258 REPORT OF THE INDIAN HEMP DRUGS COMMISSION, 1893-94. [CH. XIII.
Some of them go further than this. They go so far as to say that these drugs
not only do not incite to crime, but have the very opposite tendency. They
are of opinion that the drugs "tend to make men quiet;" that "the immediate
effect is stupefying; there is none of that tendency to violence which is a
characteristic of alcoholic intoxication;" and that the result of continued abuse
of the drugs is to make a man "timid and unlikely to commit crime." These
last statements cannot be accepted as generally true. No doubt the drugs
may sometimes have these sedative effects, though a number of witnesses speak to
habitual use producing irritability. Any one who has extensively visited ganja
shops or places where consumers congregate must be struck with the perfect
quiet which prevails in the great majority, and with the slothful, easy
attitude of the consumers. These are not, however, the invariable effects of
hemp drugs. Undoubtedly the excessive use does in some cases make the
consumer violent. It is probably safe to say in view of all the evidence that
the tendency of the drugs often seems to be to develop or bring into play the
natural disposition of the consumer, to emphasize his characteristic peculiarities,
or to assist him in obtaining what he sets his mind on. If he aims at ease and
rest and is let alone, he will be quiet and restful; but if he is naturally excitable
and ill-tempered, or if he is disturbed and crossed, he may be violent. This
may be accepted perhaps as generally true if allowance be specially made for
the fact that excess in the use of these drugs tends to show and to develop
inherent weakness of character. At the same time the fact that so many
witnesses testify to the peaceable and orderly character of the excessive con-
sumers goes far to prove that in this country experience shows that as a rule
these drugs do not tend to crime and violence.
Evidence to the contrary.
547. This impression is intensified by the consideration of the statements
made by some of the witnesses who constitute the
minority. Mr. D. R. Lyall (Bengal witness No. 1),
who has had thirty-two years' varied experience as a Revenue Officer and Magis-
trate, says: "I have known cases of temporary homicidal frenzy;" but in his oral
examination he says: "I can give no examples to illustrate my answer." This
is precisely the position occupied by many of the most experienced witnesses.
They have a more or less vague impression that hemp drugs and violent crime
have been occasionally associated, but they cannot recall cases.
A few
testify to having searched the criminal records or police reports for years
back in vain. As Mr. Westmacott (Bengal witness No. 2) says in his
written paper: "I do not at this moment remember a case, but I have an im-
pression that there are such cases." This is a witness typical of a class.
There are other witnesses who speak less cautiously of "many cases," but
cannot give information about any. Thus Mr. Williams (Bengal witness No.
18) speaks of "innumerable cases of homicidal frenzy." But his remark "is
merely based on newspapers;" and he knows only one case which occurred at
Calcutta while he was at Darbhanga, and of which his knowledge is "entirely
hearsay." Similarly, Mr. W. C. Taylor (Bengal witness No. 36), an uncove-
nanted officer of forty-seven years' experience, speaks of "numerous cases,"
but can only recall one—surely a doubtful case—in which an attack was made
on a party, of which he was a member, by a Sonthal in the Sonthal rebellion of
1856. Similarly, the Inspector-General of Police in the Central Provinces