In this one respect the fo1 may take a leaf out of the Chinese book. "It seems to me that the safe-Jguard lies in the hands of the foreigner, and the remedy is in strong ce-operation. Piece goods men, for} example, ought to be able to safeguard themselves. The same with woollens, and metals, and many of the larger staples. The retort may be that if you endeavour to re-}gulate too stringently the business that you are prepared to do you may find yourself without any, but in the long run I am convinced that it would be more profitable to confine one's self to legitimate trading than to overtrading with people who will throw the goods back. at you. One may be allowed to point to the débicle that arose in 1920 and onwards in many trades, with great loss to whom?—as always, to the foreigner. It would have been better had the business been left alone, of course.
The trade committees in the various chambers of—commeree to be able to prevent over trading, to have complete records, ofall the Chinese dealers with whom it would be risky to trade, jand institute. remedial measures that would enable @ merchant to Sirp—Adviees have reached from' the Far East which I know merit attention, and which I think will interest all those concerned in any way in dealing with opium and the effects of the opium traffic. T refer to the undoubted movement in China for the establishment of an Opium Monopoly by the Chinese Government, Let me very briefly indicate how matters stand, In 1907 China obtained from the British Government, from whose Indian pos: sions' came most of the opium that was imported, an agreement that each year, for a period of ten years, it would reduce the total amount of opium exported from India by an amount equal to one-tenth of the amount then being exported to China, under condition that the Chinese Government, upon its part, would, pari pass, bring to an end the cultivation of the poppy in China. This agreement was, of course, prior to the effective anti opium' campaign in China which culminated in 1917, but since then circumstances have' very materially altered, though only recently. About two years ago, Sir Francis Aglen, the Inspector-General of Chinese Maritime Customs, openly expressed the opinion that the only feasible way of controlling the trade with a view to effecting its gradual suppression, would be for China to establish an opium monopoly. The Advisory Committee on Traffic Opium at its wal meeting in 1923, discussed is question and expressed disfavour of any such suggested monopoly.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.