185
valuable nor more in demand than opium. So the
incentive to ganja smuggling will not be greater
than what at present exists with regard to opium.
If, therefore, we are able to successfully cope with
opium smuggling, there is no reason why we
should not be able to do so with regard to ganja.
Mr. Money, in 1871, says on this point (vide
page 31, Bengal Excise Report, 1870-71):—
"Mr. Money agrees with the Commissioner
of Rajshahi in thinking that illicit traffic in ganja
is not large. Indeed, there are difficulties in the
way of anything like extensive smuggling not
easily surmountable. Ganja, unlike opium, can¬
not be smuggled in small quantities, as this would
not pay, while its pungent smell would be likely
to lead to the detection of any large quantity."
Coming to the second great objection (B),
namely, whether, if the duty on ganja is greatly
increased, people will not be driven to other forms
of intoxicants, we see that the other possible in¬
toxicants are (i) opium, (ii) tari, (iii) pachwai,
(iv) country liquor, and (v) bhang.
With regard to opium, it is to be observed that
even with its increased price ganja will be far
cheaper than opium, so that no inducement will be
offered to the people to abandon their habitual
drug for one of a totally different character. His
Honour the Lieutenant-Governor, in reviewing the
Excise Administration Report for 1870-71,
said:—
"The Lieutenant-Governor is struck by the
circumstance that the consumption of ganja in
the opium-producing districts (after allowing for
the quantity exported from these districts to the
North-West Provinces) is large compared with
most other districts, although it is generally
believed that the population of these districts have
easy access to illicit and cheap opium. This
points to a doubt whether opium and ganja are
to any extent substitutes for one another in the
tastes of the consuming classes."
With regard to tari and pachwai, all that need
be said is that it will certainly be a blessing if the
people abandon the pernicious ganja and take to
these totally inoffensive beverages.
The real point is whether restriction in ganja
smoking will increase the consumption of alco¬
holic spirits. In this connection it seems to me
to be necessary to notice two points—
(1) Whether people will resort to drinking
spirits if the price of ganja is, say, doubled.
(2) Even if they do, whether the change will
not be for the better.
In discussing point (1), we must divide the
ganja smokers into two classes—(a) moderate
consumers, and (b) excessive consumers. With
regard to those who have become addicted to the
drug to an excess, it is to be observed that, having
become confirmed in the habit of consuming this
drug, they cannot abandon it and take to another
stimulant. The better off amongst them will pay
for the increased price, whilst the poorer, who
form the majority, will lessen their doses so as to
regulate their habit according to the altered price
of the drug.
The above remarks apply also to the case of
moderate consumers. A person addicted to one
form of intoxicant does not easily abandon it in
favour of another.
In the case of moderate consumers, there is the
further consideration that the amount which a
consumer can at present afford to spend on
ganja being only two pice or so would be
too small to satisfy their cravings by purchas¬
ing liquor. I have already stated that the
quantity of intoxicating drug or liquor which
these people, unrestrained by considerations of pru¬
dence and moderation, consume, is only limited by
their means. So, if a ganja smoker now spends
two pice a day for ganja, it shows he cannot afford
more to spend on it. If he could afford more, he
would have consumed more ganja. Further, if he
be in a position to spend more, there is no reason
why instead of spending it for ganja he would go
and spend it for liquor.
There is another phase of this question that
ought to be noticed. With the introduction of
the Sudder distillery system into the greater part
of Bengal complaints have come from several
districts that the increased price of country spirits
have driven people to ganja. Surely this shows
that the duty on ganja ought to be raised in areas
where the central distillery system is in force.
Complaints were, no doubt, sometimes raised in
places where the outstill system was in force that
the liquor was so cheap as to induce people to
abandon ganja and take to outstill liquor. But
this was never advanced as an argument for
lowering the price of ganja. It showed the
necessity of putting the outstills on a more satis¬
factory basis or of abolishing them altogether.
I have not yet considered whether a rise in the
price of ganja will not drive people to more exten¬
sive use of bhang. I would consider it a blessing
if such a change takes place. For bhang is far
less injurious than ganja. It is doubtful, however,
whether many people will take to bhang on
account of a rise in the price of ganja. Bhang
grows wild everywhere in Bengal; I should say
on almost everybody's land. The excise officers
cannot hold the owner of the land responsible for
having in his premises bhang which he has not
himself cultivated, but which has spontaneously
grown in abundance on his land. Now at the
present moment ganja selling at R20 a seer and
with bhang lying priceless at every man's door,
the ganja revenue is daily increasing, and evidence
is not yet forthcoming that the people have given
up ganja smoking to any appreciable extent.
I maintain, however, that the excise from bhang
ought to be placed on a better footing than at
present. I have dealt with this subject in my
answer to the next question.
Supposing, however, that a considerable artificial
rise in the price of ganja would drive people to the
use of country spirits, it by no means follows that
the change would be at all an unwelcome one. No
one has ever claimed for ganja higher virtues than
for alcohol. The utmost that has been said is
that ganja, like alcohol, is a highly concentrated
food. So, if people abandon ganja and take to
alcohol, I apprehend, the virtues of the two being
the same, the change cannot be regarded as
being one for the worse. I maintain, however,
that ganja possesses not a single of the virtues
ascribed to it. On the contrary, it produces the
most injurious and demoralising effects. Taken
in medical doses it may possess those virtues
ascribed to it; but we know that the real consumers
do not restrict their consumption to a medical
dose. I think it worth while to make the follow¬
ing quotations in support of my views:—
(1) Page 16, Bengal Excise Administration
Report, 1871-72—
"The Commissioner of the Presidency Division
observes, and the Member in charge coincides with
him in opinion, that the increase in the consumption