LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEYasked the Secretary of State for India if lie would refuse to allow the expense of an Opium Commission, which had not been asked for either by the India Office or by the Government or the people of India, to be put upon the Indian Treasury? He said he would, at the outset, state his own convictions and personal experience with regard to the opium traffic in the East, in order that he might not appear to be speaking now against them. There was, in the first place, a 931 great difference between the eating and smoking of opium: and it was possible to keep on eating the drug in moderation without any resultant pernicious effects. But with regard to smoking opium, he had been asked by Chinese in Singapore and Penang not to believe that any of their countrymen considered it otherwise than a vice; and once, on a vessel where the supercargo—a Chinaman—was continually smoking opium, all the people on board spoke of him as a good man, and pitied him for having fallen into that vice. There were two opinions about the opium traffic, and it seemed there was no room for a third. One opinion was that opium was an unmixed evil, except when administered by doctors, and that in forcing it upon the Chinese we had been guilty of a national sin. However, since the Treaty of Chefoo, Englishmen now living might be considered to have purged themselves from that sin. The other opinion, as he had said, was that opium was not injurious when taken in moderation; that it was a necessary of life in some countries; and that its cultivation could not be abolished in India without inflicting a loss on the Indian agricultural population, causing friction with the Native States, and sacrificing £4,000,000 annually of Indian Revenue. A large portion of India had been brought under cultivation for opium, and it was not possible to do away with the traffic without doing injury to our own subjects, to whom our first duty was due. Under the first of those opinions a national sin had to be atoned for, which could only be done by the sinners. That we had committed a national sin had been lately avowed by the Prime Minister. Under the second class of opinion the disturbance of the existing state of things was uncalled for, and was what was colloquially called a fad. Mr. Gladstone, in a part of his speech which had not been noticed by any of the papers as far as he knew, said he was obliged to object to that part of the Motion as being tainted with the sin of ambiguity, and referred to it as the wildest and most shadowy measure. It was rather singular to hear Mr. Gladstone complaining of ambiguity, and he seemed to be unconscious how much of it there was in his own speeches. He thought the House was entitled to hear from the noble Earl the Secretary of State for India which of those opinions 932 he held as to this traffic, and whether he could deny that its discontinuance must be either a duty on the part of this country or a gratification of the feelings of a section of it; and, that being so, that it ought to be paid for by this country and not by India, and that all preliminary steps to such discontinuance of the opium traffic, such as the appointment of a Royal Commission, ought to be paid for out of the British Exchequer and not out of Indian taxes. He had just received a letter which had been sent to The Daily Chronicle by the Anti-Opium Society's Secretary urging this view, and pointing out that Mr. Gladstone had apparently left the matter open for reconsideration. He, therefore, hoped, as it was still open for reconsideration, the noble Earl would be able to give a satisfactory answer that the Government did not intend to impose this cost upon India. If they did so it would be extremely unfair to the people of India. Personally, he would have been satisfied to leave the matter as it had been left in Viscount Cross's Blue Book, showing that the opium traffic had been stopped in Burma. The spread of the traffic in Bombay, and in other places where the sale of opium had increased, should be restricted. In other respects the traffic would correct itself. The last news from India was that, in consequence of the late silver legislation, the sale of opium to China was already diminishing, and in that case the Indian Government would be obliged to find some other means of raising Revenue. He would also ask his noble Friend what was the view taken by his Council, and whether he had any objection to lay any opinions expressed by any Members of that Council on the Table? Before sitting down, he felt bound to say that the Prime Minister had made an admirable and comprehensive speech on the opium traffic, and the only fault to be found with it was that the speech did not justify the conclusion arrived at—namely, an inquiry into a vast range of subjects which would occupy many years by a Royal Commission the Members of which, so far as the selection was known, did not appear to be very competent for such an inquiry, so that the proposed Commission appeared to be intended as a sop to one section of the Prime Minister's followers of an electioneering nature.
THE EARL OF KIMBERLEYMy Lords, I will confine myself to answering the question which the noble Lord has asked me. I can inform him that it is proposed that the expense of the Opium Commission shall fall half upon the Indian Revenues and half upon the British Treasury—that the cost shall be divided.
§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYMay I ask whether that has been decided? Has the proposal been agreed to?
THE EARL OF KIMBERLEYThat is what is proposed. It is only a proposal at present. We are obliged to get it into shape before it can be arranged.
LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEYasked whether the noble Earl would not give any reason why half the cost was to fall upon India? That appeared to him to require justification.
THE EARL OF KIMBERLEYIt seems to me that India is deeply interested in the settlement of the question raised by the promoters of this Commission, and, that being so, it is not unreasonable that one-half of the expense should fall on the Indian Revenues, the other half being borne by the British Treasury. That is all I can say.