n#### Non-Revival of Li-kin Barriers, &c.; Limit of Surtax, &c.\n\nIt is clearly understood that, after li-kin barriers and other stations for taxing in transit have been removed, no attempt shall be made to revive them in any form or under any pretext whatsoever; that in no case shall the surtax on foreign imports exceed the equivalent of one and a half times the import duty leviable in terms of the Final Protocol signed by China and the Powers on the 7th day of September, 1901; that payment of the import duty and surtax shall secure for foreign imports, whether in the hands of Chinese or non-Chinese subjects, in original packages or otherwise, complete immunity from all other taxation, examination or delay; that the total amount of taxation leviable on native produce for export abroad shall, under no circumstances, exceed 7 per cent. ad valorem.\n\nKeeping these fundamental principles steadily in view, the high contracting parties have agreed upon the following methods of procedure.\n\n#### Abolition of Li-kin Barriers, &c., with certain Exceptions.\n\nSection 1.—The Chinese Government undertake that all barriers of whatsoever kind, collecting li-kin or such like dues or duties, shall be permanently abolished on all roads, railways and waterways in the Eighteen Provinces of China and the Three Eastern Provinces. This provision does not apply to the Native Custom-Houses at present in existence on the seaboard or waterways, at open ports, on land routes, and on land frontiers of China.\n\n#### Special Surtax on Foreign Imported Goods, with Reservations.\n\nSec. 2. The British Government agree that foreign goods on importation, in addition to the effective 5 per cent. import duty as provided for in the Protocol of 1901, shall pay a special surtax equivalent to one and a half times the said duty to compensate for the abolition of li-kin, of transit dues in lieu of li-kin, and of all other taxation on foreign goods, and in consideration of the other reforms provided for in this Article; but this provision shall not impair the right of China to tax salt, native opium, and native produce as provided for in Sections 3, 5, 6 and 8.\n\nThe same amount of surtax shall be levied on goods imported into the Eighteen Provinces of China and the Three Eastern Provinces across the land frontiers as on goods entering China by sea.\n\n#### Native Custom-Houses.\n\nSec. 3. All Native Custom-Houses now existing, whether at the Open Ports, on the seaboard, on rivers, inland waterways, land routes or land frontiers, as enumerated in the Hu Pu and Kung Pu Tse Li (Regulations of the Boards of Revenue and Works) and Ta Ch'ing Hui Tien (Dynastic Institutes), may remain; a list of the same, with their location, shall be furnished to the British Government for purposes of record.\n\nWherever there are Imperial Maritime Custom-Houses, or wherever such may be hereafter placed, Native Custom-Houses may be also established; as well as at any points either on the seaboard or land frontiers.\n\nThe location of Native Custom-Houses in the Interior may be changed as the circumstances of trade seem to require, but any change must be communicated to the British Government, so that the list may be corrected; the originally stated number of them shall not, however, be exceeded.\n\n#### Goods carried by Junks or Sailing Vessels Trading to or from Open Ports.\n\nGoods carried by junks or sailing-vessels trading to or from Open Ports shall not pay lower duties than the combined duties and surtax on similar cargo carried by steamers.\n\n#### Duty on Native Produce.\n\nNative produce, when transported from one place to another in the Interior, shall, on arrival at the first Native Custom-House after leaving the place of production, pay duty equivalent to the export surtax mentioned in Section 7.\n\nWhen this duty has been paid, a certificate shall be given which shall describe the nature of the goods, weight, number of packages, &c., amount of duty paid, and intended destination. This certificate, which shall be valid for a fixed period of not less than one year from the date of payment of duty, shall free the goods from all taxation, examination, delay, or stoppage at any other Native Custom-Houses passed en route.\n\nIf the goods are taken to a place not in the foreign settlements or concessions of an Open Port, for local use, they become there liable to the Consumption Tax described in Section 8.\n\nIf the goods are shipped from an Open Port, the certificate is to be accepted by the Custom-House concerned, in lieu of the export surtax mentioned in Section 7.\n\n#### Limit of Taxation on Junks, Boats or Carts.\n\nJunks, boats or carts shall not be subjected to any taxation beyond a small and reasonable charge, paid periodically at a fixed annual rate. This does not exclude the right to levy, as at present, tonnage (Chuan Chao) and port dues (Chuan Liao) on junks.\n\n[13577]", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-491 - Public Offices - 1925.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 501830, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-491 - Public Offices - 1925", "page_number": 76, "title": "CO129-491 - Public Offices - 1925", "content_text": "28\n\n29\n\nProvincial Officials are to be held responsible that the officer guilty of the illegal action shall be severely punished and removed from his post.\n\nIf the complaint turns out to be without foundation complainant shall be held responsible for the expenses of the investigation.\n\nHis Britannic Majesty's Minister will have the right to demand investigation where from the evidence before him he is satisfied that illegal exactions or obstructions have occurred,\n\nChangsha, Wanhsien, Ngunking, Waichow, and Kongmoon to be Opened to Trade.\n\nSec. 12. The Chinese Government agree to open to foreign trade, on the same footing as the places opened to foreign trade by the Treaties of Nanking and Tien-tsin, the following places, namely:-\n\nChangsha in Hunan; Wanhsien in Szechuen: Nganking in Anhui;\n\nWaichow (Hui-chow) in Kuangtung; and Kongmoon (Chiang-mên) in Kuangtung.\n\nForeigners residing in these Open Ports are to observe the Municipal and Police Regulations on the same footing as Chinese residents, and they are not to be entitled to establish Municipalities and Police of their own within the limits of these Treaty Ports except with the consent of the Chinese authorities.\n\nIf this Article does not come into operation the right to demand under it the opening of these ports, with the exception of Kongmoon, which is provided for in Article 10, shall lapse.\n\nConditions and Date on which this Arrangement is to come into force. Sec. 13-Subject to the provisions of Section 14, the arrangements provided for in this Article are to come into force on the 1st January, 1904.\n\nBy that date all li-kin barriers should be removed and officials employed in the collection of taxes and dues prohibited by this Article shall be removed from their posts.\n\nSec. 14 The condition on which the Chinese Government enter into the present engagement is that all Powers entitled to most-favoured-nation treatment in China enter into the same engagements as Great Britain with regard to the payment of surtaxes and other obligations imposed by this Article on His Britannic Majesty's Government and subjects.\n\nThe conditions on which His Britannic Majesty's Government enter into the present engagement are:-\n\n(1.) That all Powers who are now or who may hereafter become entitled to most-favoured-nation treatment in China enter into the same engagements;\n\n(2.) And that their assent is neither directly nor indirectly made dependent on the granting by China of any political concession, or of any exclusive commercial concession.\n\nSec. 15. Should the Powers entitled to most-favoured-nation treatment by China have failed to agree to enter into the engagements undertaken by Great Britain under this Article by the 1st January, 1904. then the provisions of the Article shall only come into force when all the Powers have signified their acceptance of these engagements.