559
excessive, I should enter excessive in certificate
which goes to the Deputy Commissioner.
What I have stated above describes my proce-
dure. I have read the abstract of my reports in
the case of Madharam Deo in the memorandum
of cases admitted into the Dacca Lunatic Asylum
in 1892, and I see that in this case I did not
follow this procedure, inasmuch as I appear to have
entered "consumption of ganja" without the
word "excessive" as the cause upon the informa-
tion "that the lunatic used to take ganja." I am
unable at present to explain why I should have
departed from my usual practice.
The above procedure relates to cases arising
when I am in the station. I am absent from my
station about ten days in each month. In my
absence a case would be investigated by my
subordinate after my own method, and the papers
would be left for my signature on my return,
and occasionally I sign them hurriedly.
I did not know Juma until he was in the con-
dition described, viz., a helpless pauper suffering
from dementia. I learnt his history from people
in the place. He had probably been in that con-
dition for some time when I came to know him.
The case never came under my professional
notice.
The case of Babu B. Sen did not come under my
professional notice. He had recovered and was in
practice six years before I knew him. I got his
history from himself and others, including Dr.
Sanyal. I accepted the statements of these
persons, and consider that they justify me in
forming the opinion that the case was one of
ganja. I attach special weight to the gentleman's
own statement and that of Dr. Sanyal, who,
however, did not treat him professionally.
Golak Chandra Das was unable to make his
defence, and is now in the Dacca Lunatic Asylum.
22. Evidence of DR. T. D'O. PARTRIDGE, Civil Surgeon, Silchar.
Oral evidence.
I have been in the Uncovenanted Medical Ser-
vice since 1868 in India. I have had no special
experience in insanity. I have not made it a
special study, nor have I had any special charge
connected with insanity. I am now Civil Surgeon
of Cachar. My service, all but two years, has
been in Assam.
I have had considerable experiences of cases of
lunatics under observation. The case is sent to
me with an order from the Magistrate to observe
the man and state whether he is sane. This con-
tains only a few words containing a short sum-
mary of the case. It is generally sent by the
Deputy Commissioner, but occasionally by a Sub-
ordinate Magistrate. I have no recollection of
receiving any paper filled in by a police officer.
What I get is in the form of a docket from the
Deputy Commissioner. In almost all cases there
is a statement as to violence and so on; but in
most cases it is impossible for me to ascertain
from the papers what the cause is. As a general
rule, then, I have no material at the first to judge
of cause. I get no descriptive roll or anything
more than the letter.
I have to fill in the cause of insanity in the
"Medical History." I do not see the man when
he comes; and I never see friends or others accom-
panying him. I know nothing of the Hospital
Assistant seeing the friends. I go down to the
jail in the morning and see the patient who was
brought in the day before. If the docket shows
cause, well and good. If not, I ask the Magis-
trate if he can give me any information. As a
rule, the result is rather negative evidence. You
do not get much information as to the cause. Some-
times the cause is shown, but sometimes only as a
possible cause not strongly put. I should simply
put that down and say "possibly from such or
such a cause." If in any case ganja was put
down either in the original letter or in any paper
afterwards received through or from the Magis-
trate, I should enter it as the probable cause.
If
ganja was not assigned as the cause, but it was
stated that the man used ganja, I should enter
ganja as the probable cause with a query. It is
never stated how much the man takes, except that
it is occasionally put that he is "a confirmed
ganja-smoker." The amount can never be found out.
I
do not consider that I am called on to make
further enquiry, and I never do make any further
enquiry. I think this procedure is fairly satis-
factory. I have no better information. I do not
think that the information is very reliable.
I
believe that it comes from the friends of the in-
sane and from police enquiry. The friends will
give the cause as far as they can judge. I think
they can fairly well judge. The ordinary con-
stable, so far as I know, conducts the enquiry.
I
am not certain who does it. I think he can
pretty fairly judge.
The form I use contains the words "probable
cause." It is only that that I have to certify.
I do not think that it is fair to put down ganja
as the cause of insanity merely because a man is
a smoker, but it is done. I would do it if I could
find no other cause. I do not think that ganja
frequently causes insanity—certainly not more
frequently than drink in this country. I think
drink is more liable to produce insanity than
ganja. But I should prefer to enter ganja as the
cause to saying "unknown," because there must
be some cause and ganja may have been the cause;
and it looks better in my view to enter the cause
as stated by the Magistrate.
In the two cases of Monuhar Mahanti and
Narayan Nawa sent by me to the Dacca Asylum
in 1892, I entered under habits "Addicted to
ganja" and under cause "No other cause is
known except what is mentioned above." By that
I meant not that I had ascertained that ganja
was the probable cause, but that I had ascertained
no other. I therefore, as said above, entered
ganja with a query, as it were. I think that it
is very probable that the grounds on which ganja
has been assigned as the cause of insanity are in
very many cases inadequate. If I had to judge
scientifically of the connection of ganja with
insanity from the certificates I have myself given
as to "probable cause," I should (I think) have
to discount many of them.
I have never discriminated between the mo-
derate and excessive use of the drug. I have
never seen any evil effects from the use of the
drug except in the cases sent to me for observation
in the jail. I may have seen smokers: I may have
seen moderate smokers: I may have seen excessive
smokers; but I have no means of knowing that
a man is a consumer until he is thus brought
before me for observation. The effects apart from
that have never attracted my attention at all.