FINDINGS OF THE COMMISSION ON EXAMINATION OF THE ALLEGED
HEMP DRUG CASES OF 1892.
(1) Dallunda.
(p. 22-39.)
I.—Bengal.—Taking the information collected in the asylums, supplemented by that
collected in the further inquiries, it will be well to consider for each asylum how many
cases there are in which hemp drugs in any form may be reasonably accepted as the
sole cause, or at least a contributing cause, of the insanity. We take first the asylums
of Bengal. In the returns of 1892 for the Dallunda Asylum,
i.e., the Calcutta Native Asylum, there were eighteen cases
attributed to hemp drugs in 1892; of these ten cases must be rejected. These may be
first considered.
Case No. 1—(Matabadai Goala).—In this case the Superintendent is of opinion that
the man "was always of weak mind and probably of melancholic habit." There is no
evidence that the man began to use the drug before he was insane. The history shows
that he began to use the drug at the same time as he showed signs of insanity. This fact,
though noted in the history, has been overlooked by the Superintendent.
Case No. 2— (Rudra N. Bhattacharjee).—We have here a history of progressive
mental deterioration, beginning before he began to use ganja and continued steadily in
his history both before admission to the asylum and since. The Superintendent according-
ly rejects this case.
Case No. 3—(Uttam Singh).—The Superintendent says, "I do not think that this was
a case of ganja insanity, but one of recurrent mania: cause unknown." There is no
evidence that hemp drugs had anything to do with causing the first attack in May 1892;
and that drug had certainly nothing to do with the similar attack in August.
Case No. 5—(Ramlall Goala).—The Superintendent says, "I consider this to be a
case of recurrent mania which has now become continuous and chronic. I do not think
that ganja had anything to do with this man's mental disease." The man had apparently
no friends, and the asylum papers indicate that the entry in the descriptive roll regarding
the alleged ganja habit was based on the fact that the lunatic said "he took ganja."
Nothing further has been learned about him; but the Superintendent merely quotes the
old opinion regarding his habits in explanation of the entry of ganja as the cause in the
asylum registers. This opinion, as already pointed out, was based on a statement made
by the man while yet insane.
Case No. 10—(Lallji Das).—The further inquiry shows that this was practically a re-
admission. The man had previously been admitted into the asylum on three occasions
before 1892. The evidence regarding the connection between hemp drugs and this parti-
cular outbreak of insanity is conflicting and unsatisfactory. It is not the evidence of any
one who knew the man well. On the other hand, there are at least two outbreaks with
which these drugs could have had no connection. It does not appear why Lallji (if now
sane) was not examined as to his own history.
Case No. 12—(Balak Chutar).—There is nothing to connect this case with ganja
except an entry in the descriptive roll. The man is still demented. The Superintendent
says, "I cannot think that this man's insanity was in any way caused by hemp
drugs. It appears to me to be the result of imperfect development." No further
information could be obtained about him. His relatives cannot be traced.
Case No. 15—(Chotu alias Motee).—There is no evidence that this man ever
indulged in hemp drugs, but clear evidence to the contrary. The Superintendent, who
had formerly accepted the police view, rejects it now on further inquiry.
Case No. 16—(Nizamuddin).—There is no evidence of any one at all that this man
ever took a single dose of hemp, and he himself denies it. The Commission cannot
accept the Superintendent's view as to probability for which no ground is assigned.
1