\n\nImperial Edict announcing Abolition of Li-kin.\n\nSec. 16. When the abolition of li-kin and other forms of internal taxation on goods as provided for in this Article has been decided upon and sanctioned, an Imperial Edict shall be published in due form on yellow paper and circulated, setting forth the abolition of all li-kin taxation, li-kin barriers and all descriptions of internal taxation on goods, except as provided for in this Article.\n\nThe Edict shall state that the Provincial High Officials are responsible that any official disregarding the letter or spirit of its injunction shall be severely punished and removed from his post.\n\nTreaty between Japan and China of October 8, 1903.\n\nARTICLE 1.\n\nSurtax in lieu of Li-kin,\n\nWhereas China, with the object of reforming its fiscal system, proposes to levy a surtax in excess of the tariff rates on all goods passing through the custom-houses, whether maritime or inland and frontier, in order to compensate in a measure for the loss incurred by the complete abolition of li-kin, Japan consents to pay the same surtax as is agreed upon between China and all the Treaty Powers.\n\nProduction Tax, Consumption Tax, and Excise. Native Opium and Salt. With regard to the production tax, consumption tax and excise, and the taxes on native opium and salt, leviable by China, Japan also consents to accept the same arrangements as are agreed upon between all the Treaty Powers and China.\n\nReservation,\n\nIt is understood, however, that the commerce, rights and privileges of Japan shall not, on account of the above, be placed at any disadvantage as compared with the commerce, rights and privileges of other Powers.\n\nTreaty between the United States and Ching of October 8, 1903.\n\nARTICLE 4.\n\nAbolition of Li-kin.\n\nThe Chinese Government, recognising that the existing system of levying dues on goods in transit, and especially the system of taxation known as li-kin, impedes the free circulation of commodities to the general injury of trade, hereby undertakes to abandon the levy of li-kin and all other transit dues throughout the Empire, and to abolish the offices, stations, and barriers maintained for their collection, and not to establish other offices for levying dues on goods in transit. It is clearly understood that, after the offices, stations, and barriers for taxing goods in transit have been abolished, no attempt shall be made to re-establish them in any form or under any pretext whatsoever.\n\nSurtax in lieu of Li-kin.\n\nThe Government of the United States, in return, consents to allow a surtax, in excess of the Tariff rates for the time being in force, to be imposed on foreign goods imported by citizens of the United States, and in Chinese produce destined for export abroad or coastwise. It is clearly understood that in no case shall the surtax on foreign imports exceed one and one-half times the import duty leviable in terms of the Final Protocol signed by China and the Powers on the 7th day of September, A.D. 1901; that the payment of the import duty and surtax shall secure for foreign imports, whether in the hands of Chinese or foreigners, in original packages or otherwise, complete immunity from all other taxation, examination, or delay; that the total amount of taxation, inclusive of the Tariff export duty, leviable on native produce for export abroad shall, under no circumstances, exceed 7 per cent. ad valorem.\n\nRight of China to Levy Taxes.\n\nNothing in this Article is intended to interfere with the inherent right of China to levy such other taxes as are not in conflict with its provisions.\n\nKeeping these fundamental principles in view, the High Contracting Parties have agreed upon the following method of procedure :-\n\nLi-kin Barriers. Native Customs Offices.\n\nThe Chinese Government undertake that all offices, stations, and barriers of whatsoever kind for collecting li-kin duties, or such like dues on goods in transit, shall be permanently abolished on all roads, railways, and waterways in the nineteen\n\n74", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-491 - Public Offices - 1925.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 501842, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-491 - Public Offices - 1925", "page_number": 88, "title": "CO129-491 - Public Offices - 1925", "content_text": "52\n\nto discard completely these means of raising revenue, excepting the import and export duties, inland tax, and excise as hereinafter provided for, and to abolish completely and permanently throughout the provinces and special territories of the Chinese Republic all li-kin and other transit dues, native customs duties, production taxes, weighing taxes, slaughter taxes, consumption taxes, destination taxes, octroi taxes, boat and cart and motor-car and transport, animal and conveyance taxes (excepting existing tonnage and port dues), bridge and road tolls, shop and business taxes, monopoly fees, licence fees, examination fees, protection and escort fees, school, temple, guild, and chamber of commerce taxes, and all public utility contributions levied on goods, and all other forms of internal taxation on goods and trade whatsoever; and the Chinese Government guarantees that, excepting the import and export duties, inland tax and excise above referred to, no other taxes or dues or fees of any kind shall in future be levied directly or indirectly on native or foreign goods or raw material, whether in Chinese or foreign hands, nor on their importation, exportation, purchase, transportation, sale or consumption, nor on their means of manufacture or conveyance, nor on the shops or businesses dealing therein; and it is understood that the Chinese Government will refund the amount of any taxation levied in violation of the provisions of this paragraph to the firms or individuals who may have paid such irregular taxation. The abolition of internal taxation as above provided for shall be carried completely into effect before the enforcement of the increased import and export duties and excise and inland tax hereinafter provided for.\n\n(Note. Municipal rates and taxes and licences and possibly an income tax should perhaps be excluded from the above under proper safeguards.)\n\nThe Governments of the other contracting Powers in return agree that China shall be free to fix her own customs tariff rates on the lines and within the limits hereinafter laid down; and they consent to the imposition of an inland tax on all goods imported into China by their nationals, the proceeds of which shall accrue to the provinces for local expenditure of a constructive nature in compensation for the loss of local revenue resulting from the abolition of internal taxation. They further agree to consider the concession of full tariff autonomy in ten years from the date of the carrying into effect of the present supplementary article if, in the opinion of a two-thirds majority of the Governments of the contracting Powers, the provisions of the present treaty and supplementary article, including the complete abolition of internal taxation, have been satisfactorily carried into effect.\n\nThe increased import and export duties and excise and inland tax provided for in the present supplementary article shall come into force within one year from the date of the signature of the protocol carrying the present supplementary article into effect on a date to be determined by the Chinese Government; but at least three months' notice of such enforcement shall be given to the Governments of the other contracting Powers.\n\nThe Chinese Government will recast the export tariff on a graduated scale not exceeding 10 per cent, ad valorem.