But  as  the  outcome  of  the  Report  of  the  Commis-
sion has  been  given,  it  will  perhaps  be  fair  that  the
Minute  of  the  one  Member  who  dissented  should
also  be  noticed.  Mr.  Henry  J.  Wilson,  M.P.  for
Holmfirth  in  Yorkshire  on  the  Liberal  side,  should
also  be  noticed.  He  begins  by  observing  that  the
resolution  of  the  House  of  Commons  and  the  terms
of  the  reference  to  the  Royal  Commission  were
passed  by  the  Liberal  Government  in  1893,  under
Mr.  Gladstone,  by  a  majority  of  184  to  105.  He
describes  the  105  as  mainly  comprising  "  the  anti-
opium  party,"  who  desired  an  enquiry  "  for  a  very
different  and  far  more  useful  purpose."  It  is  to  be
inferred  from  his  own  language  that  he  joined  the
Royal  Commission  with  his  mind  made  up  as  to  the
policy  which,  in  his  view,  morality  dictated.  It  may
be  inferred  that  inasmuch  as  the  anti-opium  party
would  have  zealously  mustered  their  numbers  for
that  occasion,  their  full  strength,  just  over  a  hun-
dred, represented  less  than  one-sixth  of  the  House  of
Commons.  From  his  notes  it  appears  he  had  not  in-
frequent differences  with  his  colleagues  as  to  the
manner  in  which  the  evidence  was  taken  in  India.
It  is  impossible  for  any  from  the  outside  to  ap-
proach such  differences;  but  the  result  does  not
seem  in  the  end  to  be  unfavourably  regarded  by  Mr.
Wilson,  for  he  considers  that  the  general  drift  and
tendency  of  the  evidence,  or  the  prevailing  mass  of


166    PROGRESS  OP  INDIA,  JAPAN  AND  CHINA.
it,  to  be  on  his  side.  He  manifestly  differs  from  his
colleagues  in  the  view  to  be  taken  of  the  evidence.
