528
THE HONGKONG WEEKLY PRESS AND
1
1
colony, who will be led to believe that the promises of English statesmen are so many imeaningless words. Therefore, I join my au official colleagues simply in asking for a renewal of that assurance, and if that assurance be given I apprehend that my Chinese colleague and myself will be satisfied and will offer no opposition to the second reading.
#
(June 21,-1909.
deal of prosperity to the place, and we also have to lose all the incidental extra expenses which are incurred by people engaged in this trade who spend their money here. We are still prepared to go on the lines in Your Excellency's memorandum of "gradually and tentatively reducing the consumption of and trade in opium, and not too far in advance of the steps taken by China." I
that the understand
agreement between the Home Government and Intlia is that the importation is to be reduced ten per cent. per annum. Meantime it is believed China will be gradually encouraging the decrease of the consumption of opium, and also its cultivation. After three years' time it will be reconsidered, and it will then be for China to prove her bona fides. The Indian Government and the Imperial Government have not agreed to go on if China is not playing the game. I don't say she is not playing the game, but I think it is impossible for China to entirely abolish the use of the drug in ten years. We consider we should be put on exactly the same footing as the Indian Government if our reven. ue is going to be taken away. We should have gone on "gradually and tentatively," but instead we have a peremptory order from the Secretary of State to close the divans at once, and it does not seem reasonable to ask a small community struggling to pay its way, weighted down by bad trade and an excessive military contribution -which has been our old man of the sea for many years-expensive works which forced to carry out, and on top of that to be ordered that we must straightaway, and not gradually, close the whole of
The Secret- the divans within twelve months. ary of State's promise is of too little value I think it must be admitted.
My learned friend who spoke just now claimed-that was only his fun-that he was not conversant with the English language, but as I have pointed out, the Secretary of tate has already dis- tinctly laid down that 88 far 88 the compensation for divans is concerned, that that has got to be paid oat of the Colony's revenue. That I contend is wrong. In addition, through giving effect to the policy of His Majesty's Government, the Colony must suffer a loss. It seems to me that the Secretary of State has left a wide door open which he can take advantage of, and he has by no manner of means committed His Majesty's Government to fully reimburse for the substantial loss which I have no doubt we prove will be able to
is very heavy think the hon. member who moved this resolution might have spoken stronger than he did. The words in the Secretary of State's despatch do not necessarily mean that H. M. Government propose to ask
what Te
consider tarliament to give us not be
substantial compensation, and unless we get some such assurance from Your Excellency I shall voto against the second reading of this
the risk of incurring the odium of being supposed to resist the policy as a whole. We do not oppose it. But as to the wisdom of enfore. ing it by abrupt methods, opinions may vary, and it is still possible to adhere to those advo. cated so recently by Your Excellency. If the Home Government adopt the contrary opinion they ought to assure us, not vaguely but defi- nitely, of their intentions. In striving to he The Hon. Mr. HEWETT-After the very generous to China they should not overlook eloquent speech made by my hon. friend on the Hongkong's just claims to considerate treat. right and that by the hon, senior unofficial ment. Consideration of the difficulty of our member there is very little more for me to position should assume tangible shape. The say in support of the resolution which I Colony is being coerced into accepting as understand is to be put forward that the cover for a certain loss an indefinite promise. It second reading of this Bill should be seems neither reasonable or right to force postponed until Your Excellency is in a such a bargain upon us. Let the Imperial position to give an assurance in the name Government, through Your Excellency, admit of the Secretary of State for the Colonies, us to a full knowledge of our financial prospects. or on behalf of His Majesty's Government, that Let them tell us exactly what they are prepared we will receive adequate compensation for the to do; let them state plainly what proportion. if loss that will be forced upon this Colony not the whole, of our prospective loss they by the policy of the Home Government. The intend to accept, and then let them ask us to hon, and learned member who has just sat down pass this Bill. This would be reasonable. This naturally takes a slightly different point of would be right. In the absence of any such view to that held by the other unofficial members, clear understanding, in the presence only of a We know perfectly well that the existence of vague undertaking. I intend to vote, and I the opium farm has always been extremely hope my colleagues will vote, against the distasteful to the Chinese. I think Your second reading of this Bill. Lond_applause.) Excellency pointed out very clearly in the Hou. Dr. Ho KA-Sir, one would suppose memorandum which you placed before the that the introduction of this bill, which is to Council some little time ago that some such carry out the policy of the home government in restriction must exist. It is surely very much putting down the consumption of opium in this better that the divan expenses and also the opium Colony, and to in some way restrict the dealing farm regulations with regard to prepared opium in opium here, would meet with very little should fall upon the opium farmer rather opposition from the unofficial members, especi- than upon the Government, which is the alter. ally from those who have approved of the policy native. That, I think, is the only difference in a qualified way, and who have approved also between the two Chinese members and the other of the doing away with the opium divans gradu- unofficial members of this Council. Coming ally as long as it does not affect the back to the original question, the first speaker financial arrangements of the Colony. Last stated that owing to the ambiguity in the year in seconding a