\n\nThe Chinese Government will recast the import tariff on a graduated scale not exceeding 10 per cent. ad valorem in the case of ordinary articles, 25 per cent. ad valorem in the case of articles of luxury as detailed in the schedule attached to article 2, and 40 per cent. ad valorem in the case of wines, beer, porter, spirits, tobacco products and narcotics.\n\nAn inland tax at a uniform rate of 5 per cent. ad valorem will be levied by the Maritime Customs Administration on all imported goods simultaneously with the import duty, and by the Excise Administration on all local manufactures simultaneously with the excise duty; excepting only wines, beer, porter, spirits, tobacco products, and narcotics, whether imported or locally produced, on which the inland tax shall continue to be levied by the Wine and Tobacco Administration as provided for and at the rate laid down in article 1.\n\nThe proceeds of the import and export duties shall constitute the customs revenues, which shall be dealt with as provided for in article 3.\n\nThe revenues from the inland tax levied on foreign imports by the Maritime Customs Administration will be lodged, less expenses of collection, in the Shanghai Office of the Bank of China, where they shall lie in a special account at the disposal of the head of the Revenue Council and the Inspector-General of Customs, who, acting on behalf of the Central Government, will distribute the proceeds pro ratâ according to the localities in which the foreign imports are consumed amongst the provinces for local expenditure of a productive nature in compensation for loss\n\n53\n\nIn the event of any further taxation being levied, directly or indirectly, on such foreign imports, or on their transportation, sale or consumption, the amount of such taxation will be refunded, on presentation of taxation receipts or other satisfactory proof of payment, by the Maritime Customs Administration out of and up to the amount held by the said Administration on account of inland tax for the province in which such taxation is levied, and the total amount of such irregular taxation shall be deducted from the amount due on account of inland tax to the province in question. In the event of the amount of such taxation exceeding the amount due to the province concerned, reimbursement will be made by the provincial authorities, or, if the said authorities fail to do so, by the Central Government, out of other funds.\n\n(Note.-The above is a repetition of the paragraph in article 1 regarding the disposal of the transit pass dues, which are replaced by the inland tax.) The revenues from the inland tax levied on local manufactures by the Excise Administration will be similarly dealt with mutatis mutandis and distributed by the Chinese and foreign chiefs of the Excise Administration pro ratâ amongst the provinces in the same way.\n\nThe revenues from the inland tax levied on locally manufactured wine and tobacco products by the Wine and Tobacco Administration will continue to be dealt with as provided for in article 1.\n\nThe revenues from the factory excise and from the excise on wine and tobacco products, and those from the stamp taxes and salt duties, will continue to be dealt with as provided for in article 6.\n\n(Final Note. The Washington China Customs Tariff Treaty was signed by China and the United States, Belgium, the British Empire, France, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, and Portugal. The other \"Old Treaty Powers\" are Brazil, Denmark, Mexico, Norway, Peru, Spain, Sweden, and Switzerland. The \"New Treaty Powers,\" namely, who cannot claim tariff privileges, are Bolivia, Chile, Germany, Persia, and Russia. The Chinese Government are also in relations of some kind with Austria, Cuba, Czechoslovakia, Poland, and Uruguay.)\n\nAnnex I.\n\n(Referred to in Article 1.)\n\nList of Ports open to Foreign Residence and Trade.\n\nThis list will include all existing treaty ports and trade marts (with possibly a few exceptions in the case of certain marts opened by the Chinese in the north for political reasons in which foreign trade is not yet interested), and also certain centres such as Wanhsien, and Yunnanfu, the status of which is doubtful, and also a number of other places which might well be opened in the interests of foreign trade, e.g., Peking, Chengtu, Chengchow, Hsuchow, Pengpu, Siangtan, &c., in regard to which the British Chambers of Commerce in the various important centres would have to be consulted.\n\nAnnex II.\n\n(Referred to in Article 2.)\n\nSchedule of Luxury Articles.\n\nNo attempt is here made to draw up a list of luxury (i.e., non-essential) articles. But two lists are attached hereto, as being of possible assistance in a later study of this very contentious question. List No. I is a tentative list of luxury articles drawn up by the customs representative on the last Tariff Revision Commission for the preliminary consideration of the inspector-general; and List No. 2 is a \"Provisional Import Tariff for German and Austrian Goods,\" issued by the Chinese Government in 1920 but never enforced owing to the refusal of the Treaty Powers to agree to the use of certificates of origin. These two lists, which have been obtained privately from the Inspector-General of Customs, should be regarded as strictly confidential documents.\n\n[13577]", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-491 - Public Offices - 1925.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 508714, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-502-10 Macao opium traffic 6-12-1926 - 7-12-1927", "page_number": 102, "title": "CO129-502-10 Macao opium traffic 6-12-1926 - 7-12-1927", "content_text": "## No. 18. \n## OPIUM\n\nHaving by Law No. 1847 on the 2nd day of March, 1926 approved for ratification, the conferences on Opium held in Geneva on 2nd day of November, 1924, to 19th day of February, 1925, by the signature of the final Protocol of these conferences, the Government has contracted to carry out the exclusive sale of Opium, stipulated in the protocol of the Hague Convention of 1912, the present contract will end on 30th day of June of the current year and the Government agrees now to establish the rule that from the 1st day of July, in the terms of the final agreement of the same conferences, already ratified by Portugal, to establish Government sale of Opium in the Colony: The Governor of Macau in council in accordance with instructions from the Minister of the Colonies decides\n\n### Art.1\n\nTo establish a Government Monopoly for the importation, preparation, sale and distribution of opium administered directly and under the control of the \"Inspector of the Taxes of Consumption\" the post created by the Art. No.4 of the Treasury Notification No.17 of 6th day of April, 1927.\n\n1. The right to import, to prepare, to sell and to distribute opium cannot be exclusively licensed out or delegated \n2. The sale of opium by retail will be allowed through persons who held licences from the \"Inspector of the Taxes of Consumption.\"\n\n### Art.2\n\nThe sale of Opium is strictly prohibited:-\n\n(1) to persons under age. The Government of the Colony will use all its efforts in every way to stop persons under age from smoking opium.\n\n(2) Opium divans are prohibited.", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-502-10 Macao opium traffic 6-12-1926 - 7-12-1927.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 572447, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-588-22 China- British territorial rights; negotiations with China 28-12-1942 - 10-11-1943", "page_number": 28, "title": "CO129-588-22 China- British territorial rights; negotiations with China 28-12-1942 - 10-11-1943", "content_text": "# TREATY BETWEEN HIS MAJESTY IN RESPECT OF THE UNITED KINGDOM AND INDIA AND HIS EXCELLENCY THE PRESIDENT OF THE NATIONAL GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF CHINA FOR THE RELINQUISHMENT OF EXTRA-TERRITORIAL RIGHTS IN CHINA AND THE REGULATION OF RELATED MATTERS EXCHANGE OF NOTES AND AGREED MINUTE)\n\nChungking, January 11, 1943.