Drug Abuse

FINDINGS OF THE COMMISSION ON EXAMINATION OF THE ALLEGED HEMP DRUG CASES OF 1892.

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 1 892 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—(Matabadal 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 accordingly 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 12arned 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 readmission. The man had previously been admitted into the asylum on three occasions before 1892. The evidence regarding the connection between hemp drugs and this particular 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.

Case No. 17—(Poran Patro).—The evidence collected in the further inquiry shows that this man was "not a ganja smoker." His father was a lunatic, so that there was hereditary predisposition. "Sudden grief," which is now assigned as the exciting cause, would be quite an adequate cause in such a case. The Superintendent's suggestion of the possibility of the man's having "taken to ganja or other stimulant to assuage his grief" is unsupported by any evidence.

Case No. 18—(Mahadeo Chamar).—This man was arrested on 22nd December 1892. He was sane when admitted to the asylum on the 26th idem. The papers disclose no sign of insanity after an act of violence on the 23rd idem. There is therefore no proof of mental alienation lasting over 24 hours. The Superintendent's view that this was a case of intoxication, and not insanity, is therefore accepted.

There are three cases in which the abuse of hemp drugs, though one of the possible causes, is not the sole cause of insanity. These cases may be taken as "mixed" cases—

Case No. 7—(Mihir Lal Dey).—This man was addicted to liquor as well as ganja. The Superintendent's opinion is that "this man's insanity was due more to excess of alcohol than anything else."

Case No. 8—(Nafir Chandra Dey).—In this case we have an indication of heredity in the fact that his "younger sister and cousin are insane." We have also clear proof of the liquor habit and of sexual excess as well as of the abuse of ganja.

Case No. 14—(Hari Mohan Chatterji).—The father of this young man stated that he "is constantly smoking ganja and drinking wine, brandy and bhang."
There remain five cases which may be accepted as being, so far as is known, due to hemp drugs alone—

Case No. 4—(Shama Charan Kar).—This man was not insane when admitted into the asylum. But further inquiry into his previous history affords sufficient ground for attributing this attack, as well as a previous attack, of temporary insanity to the abuse of ganja.

Case No. 6—(Guru Parshad).—This man was quite sane in the asylum. There can be no doubt that he habitually used ganja ; and as there is no other apparent cause, this has been accepted as the cause of his temporary insanity on this as well as on a previous occasion.

Case No. 9—(Ramkissen Panda).—The statement of the descriptive roll that the man was addicted to ganja and siddhi is corroborated by his own statement after he recovered his reason. This is a reasonably probable cause of his temporary insanity.

Case No. 11—(Mongla alias Mahomed Syad).—In this case we have a history of opium (not in the form of " chandu" as stated by the Superintendent) and ganja, and no other apparent cause for the insanity. Ill-health may have rendered the man more susceptible to the effects of ganja.

Case No. 13—(Fatteh Ram Singh).—In this case there is a clear history of ganja and no other established cause.

Thus in the Dallunda Asylum out of the eighteen cases shown as hemp drug cases in 1892, we have ten which are rejected, three that are " mixed " cases, and five that seem due to hemp. These conclusions are based on a consideration of the information collected in the asylum and in the further enquiry and of Dr. Walsh's evidence before the Commission.

In the Patna asylum returns for 1892 eight cases were attributed to hemp drugs. Of these five must be rejected —

Case No. 1—(Salik Patick).—Here we have in the further inquiry clear evidence of relatives and neighbours to the effect that the lunatic did not use ganja. There is insanityin the family ; and the man's insanity is attributed "to fright in a dream." In this case we have an illustration of an entry of cause being based on information given by a village chaukidar.

Case No. 4—(Siba Thakur).—The further inquiry in this case shows that the use of ganja was in small quantities ; that the man first became mad in jail where he had no ganja ; and that he was addicted to excessive sexual indulgence.

Case No. 5—(Maghan Gir).—This is not an 1892 case. It belongs to 1891. It was a merely formal readmission in 1892. It is excluded merely as not belonging to that year.

Case No. 7—(Ram Sarup Das).--.The further inquiry proves conclusively that ganja had nothing to do with the insanity, as the man did not use hemp at all. The probable causes were fever and reverses in fortune. The Magistrate and Civil Surgeon declare the entry regarding ganja in the descriptive roll to be inexplicable.

Case No. 8—(Adit Misr).—This man's insanity was ascribed to ganja, because he is said to have admitted ganja smoking when received into the asylum. He now denies having used the drug, and the descriptive roll distinctly says that he did not use it. This is an illustration of the impropriety of basing an opinion on statements made by insane persons.

