38 REPORT OF THE INDIAN HEMP DRUGS COMMISSION, 1893-94. [CH. IV.
that he has never seen more than twenty plants growing together. This account
is confirmed by the Khas Tahsildar and Deputy Collector in Angul (73) and
by Mr. Toynbee (4), who is the only official witness of superior rank who has
made a tour of any duration in that country. It is pretty clear that there is no
regular field cultivation in the Garhjat, and that the homestead or garden cultiva-
tion is quite uncontrolled and extremely common.
No decided evidence of increase
in the cultivation.
97. Witnesses (62) and (52) think that the cultivation is increasing, the
former because the sale of Rajshahi ganja in Orissa
has fallen off, and the latter because the restrictions
on cultivation in the Tributary States have been
withdrawn. Witness (13) of the Central Provinces, who is Extra Assistant
Commissioner and Diwan of the Sonpur State, reports that the cultivation in the
Boad State where it borders on Sonpur has increased since 1889 "because (1) it
has not been allowed in the latter State; (2) it can be had cheaper than that
supplied from the Government godowns; (3) people say that ganja manufactured
from plants cultivated in the Boad State, which are similar to those cultivated
before in Sonpur, is liked by them better than the flat ganja, which they think is
more injurious to their health." It may be that the prohibition of cultivation
in the Central Provinces States has given an impulse to it in the Garhjat even
beyond the limits indicated by this witness. But it cannot be said that there is
evidence of a decisive character showing any important extension of cultivation
of late years.
Political States of Chota Nagpur.
Cultivation is under restriction.
98. All the detailed information that can be gathered of cultivation in the
political States of Chota Nagpur comes through
Mr. Grimley, Commissioner of the Division. One or
two other witnesses who mention it state only the
fact of its occurrence. In 1890 Mr. Grimley made special enquiries in the States
on the subject, and the summary of replies from Sirguja, Udaipur, Gangpur, and
Bonai seems to show that in all of them the cultivation is regularly practised, but
everywhere under some sort of restriction. It would seem that the restrictions
date back to 1883, and were imposed on account of representations from the
authorities of the Central Provinces that considerable smuggling was being
carried on from these States into that territory. It is proposed at present only to
ascertain as far as possible the extent and character of such cultivation as exists.
The character and extent of the
cultivation.
99. Regarding the character, it cannot be discovered that there is any
systematic field cultivation. Mr. Grimley states
that "there is no regular cultivation. In some of
the Tributary States people smoking ganja grow
the plant at their doors according to their requirements for smoking and
drinking; but this is done only on a small scale." It appears from Mr.
Grimley's report of 1890 that the produce is of inferior quality, and it may
be concluded that the produce as well as the cultivation very much resemble
those of the adjoining Garhjat. Regarding the extent of this cultivation, there
is no apparent reason why it should be less than in the Garhjat, unless it be the
absence of such an outlet as the Garhjat possesses in the bhang-consum-
ing population of Puri, and the restrictions which the authorities of Chota
Nagpur have succeeded in enforcing.
Mr. Grimley thinks that the local
production is now insignificant, and he mentions as proof of this that the