\n\n[Ratifications exchanged at Chungking, May 20, 1943.]\n\nHis Majesty The King of Great Britain, Ireland and of the British Dominions beyond the Seas, Emperor of India, and His Excellency the President of the National Government of the Republic of China;\n\nBeing desirous of defining more clearly in spirit of friendship the general relations between them, and for this purpose to settle certain matters relating to jurisdiction in China;\n\nHave decided to conclude a Treaty for this purpose and to that end have appointed as their Plenipotentiaries:\n\nHis Majesty The King of Great Britain, Ireland and of the British Dominions beyond the Seas, Emperor of India (hereinafter referred to as His Majesty The King):\n\nFor the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland:\n\nHis Excellency Sir Horace James Seymour, K.C.M.G., C.V.O., His Majesty's Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to the Republic of China;\n\nFor India:\n\nHugh Edward Richardson Esquire, an officer of the Indian Political Service;\n\nHis Excellency the President of the National Government of the Republic of China:\n\nHis Excellency Dr. Tse Vung Soong, Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Republic of China;\n\nWho, having communicated to each other their full powers, found to be in good and due form, have agreed as follows:-\n\n## ARTICLE 1\n\n(i) The territories of the High Contracting Parties to which the present Treaty applies are, on the part of His Majesty The King, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, India, all colonies, overseas territories, protectorates of His Majesty, all territories under his protection or suzerainty and all mandated territories in respect of which the mandate is exercised by his Government in the United Kingdom; and on the part of His Excellency the President of the National Government of the Republic of China, all the territories of the Republic of China. Any reference in subsequent Articles of the present Treaty to the territories of one or the other High Contracting Party shall be deemed to relate to those territories of that High Contracting Party to which the present Treaty applies.\n\n(ii) In the present Treaty, the term \"nationals of the one (or of the other) High Contracting Party\" shall in relation to His Majesty The King mean all British subjects and all British-protected persons belonging to the territories to which the present Treaty applies; and in relation to the Republic of China, all nationals of the Republic of China.\n\n(iii) The expression \"companies of the one (or of the other) High Contracting Party\" shall for the purpose of the present Treaty be interpreted as meaning limited liability and other companies, partnerships and associations constituted under the law of the territories of that High Contracting Party to which the present Treaty applies.\n\n## ARTICLE 2\n\nThose provisions of treaties or agreements in force between His Majesty The King and His Excellency the President of the National Government of the Republic of China which authorise His Majesty or his representatives to exercise jurisdiction over nationals or companies of His Majesty in the territory of the Republic of China are hereby abrogated. The nationals and companies of His Majesty The King shall be subject in the territory of the Republic of China to the jurisdiction of the Government of the Republic of China, in accordance with the principles of international law and practice.\n\n## ARTICLE 3\n\n(i) His Majesty The King considers that the Final Protocol concluded at Peking, on the 7th September, 1901[^1] between the Chinese Government and other Governments, including His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom, should be terminated, and agrees that the rights accorded to His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom under that Protocol and under the agreements supplementary thereto shall cease.\n\n(ii) His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom will co-operate with the Government of the Republic of China for the reaching of any necessary agreements with the other Governments concerned for the transfer to the Government of the Republic of China of the administration and control of the diplomatic quarter at Peiping, including the official assets and the official obligations of the diplomatic quarter, it being mutually understood that the Government of the Republic of China, in taking over administration and control of the diplomatic quarter, will make provision for the assumption and discharge of the official obligations and liabilities of the diplomatic quarter and for the recognition and protection of all legitimate rights therein.\n\n(iii) The Government of the Republic of China shall accord to His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom a continued right to use for official purposes the land which has been allocated to His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom in the diplomatic quarter in Peiping, on parts of which are located buildings belonging to His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom.\n\n## ARTICLE 4\n\n(i) His Majesty The King considers that the International Settlements at Shanghai and Amoy should revert to the administration and control of the Government of the Republic of China and agrees that the rights accorded to His Majesty in relation to those Settlements shall cease.\n\n(ii) His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom will co-operate with the Government of the Republic of China for the reaching of any necessary agreements with the other Governments concerned for the transfer to the Government of the Republic of China of the administration and control of the International Settlements at Shanghai and Amoy, including the official assets and the official obligations of those Settlements, it being mutually understood that the Government of the Republic of China, in taking over administration and control of those Settlements, will make[^1] `Treaty Series No. 17 (1902)`, \"Cd. 1390.\n\n28", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-588-22 China- British territorial rights; negotiations with China 28-12-1942 - 10-11-1943.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 572502, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-588-22 China- British territorial rights; negotiations with China 28-12-1942 - 10-11-1943", "page_number": 83, "title": "CO129-588-22 China- British territorial rights; negotiations with China 28-12-1942 - 10-11-1943", "content_text": "# TREATY BETWEEN HIS MAJESTY IN RESPECT OF THE UNITED KINGDOM AND INDIA AND HIS EXCELLENCY THE PRESIDENT OF THE NATIONAL GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF CHINA FOR THE RELINQUISHMENT OF EXTRA-TERRITORIAL RIGHTS IN CHINA AND THE REGULATION OF RELATED MATTERS (WITH EXCHANGE OF NOTES AND AGREED MINUTE)\n\nChungking, January 11, 1943.