²⁴ 3:264 (July, 1909).

²⁵ China No. 1, (1908), p. 11.

²⁶ Ibid, p. 19.

²⁷ Ibid, p. 31.

²⁸ Mr. Leech’s estimate, “Opium Question in China,” China, No. 1, 1908. The estimate is probably too high.

²⁹ Rowntree: “The Imperial Drug Trade,” p. 297.

³⁰ Opium Question in China. China No. 2 (1908).

³¹ The Trade and Administration of the Chinese Empire, p. 350.

³² Chinese Report, International Opium Commission.

³³ China No. 1, 1908.

³⁴ The Ten Year Agreement, vide Supplement, 3:264 (July, 1909).

³⁵ Rowntree : “The Imperial Drug Trade,” p. 285.

³⁶ Correspondence on Consumption of Opium in Ceylon, White Book, 1908.

³⁷ Straits Settlements and Federated Malay States Opium Commission, Singapore, 1908.

³⁸ The Commission reported Feb. 7, 1808.

³⁹ Report on Opium, its Derivatives and Preparations, Feb., 1909.

⁴⁰ Upon taking the chair Bishop Brent said: “Fellow Members of the International Opium Commission: In electing me your Chairman you have conferred an extraordinary honor on the government which I represent. In behalf of the United States of America and also in behalf of my esteemed colleagues, I beg to think you for this distinction. * * *

“The question that brings us together — the opium question — is an extremely difficult one and I think the very first thing that all of us should do is to frankly recognize the fact and openly admit it. It is a great problem and we can hope to reach a successful solution of it only by facing facts and facing them squarely. We must have courage, and it seems to me that two principal features of courage are sincerity and thoroughness. All great problems go through two distinct stages. The first stage is what might be termed the emotional stage; it is based largely upon sentiment and ideals that are conceived in the inner self, sometimes more independent of facts than is warranted. In the problem before us, for a long period we have been passing through this preliminary stage — what I have termed the emotional stage. The emotional stage finds expression in agitation. We have had agitation. Now I believe we are at least midway in the second stage, when men deal with ascertained fact, and on the basis of ascertained fact reach certain conclusions of a practical character that will enable those upon whom the responsibility rest to arrive at some final conclusion.

The first steps towards this International Commission were taken some time since by the government which I have the honour of representing. The negotiations for the establishment of the Commission have covered a considerable period of time. At first it seemed wise to restrict the nations that would take part in this investigation, or Commission of Inquiry, to those which through territorial possessions, agriculture, or commerce, were actively interested in the opium question in the Far East. Since that time the scope has been considerably widened. Countries that have not the problem in its more acute form, as in the case of my own country and that of other countries similarly situated, were by mutual consent included by the powers already interested, so that now I think we may say we are in a very real sense an International Commission. Almost at the last moment — indeed at the very last moment — two countries without a serious opium problem of their own were included by their expressed desire, and by the ready acquiescence of all other countries that up to date had notified their willingness to take part in the inquiry. Last summer it was decided by the American Commission — and notification was sent to all other governments concerned— to study every phase of the opium question in their own territory, including the homeland. So that, presumably, in this International Commission, as we are desirous to ascertain all facts that will enable us to come to some satisfactory conclusion, we shall agree in the desire to receive such information as is presented regarding the various aspects of the question in all the countries represented on the Commission.

