The opium controversy.

  • Arbuthnot, Alexander John, 1822-1907.
Date:
1882
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: The opium controversy. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by The Royal College of Surgeons of England. The original may be consulted at The Royal College of Surgeons of England.

    9/13 (page 410)
    March opposed to any considerable diminution of the Indian opium revenue, unless the opposition to it in this country shall be allowed to pre- vail. The foregoing brief summary of the rise, progress, and present position of the opium trade may possibly serve to correct some mis- conceptions which still exist in regard to matters of fact bearing upon that trade. The trade is the natural result of the capacity of the soil and climate of certain parts of India to produce a drug for which there is, and long has been, a demand in China, and to produce it of a quality which better suits the taste of the Chinese than that which they have been able to produce in their own country or to pro- cure from elsewhere. It cannot be said that the legalisation of the trade was forced or even pressed by the British Government upon the Chinese until it had been proved by the experience of many years that, notwithstanding the prohibitions periodically issued by the Govern- ment of China against the importation of opium, the people of China were determined to have it, and that the traffic was not only con- nived at, but was encouraged by the officers of that Govern- ment. These facts are in no way affected by the view that may be taken of the two wars which England has waged against China. The first war, which was the only war fought in connection with opium, was not followed by any attempt on our part to force opium upon the Chinese. Had the authorities in China been sincere in their desire to put down the trade, it might have been stopped immediately after the ratification of the Treaty of Nankin. The second war had nothing to do with opium ; but when peace was made, and when the time came for revising our commercial relations with the Chinese, it was not unreasonable that our Govern- ment should bring under consideration a trade which it was im- possible to ignore, which, as carried on, was a scandal, and which, unless it could be stopped altogether, it was for the interests of both countries to place upon a legal footing. Nor were the British Government, singular in holding this view. The same view was held and was pressed upon Lord Elgin by the American Minister in China, who, distrusting the possibility of any really effective prohibi- tion of the traffic, mainly, as he said, ‘through the inveterate appetite of the Chinese,’ recommended that the Chinese Government should be persuaded ‘ to put such high duties on the drug as will restrain the supply, regulate the import, and yet not stimulate some other form of import with or without the connivance of the Chinese.’ The practical questions which the people of England have to consider in connection with this matter are: first, whether the evils resulting from the use of opium, as practised by the Chinese, so far transcend the evils resulting in other countries from the use of stimu- lants of other kinds, as to compel us, on grounds of public justice and morality, to impose upon India the heavy loss which would ensue