\n\nHis Majesty The King of Great Britain, Ireland and of the British Dominions beyond the Seas, Emperor of India, and His Excellency the President of the National Government of the Republic of China;\n\nBeing desirous of defining more clearly, in a spirit of friendship, the general relations between them and for this purpose to settle certain matters relating to jurisdiction in China;\n\nHave decided to conclude a treaty for this purpose and to that end have appointed as their plenipotentiaries:\n\nHis Majesty The King of Great Britain, Ireland and of the British Dominions beyond the Seas, Emperor of India (hereinafter referred to as His Majesty The King):\n\nFor the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland:\n\nHis Excellency Sir Horace James Seymour, K.C.M.G., C.V.O., His Majesty's Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to the Republic of China;\n\nFor India:\n\nHugh Edward Richardson, Esq., an officer of the Indian Political Service;\n\nHis Excellency the President of the National Government of the Republic of China:\n\nHis Excellency Dr. Tse Vung Soong, Minister for Foreign Affairs for the Republic of China;\n\nWho having communicated to each other their full powers, found to be in good and due form, have agreed as follows:\n\n## ARTICLE 1\n\n(i) The territories of the High Contracting Parties to which the present Treaty applies are, on the part of His Majesty The King, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, India, all colonies, overseas territories, protectorates of His Majesty, all territories under his protection or suzerainty and all mandated territories in respect of which the mandate is exercised by his Government in the United Kingdom; and, on the part of His Excellency the President of the National Government of the Republic of China, all the territories of the Republic of China. Any reference in subsequent Articles of the present Treaty to the territories of one or the other High Contracting Party shall be deemed to relate to those territories of that High Contracting Party to which the present Treaty applies.\n\n(ii) In the present Treaty, the term nationals of the one (or of the other) High Contracting Party shall in relation to His Majesty The King mean all British subjects and all British-protected persons belonging to the territories to which the present Treaty applies; and in relation to the Republic of China, all nationals of the Republic of China.\n\n(iii) The expression companies of the one (or of the other) High Contracting Party shall for the purpose of the present Treaty be interpreted as meaning limited liability and other companies, partnerships, associations constituted under the law of the territories of that High Contracting Party to which the present Treaty applies.\n\n## ARTICLE 2\n\nAll those provisions of treaties or agreements in force between His Majesty The King and His Excellency the President of the National Government of the Republic of China which authorise His Majesty or his representatives to exercise jurisdiction over nationals or companies of His Majesty in the territory of the Republic of China are hereby abrogated. The nationals and companies of His Majesty The King shall be subject in the territory of the Republic of China to the jurisdiction of the Government of the Republic of China, in accordance with the principles of international law and practice.\n\n## ARTICLE 3\n\n(i) His Majesty The King considers that the final protocol concluded at Peking, on the 7th September, 1901,(1) between the Chinese Government and other Governments, including His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom, should be terminated, and agrees that the rights accorded to His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom under that protocol and under the agreements supplementary thereto shall cease.\n\n(ii) His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom will co-operate with the Government of the Republic of China for the reaching of any necessary agreements with the other Governments concerned for the transfer to the Government of the Republic of China of the administration and control of the diplomatic quarter at Peiping, including the official assets and the official obligations of the diplomatic quarter, it being mutually understood that the Government of the Republic of China, in taking over administration and control of the diplomatic quarter, will make provision for the assumption and discharge of the official obligations and liabilities of the diplomatic quarter and for the recognition and protection of all legitimate rights therein.\n\n(iii) The Government of the Republic of China shall accord to His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom a continued right to use for official purposes the land which has been allocated to His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom in the diplomatic quarter in Peiping, on parts of which are located buildings belonging to His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom.\n\n## ARTICLE 4\n\n(i) His Majesty The King considers that the International Settlements at Shanghai and Amoy should revert to the administration and control of the Government of the Republic of China and agrees that the rights accorded to His Majesty in relation to those settlements shall cease.\n\n(ii) His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom will co-operate with the Government of the Republic of China for the reaching of any necessary agreements with the other Governments concerned for the transfer to the Government of the Republic of China of the administration and control of the International Settlements at Shanghai and Amoy, including the official assets and the official obligations of those settlements, it being mutually understood that the Government of the Republic of China, in taking over administration and control of those settlements, will make provision for the assumption and discharge of the official obligations and liabilities of those settlements and for the recognition and protection of all legitimate rights therein.\n\n(1)\"Treaty Series No. 17 (1902),\" Cd. 1390.", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-588-22 China- British territorial rights; negotiations with China 28-12-1942 - 10-11-1943.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 572739, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-588-23 China- British extra-territorial rights- negotiations with China 28-3-1942 - 27-11-1942", "page_number": 173, "title": "CO129-588-23 China- British extra-territorial rights- negotiations with China 28-3-1942 - 27-11-1942", "content_text": "171\n\n(iii). The expression \"companies of the one (or the other) High Contracting Party\" shall for the purpose of the present Treaty be interpreted as meaning limited liability and other companies, partnerships and associations constituted under the law of the territories of the High Contracting Party to which the present Treaty applies.\n\n## Article 2\nAll those provisions of treaties or agreements in force between His Majesty the King and the President of the National Government of the Republic of China which authorise His Majesty or his representatives to exercise jurisdiction over nationals or companies of His Majesty in the territory of the Republic of China are hereby abrogated. Nationals and companies of His Majesty the King shall be subject in the territory of the Republic of China to the jurisdiction of the Government of the Republic of China, in accordance with the principles of international law and practice.\n\n## Article 3\n(i). His Majesty the King considers that the final protocol concluded at Peiping on September 7th, 1901, between the Chinese Government and other Governments, including His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom, should be terminated, and agrees that the rights accorded to His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom under that protocol and under the agreements supplementary thereto shall cease.\n\n(ii). His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom will co-operate with the Government of the Republic of China for the reaching of any necessary agreements with the other Governments concerned for the transfer to the Government of the Republic of China of the administration and control of the diplomatic quarter at Peiping, including the official assets and the official obligations of the diplomatic quarter, it being mutually understood that the Government of the Republic of China, in taking over administration and control of the diplomatic quarter, will make provision for the assumption and discharge of the official obligations and liabilities of the diplomatic quarter and for the recognition and protection of all legitimate rights therein.