“It devolves upon me to pronounce with emphasis that this is a Commission, and as those who are informed — as all of you must be in matters that pertain to international affairs of ‘this kind — a Commission is not a Conference. The idea of a Conference was suggested, but it seemed wise to choose this particular form of action rather than a Conference, because, for the present at any rate, we are not sufficiently well informed, and not sufficiently unanimous in our attitude, to have a conference with any great hope of immediate success. Further, this Commission is a temporary Commission as distinguished from some of the permanent Commissions already in existence, and if we were to look for the source of our origin, I think we would find it in the articles of the First Hague Conference, which provides for such International Commissions of Inquiry where points of difference on matters kindred to that which is before us arise between the powers. So that in all our deliberations and in all our committee work, we must bear in mind that we are to confine ourselves to facts that will enable us to reach, I trust, certain unanimous resolutions and, perhaps, some recommendations of a practical, broad and wise character in connection with those resolutions. But, if I may be permitted to make a suggestion to this assembly, it seems to me that it would be extremely wise if we were to rule out of our deliberations what might be termed useless historical questions beneath which a great deal of controversy lies hidden, and which would only tend to fog the issue. The one way to reach a satisfactory solution of a grave problem is to simplify, as far as possible, the elements of that problem, and I believe that history bears me out when I say that no great question has ever been satisfactorily settled until men have come to a realization of the fact that purely side issues, and controversial matters which do not touch the main question, must be set aside and ignored. They may be of interest, but they are of no practical importance, and, indeed, are impediments in the actual working out of the main question.

“I feel that I am speaking not merely for myself and my colleagues on the American Commission, but for this distinguished assembly, when I say that we are here to do such work as will bring the utmost credit to our respective countries and the utmost benefit possible to mankind. We must study this question in its every aspect — moral, economical, and commercial, diplomatic also, if you will — and we must study it, as I have already said, with those two phases of courage which will bring us to a happy conclusion of our labors — with sincerity and thoroughness.

“Nothing more remains for me to say, gentlemen, except to announce that this International Opium Commission is now organized and ready for business.”

⁴¹ Second International Peace Conference, p. 7.

⁴² “It is resolved:

“1. That the Chair shall be addressed as ‘Mr. President.’

“2. That no delegate shall continue to speak until recognized by the Chair.

“3. That when a vote is taken each delegation shall have only one vote. On questions of procedure or discipline, the President — in the event of a vote being equally divided — shall have a deciding vote.

“4. That immediately upon the adoption of these rules, the President shall call for the presentation of reports concerning the various phases of the opium question in the territories and dependencies of their respective countries from the delegations taking part in the International Opium Commission.

“5. That each delegation in its turn (alphabetically) shall then lay a report covering its data on the opium question before the Commission, without discussion or debate. It shall be within the power of the President to allow the presentation of any report to be postponed on due cause shown.

“6. That a copy of each report shall be supplied to each member of the Commission, and a reasonable time allowed to members of the Commission generally for the examination of the report presented; and that thereafter the President shall call upon the Commission to discuss any report that may be ready for investigation.

“7. That one or more Committees may be appointed for the purpose of studying the reports referred to under Rules 4, 5, and 6, or any specific portion of them, when it is apparent that previous study by a limited number of delegates is necessary for arriving at a conclusion regarding any problem under consideration.

“8. That any Committee so appointed for the detailed study of a report, or section of a report, shall, upon the termination of its labors, report the result of its examination to the Commission in plenary session, whereupon a general discussion on the report of such Committee will be in order.

“9. That the number and constitution of Committees shall in every case be decided by the Commission in plenary session; but a Committee may complete its own organization.

“10. That the manner of forming Committee shall be as follows: Each delegation shall hand in the name of one of its members to the President, who from amongst them will proceed to nominate the number necessary to serve on any one Committee; any delegate who is not himself a member of a Committee may attend the sittings of such Committee without taking part in any of its proceedings.

“11. That all proposals submitted to the Commission shall be handed to the President (or Chairman of a Committee) in writing, and a copy supplied on request to each delegation.

“12. That the public shall not be admitted to the Commission, but that such information regarding the progress of the general proceedings as may be deemed expedient to make public shall be communicated to the Press by a Committee of three to be elected for that purpose.

“13. That the Minutes of the plenary sessions of the Commission shall give a succinct resumé of the deliberations, and that a proof copy shall be opportunely delivered to the members of the Commission; and the Minutes shall not be read at the beginning of a session unless specially called for. Each delegate, shall, however, have the right to request the insertion in full of his special declarations, according to the text delivered by him to the Secretary, and to make observations regarding the Minutes.

“14. That both English and French shall on principle be recognized as the languages to be used in the Commission, and that steps shall be taken to ensure that the deliverations be rendered, if necessary, and the Minutes recorded in both languages.