There is one case which may be regarded as a "mixed " case, namely—

Case No. 6—(Bihari Runiar).—This man was addicted to drink as well as ganja ; but the circumstances seem to indicate that the latter may have had most to do with the insanity.

There are two cases which seem due to ganja alone :-
Case No. 2—(Kali Singh).—Further inquiry proves that this man was clearly an excessive smoker.

Case No. 3—(Gajadhar Ahir).—The further inquiry shows that this man's former attack, as well as the present, may reasonably be attributed to ganja smoking.
These conclusions are based on the paper submitted by Dr. Bovill to the Commission, in which he carefully and accurately summarizes the result of the further inquiries conducted in these cases.
In the Dacca Asylum returns for 1892 fifteen cases were ascribed to hemp drugs : of these ten must be rej ected-

Case No. 1—(Charan Das).—The only ground for attributing the insanity to ganja in this case is an entry in the register for 1864, that the man "is addicted to ganja." He had then been nine years insane. Dr. Cobb very reasonably rejects this case.

Case No. 4—(Uzir Ali Shay.—The alleged connection of the insanity with ganja is disproved in the further inquiry. It is found that this man was never known to have used ganja, and certainly had not used it for years before he became insane.

Case No. 5—(Swarup Kaibarta).—The further inquiry shows that the insanity was due to "emotional" excitement, not to ganja. The man is reported to have occasionally smoked ganja without noticeable effect. But his insanity is distinctly connected with a "violent scene" arising from his improper intimacy with a married woman.

Case No. 6— (Sheikh Waris).—The further inquiry shows that the insanity was due to "grief and anxiety," not to ganja. The previous papers had shown "not a particle of evidence " to connect the alleged insanity with hemp drugs, as Dr. Cobb says ; and the further inquiry has fully accounted for it on quite other grounds.

Case No. 7—(Durga C. Chunga).—The ganja habit is disproved in the further inquiry. The further inquiry fully confirms Dr. Cobb's previous opinion.

Case No. 8—(Madhavram Dev).—Ruin from business losses led to mental aberration. There is nothing to show that the man used ganja before this mental aberration began. The habit was not known till afterwards.

Case No. 9—(Gagan C. Chathati).—The further inquiry shows that this man never used ganja, but had taken to alcohol owing to mental troubles.

Case No. 10—(Garua).—There is no evidence that this man used ganja, except an entry as to habit in the descriptive roll, quite unsupported. Nothing was known of the man. The then Superintendent, though the Overseer entered the cause as " ganja," was doubtful about this being a toxic case. The man is not improved. And the ganja habit has not been established.

Case No. 12—(Manohar Mahanta).—Dr. Partridge (Assam witness No. 22), in his evidence before the Commission, shows that he had formed no opinion as to the cause of insanity. Dr. Cobb points out that there does not seem to have been any knowledge of this man, and the entry in the descriptive roll is not trustworthy. There is no improvement.

Case No. 15—(Narayan Das).—This is the same as case No. I r, which is discussed below and is therefore struck off.
There is one case that may be regarded as a "mixed" case—

Case No. 3—(Baishmar Chandra Saha).—Heredity is proved in the further inquiry and also "business losses," which are a quite adequate exciting cause. The evidence regarding the ganja habit is in some respects vague ; but the fact of the habit seems established.
In the remaining four cases the insanity seems reasonably attributable to hemp drugs alone—

Case No. 2—(Dayal Dass).—Dr. Cobb's evidence regarding this man leaves no doubt that this may be accepted as a ganja case. The gradual growth of the habit of excessive smoking is well described by Dr. Cobb in his evidence.

Case No. 1—(Narayan Das).—This man is now sane, and, according to Dr. Cobb, confirms the statement made in the papers that he used ganja to excess.

Case No. 13—(Narayan Nava).—This case is treated by Dr. Partridge in much the same way as case No. 12 (supra). It is decidedly a doubtful case. But in view of the fact that Dr. Cobb accepts the case, it has not been rejected.

Case No. .r4—(Padai Ram).—This case rests on nothing but the descriptive roll. But the entries therein seem to have been framed after a full inquiry and to be reasonable in character. Though far from being a certain case, it is accepted.

In coming to these conclusions regarding these cases the note submitted by Dr. Cobb has been considered, as well as the information collected in the asylum and in the further inquiry under Dr. Russell.