\n\n(iii). The Government of the Republic of China shall accord to His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom a continued right to use for official purposes the land which has been allocated to His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom in the diplomatic quarter in Peiping, on parts of which are located buildings belonging to His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom.\n\n## Article 4\n(i). His Majesty the King considers that the International Settlements at Shanghai and Amoy should revert to the administration and control of the Government of the Republic of China and agrees that the rights accorded to His Majesty in relation to those settlements shall cease.\n\n(ii). His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom will co-operate with the Government of the Republic of China for the reaching of any necessary agreements with the other Governments concerned...", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-588-23 China- British extra-territorial rights- negotiations with China 28-3-1942 - 27-11-1942.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 572778, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-588-23 China- British extra-territorial rights- negotiations with China 28-3-1942 - 27-11-1942", "page_number": 212, "title": "CO129-588-23 China- British extra-territorial rights- negotiations with China 28-3-1942 - 27-11-1942", "content_text": "210\n\n• \n\nterritory of the Republic of China are hereby \nabrogated. Nationals and companies of His \nMajesty the King shall be subject in the territory \nof the Republic of China to the jurisdiction of \nthe Government of the Republic of China, in \naccordance with the principles of international \nlaw and practice.\n\n## Article 3(1)\nHis Majesty the King considers that the final protocol concluded at Peiping on September 7th, 1901, between the Chinese Government and other Governments, including H.M.G. in the U.K., should be terminated, and agrees that the rights accorded to H.M.G. in the U.K. under that Protocol and under the agreements supplementary thereto shall cease.\n\n## \nH.M.G. in the U.K. will co-operate with the Government of the Republic of China for the reaching of any necessary agreement with the other Governments concerned for the transfer to the Government of the Republic of China of the administration and control of the diplomatic quarter at Peiping, including the official assets and the official obligations of the diplomatic quarter, it being mutually understood that the Government of the Republic of China, in taking over administration and control of the Diplomatic quarter, will make provision for the assumption and discharge of the official obligations and liabilities of the Diplomatic quarter and for the recognition and protection of all legitimate rights therein.\n\n(111)/", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-588-23 China- British extra-territorial rights- negotiations with China 28-3-1942 - 27-11-1942.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 572805, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-588-23 China- British extra-territorial rights- negotiations with China 28-3-1942 - 27-11-1942", "page_number": 239, "title": "CO129-588-23 China- British extra-territorial rights- negotiations with China 28-3-1942 - 27-11-1942", "content_text": "236\n\n2.\n\nThe National Government of the Republic of China, all the territories of the Republic of China. Any reference in subsequent Articles of the present Treaty to the territories of one or the other High Contracting Party shall be deemed to relate to those territories of that High Contracting Party to which the present Treaty applies.\n\n(ii) In the present Treaty, the term \"nationals of the one (or of the other) High Contracting Party\" shall in relation to His Majesty the King mean all British subjects and all British protected persons belonging to the territories to which the present Treaty applies.\n\n(iii) The expression \"companies of the one (or the other) High Contracting Party\" shall for the purpose of the present Treaty be interpreted as meaning limited liability and other companies, partnerships, and associations constituted under the law of the territories of that High Contracting Party to which the present Treaty applies.\n\n## Article 2\n\n(i) All those provisions of treaties or agreements in force between His Majesty the King and the President of the National Government of the Republic of China which authorise His Majesty or his representatives to exercise jurisdiction over nationals or companies of His Majesty in the territory of the Republic of China are hereby abrogated. Nationals and companies of His Majesty the King shall be subject in the territory of the Republic of China to the jurisdiction of the Government of the Republic of China, which shall be exercised in accordance with the principles of international law and practice.\n\n## Article 3\n\n(i) His Majesty the King considers that the final protocol concluded at Peiping on September 7th, 1901, between the Chinese Government and other Governments, including His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom, should be terminated, and agrees that the rights accorded to His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom under that protocol and under the agreements supplementary thereto shall cease.\n\n(ii) His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom will co-operate with the Government of the Republic of China for the reaching of any necessary agreements with the other Governments concerned for the transfer to the Government of the Republic of China of the administration and control of the diplomatic quarter at Peiping, including the control of the official assets and the official obligations of the diplomatic quarter, and the Government of the Republic of China will accept such transfer and will make provision for the assumption of such obligations...", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-588-23 China- British extra-territorial rights- negotiations with China 28-3-1942 - 27-11-1942.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 572836, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-588-23 China- British extra-territorial rights- negotiations with China 28-3-1942 - 27-11-1942", "page_number": 270, "title": "CO129-588-23 China- British extra-territorial rights- negotiations with China 28-3-1942 - 27-11-1942", "content_text": "**STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL**\n\nTEXT OF BRIEF DRAFT TREATY RELATING TO AMERICAN EXTRATERRITORIAL JURISDICTION IN CHINA WHICH THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT HAS IN MIND PRESENTING TO THE CHINESE GOVERNMENT.\n\nTreaty with regard to relations between the United States of America and China.\n\n267\n\nThe United States of America and the Republic of China, desirous of defining more clearly the general relations between the two countries, have resolved to conclude a treaty for that purpose and have appointed as their plenipotentiaries:\n\nThe President of the United States of America and the President of the National Government of the Republic of China,\n\nWho, having communicated to each other their full powers found to be in due form, have agreed upon the following articles:\n\n## Article One\n\nAll those provisions of treaties or agreements in force between the United States of America and the Republic of China which authorise the Government of the United States of America or its representatives to exercise jurisdiction over nationals of the United States of America in the territory of the Republic of China are abrogated. Nationals of the United States of America in such territory shall be subject to the jurisdiction of the Government of the Republic of China in accordance with the principles of international law and practice.\n\n## Article Two\n\nThe Government of the United States of America considers that the final Protocol concluded at Peiping on September 7, 1901, between the Chinese Government and other Governments, including the Government of the United States of America, should be terminated and agrees that the rights accorded to the Government of the United States of America under that Protocol and under agreements supplementary thereto shall cease.