“15. That each delegation shall have the right to introduce a secretary of delegation to the meetings of the Commission, providing that such secretary holds a substantive post in his Government service. Exception to this rule may be made in the case of a delegation of a country having no Consular or Diplomatic representative in China; but under no circumstances will other than bonâ fide secretaries be admitted. The names of secretaries to delegations shall be formally reported to the Chair.

“16. That, except when otherwise decided by the Commission, the hours of meeting of the Commission shall be from 10.30 A. M. to 12.30 P. M., and from 2 to 5 P. M., on every day of the week except Saturday and Sunday.”

⁴³ American Program:

“(1) That, whereas the reports submitted to the International Opium Commission by the delegations present recognize that opium, its alkaloids, derivatives and preparations are, or should be, confined to legitimate medical practice;

“Be it resolved, therefore, that in the judgment of the International Opiura Commission a uniform effort should be made by the countries represented at once or in the near future to confine the use of opium, its alkaloids, derivatives and preparations to legitimate medical practice in their respective territories;

“And be it further resolved, that in the judgment of the International Opium Commission each government represented is best able to determine for its own nationals, dependent or protected peoples, what shall be regarded as legitimate medical practice.

“(2) That, whereas the reports submitted to the International Opium Comgovernments confronted by them; and that they should be settled as soon as mission by the delegations present recognize that, as the result of inadequate knowledge in the past of the baneful effects of the unguarded and indiscriminate use of opium, alkaloids, derivatives and preparations, there have arisen certain revenue problems which depend upon the production, sale and use of opium, its alkaloids, derivatives and preparations;

“And, further, whereas, in the judgment of the International Opium Commission these revenue problems remain and will require a certain time for solution;

“Be it resolved, therefore, that in the judgment of the International Opium Commission no government should, as a matter of principle or necessity, continue to depend upon the production of opium, its alkaloids, derivatives and preparations for an essential part of its revenue;

“And be it further resolved, that in the judgment of the International Opium Commission such revenue problems as exist are not of a nature to baffle the possible to the end that opium, its alkaloids, derivatives and preparations should be relegated to their proper use in legitimate medical practice.

“(3) That, whereas, the reports submitted to the International Opium Commission by the delegations present state that opium smoking is prohibited to their nationals; further, that some of the reports submitted state that opium smoking is prohibited to protected and dependent peoples of some of the governments here represented;

“Be it resolved, therefore, that in the judgment of the International Opium Commission, the principle of the total prohibition of the manufacture, distribution and use of smoking opium is the right principle to be applied to all people, both nationals and dependent or protected; and that no system for the manufacture, distribution or use of smoking opium should continue to exist, except for the express purpose and no other of stamping out the evil of opium smoking in the shortest possible time.

“(4) That, whereas, the reports submitted to the International Opium Commission by the delegations present, record that each government has strict laws which are aimed directly or indirectly to prevent the smuggling of opium, its alkaloids, derivatives and preparations into their respective territories;

“Be it resolved, therefore, that in the judgment of the International Opium Commission it is the duty of all countries which continue to produce opium, its alkaloids, derivatives and preparations, to prevent at ports of departure the shipment of opium, and of its alkaloids, derivatives and preparations, to any country which prohibits the entry of opium or of its alkaloids, derivatives and preparations.

“(5) That, whereas, the reports submitted to the International Opium Commission by the delegations present, indicate that the use of morphia, its salts and derivatives, is indissolubly bound up with the abuse of opium itself, and that their use accompanies, or sooner or later supervenes, on the use of opium itself;

“Be it resolved, therefore, that in the judgment of the International Opium Commission, strict international agreements are needed to control the trade in, and the present or possible future abuse of, morphia and its salts and derivatives, by the people of the governments represented in the International Opium Commission.

“(6) That, whereas, the reports submitted to the International Opium Commission by the delegations present indicate that though each government represented is best able by its national laws to control its own internal problem as regards the manufacture, importation or abuse of opium, its alkaloids, derivatives and preparations, yet that no government represented may by its national laws wholly solve its own opium problem without the conjoint aid of all those governments concerned in the production and manufacture of opium, its alkaloids, derivatives and preparations;

“Be it resolved, therefore, that in the judgment of the International Opium Commission a concerted effort should be made by the governments represented in the Commission to assist every other government in the solution of its opium problem.”