proposition by the hou. Secretary of State's despatch there were grave gentleman who has just resumed his seat. I doubts that the Government's offer of com then declared I did not support this resolution 'pensation would be sufficient I think because I think the closing of opium divans is a myself that the hou, member might even mistake or is undesirable, or that the opium have gone further. In the extracts from farm is a benefit to the Colony or a necessity certain despatches read by Your Excellency thereto. I therefore stated that if the Governin your speech of March 11th, it appears ment determined to root out the opium dens that the Secretary of State wrote that what- and abolish the opium farm I for one would not ever compensation might be found to be equit- regret, and I was certain the Chinese com- ably due to the holders of these licences, it will munity would not regret. To-day I aut be provided from the Colonial revenue That prepared to stand on the position I occupied makes it clear that the Home Government has then. I repeat what formerly said not the slightest intention to fully compensate that I support
the home the Colony for the loss sustained. When we the policy of Government. At the same time I am more were asked later to pass a vote of $11,000 for than ever alive to the necessity for some compensation to those divaus which we closed under instructions -arbitrary instructions- definite assurances from the Home Government that the deficit in our finances should be met from the Home Government the point was raised substantially by the home Government? Now, in committee. Your Excellency referred to that Sir, you yourself on a former occasion I think on a later occasion at the meeting on 13th May. I your words have been quoted by the member who gather that Your Excellency seemed to think
on the 11th March this year this has just sat down
I may stated that His Majesty's Government are pre interpreting Your Excellency's remarks pared to ask Parliament to give a substantial correctly-I was prevented by illness from grant towards making good the revenue which being present, and can only go by the report we have lost as the result of the measures in Hausard, iu which you are reported adopted in accordance with the instructions of the home Government, When I received that assurance and looked at it in print I must say that the English was plain enough and I believed. that the home Government would act up to, their promise and give us that substantial assis. tance. It has been pointed out to me, however, that these words are too loose, although I did not think so myself, but as my knowledge of English has been acquired since my youth perhaps I may be excused for differing from those who claim English as their native tongue. No statesman worthy of the name in England would depart from a promise which he has given, and therefore I think. Your Excellency, we may expect the aid which has been promised us will be forthcoming. however, here to represent other interests than my own, and therefore I must to a certain extent join in the request that Your Excellency would be so good as to give us the meaning of the despatch which I have just quoted. If the British Government intend to do as they have said in this message they would do, we have very little to fear, and I for one will support the second reading of this bill. Eut if not then I say the Home Government have taken upon themselves a very great responsibility and their failure to ratify the promise would drag the fair name of Great Britain in the mire and would have A bad effect upon the Chinese population of this
small
matter.
to have said, "I trust. gentlemen, that this explanation is sufficient, and that the Council will not desire it should be understood by His Majesty's Government that we repudiate the views which have been recorded in this Council. I think Your Excelleucy perhaps hardly under- stood the protest which was made in the Finance Committee. We did not by any manner of means go back on anything we have said as to the advisability of gradually reducing the con- sumption of opium in this Colony. and joining with our countrymen in helping China to shake herself free from what is viewed as the curse of the country-a curse which has. no doubt, been very much exaggerated by interested
What the parties.
Committee considered I am. was the question of the very direct loss incurred by this colony through the Secretary of State's despatch, and what should be repaid by the Imperial Government. The Colony is incurring a very serious loss, roughly four-and-a-i half to five-and-a-half millions sterling a year on the whole of that trade which we have every reason to believe will entirely disappear. As the hon. member on my extreme right has al- ready pointed out, this will necessitate a very great loss to all concerned in the trade and affect the prosperity of the Colony. We are now to face a loss of a trade which has been carried on for fifty or sixty years at enormous value to the Colony, and which his brought a great
|
I one.
bill.
-
В
us
we are
1+
cursa.
and
Hon. Mr. OSBO NE-Lest there should be
misunderstanding Ast to any
the position which unofficial members of this Council take with regard to this measure, I should like to reiterate what
the the hon. member for Chamber of Commerce has already stated-
is that there no divergence of opinion whatever as to the virtue and éven necessity of closing the opiuma divans in this colony; and assisting the Imperial Government to help China to get rid of this But I wish to point out that the whole question hinges upon what is the interpretation of the Secretary of States' word "substantial, whether his promise was only a promise to merely ask the Imperial Parliament for a grant, or whether it is the intention of the Government to press for a grant. I think if Your Excellency could make it clear to this Council what the promise actually means and if that promise is satis. factory, the second reading of the bill will go through to-day. If, however, Your Excellency can not give a definite promise, or rather a definite interpretation of the word substantial, it would perhaps be better to hold the discussion over until Your Excellency has time to get that interpretation from London.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL-If the hon. member opposite representing the Chamber of Commerce had read a few lines further on in his quotation from Your Excellency's speech on
Page 20Page 21
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.