\n\nThe Government of the United States of America will co-operate with the Government of the Republic of China for the reaching of any necessary agreements with the other Governments concerned for the transfer to the Government of the Republic of China of the administration and control of the diplomatic quarter at Peiping, including the control of the official assets and the official obligations of the diplomatic quarter, and the Government of the Republic of China will accept such transfer and will make provision for the assumption of such obligations and for the recognition and protection of all legitimate rights in such quarter.\n\nThe Government of the Republic of China hereby accords to the Government of the United States of America a continued right to use for official purposes the land which has been allocated to the Government of the United States of America in the diplomatic quarter in Peiping, on parts of which are located buildings belonging to the Government of the United States of America.\n\n## Article Three\n\nPage 270 \nPage 271", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-588-23 China- British extra-territorial rights- negotiations with China 28-3-1942 - 27-11-1942.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 572850, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-588-23 China- British extra-territorial rights- negotiations with China 28-3-1942 - 27-11-1942", "page_number": 284, "title": "CO129-588-23 China- British extra-territorial rights- negotiations with China 28-3-1942 - 27-11-1942", "content_text": "# ANNEX \n## STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL \n### TEXT OF BRIEF DRAFT TREATY RELATING TO AMERICAN EXTRATERRITORIAL JURISDICTION IN CHINA WHICH THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT HAS IN MIND PRESENTING TO THE CHINESE GOVERNMENT.\n\n## Treaty With Regard to Relations Between the \n### United States of America and China.\n\n281\n\nThe United States of America and the Republic of China, desirous of defining more clearly the general relations between the two countries, have resolved to conclude a treaty for that purpose and have appointed as their plenipotentiaries:\n\nThe President of the United States of America, and the President of the National Government of the Republic of China,\n\nwho, having communicated to each other their full powers found to be in due form, have agreed upon the following articles:\n\n### Article One.\n\nAll those provisions of treaties or agreements in force between the United States of America and the Republic of China which authorise the Government of the United States of America or its representatives to exercise jurisdiction over nationals of the United States of America in the territory of the Republic of China are abrogated. Nationals of the United States of America in such territory shall be subject to the jurisdiction of the Government of the Republic of China in accordance with the principles of international law and practice.\n\n### Article Two.\n\nThe Government of the United States of America considers that the final Protocol concluded at Peiping on September 7, 1901, between the Chinese Government and other Governments, including the Government of the United States of America, should be terminated and agrees that the rights accorded to the Government of the United States of America under that Protocol and under agreements supplementary thereto shall cease.", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-588-23 China- British extra-territorial rights- negotiations with China 28-3-1942 - 27-11-1942.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 572944, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-588-24 China- British extra-territorial rights- negotiations with China 23-11-1942 - 1-1-1943", "page_number": 79, "title": "CO129-588-24 China- British extra-territorial rights- negotiations with China 23-11-1942 - 1-1-1943", "content_text": "79 \n\n(iii) The expression \"companies of the one (or the other) High Contracting Party\" shall for the purpose of the present Treaty be interpreted as meaning limited liability and other companies, partnerships and associations constituted under the law of the territories of that High Contracting Party to which the present Treaty applies.\n\n## Article 2\nAll those provisions of treaties or agreements in force between His Majesty The King and His Excellency the President of the National Government of the Republic of China which authorise His Majesty or his representatives to exercise jurisdiction over nationals or companies of His Majesty in the territory of the Republic of China are hereby abrogated. Nationals and companies of His Majesty the King shall be subject in the territory of the Republic of China to the jurisdiction of the Government of the Republic of China, in accordance with the principles of international law and practice.\n\n## Article 3\n(i) His Majesty The King considers that the final protocol concluded at Peiping on 7th September 1901 between the Chinese Government and other Governments, including His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom, should be terminated, and agrees that the rights accorded to His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom under that protocol and under the agreements supplementary thereto shall cease.\n\n(ii) His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom will co-operate with the Government of the Republic of China for the reaching of any necessary agreements with the other Governments concerned for the transfer to the Government of the Republic of China of the administration and control of the diplomatic quarter at Peiping, including the official assets and the official obligations of the diplomatic quarter, it being mutually understood that the Government of the Republic of China, in taking over administration and control of the diplomatic quarter, will make provision for the assumption and discharge of the official obligations and liabilities of the diplomatic quarter and for the recognition and protection of all legitimate rights therein.\n\n(iii) The Government of the Republic of China shall accord to His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom a continued right to use for official purposes the land which has been allocated to His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom in the diplomatic quarter in Peiping, on parts of which are located buildings belonging to His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom.\n\n## Article 4\n(i) His Majesty The King considers that the International Settlements at Shanghai and Amoy should revert to the administration and control of the Government of the Republic of China and agrees that the rights accorded to His Majesty in relation to those settlements shall cease.\n\n(ii) His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom will co-operate with the Government of the Republic of China for the reaching of any necessary agreements with the other Governments concerned.", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-588-24 China- British extra-territorial rights- negotiations with China 23-11-1942 - 1-1-1943.