“(7) Be it resolved, that, in the opinion of the International Opium Commission, every nation which effectively prohibits the production of opium and its derivatives in that country except for medical purposes should be free to prohibit the importation into its territories of opium or its derivatives except for medical purposes.

⁴⁵ Vide Supplement, 3:275 (July, 1909).

Mr. President, during the last few years our people have watched with admiration a repetition of history, for they have seen the beginning of a determined and they hope a final effort by that same great nation to sacrifice a large revenue to the end that another widespread evil may cease. In watching this historical day, the American people, besides cleaning its own house, have felt that the century old desire of China is about to be fulfilled. They believe that we live in a new day in which, were he alive, the great Warren Hastings would while enunciating the great fundamental principles which filled his mind, say somewhat differently in the matter of foreign commerce in opium. They believe that he would say, and would be indorsed by the decent opinion of mankind, that opium was not a necessary of life, that it was undesirable to increase the production of any such article, that opium was a pernicious article when regarded as an article of luxury, an article which the wisdom of governments should carefully restrain from consumption, internally, and let us add, abroad. The day we are in is a modern and more happy day than the day of Warren Hastings. It is a day in which moves the force of another great Indian and Imperial statesman, a great philosopher also — Lord Morley. Lord Morley is not afraid to say that he did not “ wish to speak in disparagement of the Royal Commission, but somehow or other its findings had failed to satisfy public opinion in this country, and to ease the consciences of those who had taken up the matter. * * * What was the value of medical views as to whether opium was a good thing or not, when we had the evidence of nations who knew opium at close quarters. That the Philippines Opium Commission in the passage of their report which he hoped the House of Commons would take to heart, declared that the United States so recognized the use of opium as an evil for which no financial gain could compensate, that she would not allow her citizens to encourage it, even passively.”

Lord Morley could further express himself on three most important points:

“The first concerning his insistence that China must fulfil her part of the agreement founded on her own proposals, if England is to do the same. Lord Morley explained that from his point of view such insistence was intended, not as a threat to China, but rather as a help to her to hold fast to her obligations, and to go forward with their fulfilment.

“The second point concerned the action of our government (i. e. the British) in case China should fail to carry out her own proposals — was it to be understood that the present movement for the gradual extinction of the Indian opium export should, in that case, come to an end? Lord Morley did not see that that was implied. There were two broad grounds for the present movement; one, the proposals of the Chinese government, the other the resolution of the House of Commons on the 30th May, 1906. If the first should fail the second did not necessarily cease to be a ground of action.

“The third point concerned a possible plea on the part of China that the process of reduction might go on more swiftly than her own first proposals contemplated. Would Lord Morley be prepared to consider such a plea if deliberately put before him by the Chinese authorities? In reply Lord Morley said that he could only refer to his statement on the 30th May, 1908, that any deliberate proposals from the Chinese government on the subject of opium would meet with symuathetic consideration.”

Mr. President, is Great Britain to halt? Our delegation, the American people, do not believe it. Great Britain will not halt if we are to credit her public opinion, her press, her present eminent Secretary of State for Indian affairs. The American people believe that Great Britain will defend herself against world-wide criticism by replacing her opium revenue, sacrificing it mayhap, and by sacrificing dual agreements and obsolete treaties, as she sacrifices, and sends to the scrap heap an obsolete class of battleships that are of no further use to defend her extensive interests. We live in a day when such things may be done by our great Mother Country. We live in the day of large-minded governors-general and statesmen as Lord Minto who declares : “ That there is no doubt throughout the civilized world a feeling of disgust at the demoralizing effect of the opium habit in excess. It is a feeling in which we cannot but share. We could not with any self-respect refuse to assist China on the ground of loss of revenue to India.” And here let me express my admiration for the honorable member of the Indian government who sits in the British delegation, for placing this statement of Lord Minto’s in the record of this International Opium Commission.