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 573032, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-588-24 China- British extra-territorial rights- negotiations with China 23-11-1942 - 1-1-1943", "page_number": 167, "title": "CO129-588-24 China- British extra-territorial rights- negotiations with China 23-11-1942 - 1-1-1943", "content_text": "**STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL** \n\n168 \n\nThe original of this document was handed to Mr. Liu Chieh, Minister Counselor of the Chinese Embassy, by Mr. Hornbeck and Mr. George Atcheson, Jr., on November 27, 1942 \n\n(Communicated by United States Ambassador on 9th December) \n\n**TREATY WITH REGARD TO RELATIONS BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND CHINA** \n\nThe United States of America and the Republic of China, in recognition of the friendly relations which have long prevailed between their two peoples and of their common desire as equal and sovereign States that the high principles in the regulation of human affairs to which they are committed shall be made increasingly effective, have resolved to conclude a treaty for the adjustment of certain matters in regard to jurisdiction in China and related questions, and have appointed as their Plenipotentiaries: \n\nThe President of the United States of America, \n\nThe President of the National Government of the Republic of China, \n\nand \n\nWho, having communicated to each other their full powers found to be in due form, have agreed upon the following articles: \n\n## ARTICLE I \n\nAll those provisions of treaties or agreements in force between the United States of America and the Republic of China which authorize the Government of the United States of America or its representatives to exercise jurisdiction over nationals of the United States of America in the territory of the Republic of China are hereby abrogated. Nationals of the United States of America in such territory shall be subject to the jurisdiction of the Government of the Republic of China in accordance with the principles of international law and practice. \n\n## ARTICLE II \n\nThe Government of the United States of America considers that the Final Protocol concluded at Peking on September 7, 1901, between the Chinese Government and other governments, including the Government of the United States of America, should be terminated and agrees that the rights accorded to the Government of the United States of America under that protocol and under agreements supplementary thereto shall cease. \n\nThe Government of the United States of America will cooperate with the Government of the Republic of China for the reaching of any necessary agreements with other governments concerned for the transfer to the Government of the Republic of China of the administration and control of the Diplomatic Quarter at Peiping, including the official assets and the official obligations of the Diplomatic Quarter, it being mutually understood that the Government of the Republic of China in taking over", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-588-24 China- British extra-territorial rights- negotiations with China 23-11-1942 - 1-1-1943.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 573113, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-588-24 China- British extra-territorial rights- negotiations with China 23-11-1942 - 1-1-1943", "page_number": 248, "title": "CO129-588-24 China- British extra-territorial rights- negotiations with China 23-11-1942 - 1-1-1943", "content_text": "248 \n\n(iii) The expression \"companies of the one (or the other) High Contracting Party\" shall for the purpose of the present Treaty be interpreted as meaning limited liability and other companies, partnerships and associations constituted under the law of the territories of that High Contracting Party to which the present Treaty applies.\n\n## Article 2\nAll those provisions of treaties or agreements in force between His Majesty the King and the President of the National Government of the Republic of China which authorise His Majesty or his representatives to exercise jurisdiction over nationals or companies of His Majesty in the territory of the Republic of China are hereby abrogated. Nationals and companies of His Majesty the King shall be subject in the territory of the Republic of China to the jurisdiction of the Government of the Republic of China, in accordance with the principles of international law and practice.\n\n## Article 3\n(i) His Majesty the King considers that the final protocol concluded at Peiping on September 7th, 1901, between the Chinese Government and other Governments, including His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom, should be terminated, and agrees that the rights accorded to His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom under that protocol and under the agreements supplementary thereto shall cease.\n\n(ii) His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom will co-operate with the Government of the Republic of China for the reaching of any necessary agreements with the other Governments concerned for the transfer to the Government of the Republic of China of the administration and control of the diplomatic quarter at Peiping, including the official assets and the official obligations of the diplomatic quarter, it being mutually understood that the Government of the Republic of China, in taking over administration and control of the diplomatic quarter, will make provision for the assumption and discharge of the official obligations and liabilities of the diplomatic quarter and for the recognition and protection of all legitimate rights therein.\n\n(iii) The Government of the Republic of China shall accord to His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom a continued right to use for official purposes the land which has been allocated to His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom in the diplomatic quarter in Peiping, on parts of which are located buildings belonging to His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom.\n\n## Article 4\n(i) His Majesty the King considers that the International Settlements at Shanghai and Amoy should revert to the administration and control of the Government of the Republic of China and agrees that the rights accorded to His Majesty in relation to those settlements shall cease.\n\n(ii) His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom will co-operate with the Government of the Republic of China for the reaching of any necessary agreements with the other Governments concerned...", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-588-24 China- British extra-territorial rights- negotiations with China 23-11-1942 - 1-1-1943.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 573651, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-589-1 Sino-Japanese War- shipping on Pearl River 26-1-1941 - 17-6-1941", "page_number": 46, "title": "CO129-589-1 Sino-Japanese War- shipping on Pearl River 26-1-1941 - 17-6-1941", "content_text": "46\n\nargument of the Japanese Consul-General, which implies \nhis right to refuse agreement.\n\nSCO CALLÍ, OZm in the \nverbosa coates \n\nA right \nto refuse agreement unconditionally would appear to involve \nsome argument under certain \n\ncircumstances \n\ncomplied with this ruling in our \nview that \nit would \nnot are in within the Queen's \njurisdiction such as the cargo shipped \novarian hold at Hongkow although \nswalen \ntaken to the list of restricted has grave suspicion \nexpressed that it might prove to be a weapon of discrimination, \ndid not \nfind it to be regarded as a probable \nobstacle \nwas that \nit was looked upon as a temporary \nfinal judgment was \nworking in protocol The original decision to abstain from \ncarrying munitions applies for the foreign \ngun running based on the other light cruiser \nwas on plagiar \ntherefore \n\nmonopoly and the inn in 1918 \nfrom the carrying \nwhich was allowed by \nnew development and \n\nLolita fool unit \n1010 \n\nAlthough the grounds for an official protest may \nto be somewhat weak it appeared to be desirable that everything \npossible should be done by Shanghai branch \npending possible agreement to be concluded by His Majesty's \nambassador in \nTokyo, and have accordingly addressed to \nJapanese Colleague the enclosed letter.", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-589-1 Sino-Japanese War- shipping on Pearl River 26-1-1941 - 17-6-1941.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 } ]