Mr. President, it is the day of such great lawyers and statesmen as Mr. Elihu Root, who could bring to life this International Opium Commission. It is the day of such practical churchmen and philanthropists as Bishop Brent, whose mind grasped the opportune moment for suggesting the calling of this Commission. It is a day when this troublesome opium question is no longer the concern of one or two powers, who have direct interests in the traffic and illicit use of opium. But a day when the great powers of the world who have kept aloof from the problem may join with those others and out of their experience, advise on this question. It is a day, let us hope, in which moves the old happy spirit that leaped at the discovery of opium as an anodyne for those irretrievable ills from which the human mind and frame may sametimes suffer. It is a day, we venture to hope, when opium shall by the voice of this International Opium Commission be relegated and consecrated to its proper use in relieving the really sick. The American delegates trust that it is a day when opium shall no longer be made to descend from its high place amongst the gifts of nature to pander to the careless desires or vices of mankind.

Mr. President and fellow Commissioners, through this more recent and more thorough study of the opium question, I have seen that the abuse of opium is a sad business. It was with a feeling not far from shame that it fell to my lot to place before this Commission the unhappy state of the opium question in the United States. I venture to place myself with those other gentlemen on the floor of this house who by their training are best able to judge of the mental and physical conditions that arise and ultimately call for the use of opium. We would agree that the need for opium often occurs. We know, as the great Sydenham said, that medicine would go limping had it not been for the discovery of that drug. We would agree, I think, that there is a constant temptation to the most enlightened members of the medical profession to resort to the use of opium to relieve mental and physical pain, a temptation to which the medical profession too often gives way; yet because I know these particular phases of the opium problem, all the more am I firmly convinced that opium in all of its forms is a drug to be honestly and simply used only in those stresses and strains of mental and physical life that may be said to be extreme.

With these thoughts in our minds, our delegation has had to face an international problem that earnestly calls for the study of questions of revenue, of treaties between various powers on the question of opium, of dual agreements of the same nature for the control or reduction of the use of opium amongst those peoples to whom it is a familiar and ready remedy for all the minor ills that flesh and mind are heir to. There has at times been a temptation to look at the opium problem from the moral, the medical, the financial, or the historical point of view alone. But on the whole we may assert that we have resolved the opium problem in its most comprehensive sense; and that if we had any thought that it was a problem of easy solution without the conjoint action of the different governments here represented, we have been sobered. It is with strong convictions but in generous spirit that the American Opium Commission presents its resolutions with a hope that there shall speedily be recorded the first great international step in the solution of this vexatious question, so that the East and the West may be free without further conflict of opinion to proceed to discuss those other but minor problems that still agitate them.

⁴⁶ In this (October) Supplement will be found several treaties in addition to those appearing in the previous (July) Supplement.

The author also desires to add that, on looking further into the subject, and after re-reading Mr. Reed’s letter that appeared in the Supplement (p. 269), to the July number of the Journal, the statements made on page 641 of the Journal (July) in reference to Americans not engaging in the opium trade after the negotiation of the Treaty of Wang Hea of 1844 must be modified. It seems certain that the Treaty of Wang Hea did not drive Americans from the opium trade. This was largely due to the connivance of Chinese port authorities with the traders. Had the Chinese government attempted to effectuate the opium aritcle of the Treaty of Wang Hea by dealing with American opium traders under its own laws, these traders would not have received either countenance or protection from the United States.

⁴⁶ In this (October) Supplement will be found several treaties in addition to those appearing in the previous (July) Supplement.

The author also desires to add that, on looking further into the subject, and after re-reading Mr. Reed’s letter that appeared in the Supplement (p. 269), to the July number of the Journal, the statements made on page 641 of the Journal (July) in reference to Americans not engaging in the opium trade after the negotiation of the Treaty of Wang Hea of 1844 must be modified. It seems certain that the Treaty of Wang Hea did not drive Americans from the opium trade. This was largely due to the connivance of Chinese port authorities with the traders. Had the Chinese government attempted to effectuate the opium aritcle of the Treaty of Wang Hea by dealing with American opium traders under its own laws, these traders would not have received either countenance or protection from the United States.