In the Berhampore Asylum eleven cases were attributed to hemp drugs in 1892; of these seven must be rejected—

Case No. 3—(Karanu Shaha).—Further inquiry proves that the man did not take ganja. He became suddenly insane at the age of eleven years. This attack has never been attributed to ganja The lad has had several attacks since. This had been accepted all along in this case, until Dr. Meadows, in March 1894, recorded an admission alleged to have been made by this man that he had smoked ganja. This admission does not touch his early history. Dr. Meadows, on noticing the lad's early history, withdrew his opinion that the case might have been due to ganja.

Case No. 4—(Bihari Jolaha).—This man was sent to jail on 18th March 1891 and did not become insane until a year. after. He had shown " weakness of intellect" from the time of his admission to jail. Although further inquiry shows that he had been a moderate smoker, the outbreak of insanity which occurred more than a year after his admission to jail cannot be attributed to ganja.

Case No. 5—(Kanai Lall Dube).—Nothing is known of this man except that he " is an up-country man and came to the district shortly before his arrest in an insane state." Flow the police made the entry professing to know his habits " for a long time is not explained. There was no one who could have given any information about his history ; and the man himself was insane at the time.

Case No. 6—(Ramnarain).—There is nothing known of this man and nothing to connect his insanity with ganja, except a statement made by him, while still insane, that he used the drug. The Magistrate distinctly states that the man is not in a condition to give any information, and that there is no one who knows anything about him.

Case No. 8—(Kanta Dube).—The further inquiry shows that nothing can be ascertained about this man. " Nothing was known of his past history " when the descriptive roll was drawn up ; and the police entry that he formerly used ganja was probably based (if not a mere guess) on such a statement made by him as he made in the asylum while still insane. On the other hand, there is a clear history in the asylum of syphilis.

Case No. 9—(Arjun Upadhya).---In this case the evidence recorded in the further inquiry shows conclusively that the man did not take hemp drugs in any form. The Commission do not understand why the Superintendent of the Asylum should attach more weight to the descriptive roll than to the evidence now recorded. He does not explain.

Case No. 11—(Purna Chandra Rishi).—There is no mention whatever of ganja in the criminal record ; and the further inquiry now made shows that the theory that the insanity was due to ganja was started to conceal a grave family scandal.

There is one case which may be accepted as a " mixed " case—

Case No. 2 —(Pitambar Singh).—A younger brother of this man is insane. There is thus an indication of heredity as well as a history of the use of ganja and bhang.

There are three cases which may be accepted as due to hemp drugs alone—

Case No. 1—(Surat Chandra Ghose).—It appears that the lunatic's brother was probably responsible for the entry of ganja in the papers as the cause.

Case No. 7—(Hari Das).—The further inquiry, while suggesting some doubt as to the genuineness of this case, contains a clear history of the use of ganja.

Case No. l0—(Mangal Sen).—This case depends only on the previous papers, and can only be regarded as possibly due to ganja. All that can be said is that there is no apparent reason for rejecting the entries in the descriptive roll.

It is noteworthy that in three cases the allegation regarding cause in the descriptive roll is erroneously ascribed to the Civil Surgeon in the further report. This mistake indicates want of care in the examination of the papers.

Case No. 1—(Bira Das).—There is only one case shown as due to hemp drugs in the Cuttack Asylum returns for 1892. The whole (p. 62.)    history of the case shows that ganja had nothing to do with it. The ganja alleged to have been given by a bairagi was given after the lunatic had left the Raja's service through madness. There Aeems to have been no suspicion of ganja on the mind of any one; but somehow this was shown as the cause (without any record of the reason) after the man had been years in the asylum. This case should also be rejected as belonging to 1879, not 1892. It was a merely formal readmission in the latter year.

II.—Assam.—

In the Tezpur Asylum there were thirteen cases attributed to ganja in Tezpur. the returns for 1892. Of these entries of cause only one (p. 63.67.) was made by the Overseer ; the remaining twelve were made by his subordinate, the Jamadar. The Superintendent, Dr. Macnamara, disavows these entries in his oral evidence before the Commission. The efforts to obtain more information by further inquiries failed, as the lunatics and their friends could not be traced. But fortunately Dr. Mullane (Assam witness No. 13) was able to give in his oral examination before the Commission valuable information regarding seven of these cases which had passed through his hands. Out of these thirteen cases, the Commission have rejected ten—

Case No. 1—(Uchit Ram).—This man was a garden coolie and nothing is known about him. The Jamadar's entry of ganja as the cause of insanity is not supported by the papers. There is a habit entry that "the lunatic sometimes smokes ganja and takes liquor." But the insanity is attributed to neither.

Case No. 2—(Akhilananda).—Ganja was entered by the Jamadar as the cause without any authority in the papers. They did not mention the drug in any way. Dr. Mullane shows that this was not a ganja case.

Case No. 4—(Saheb Ram).—Dr. Mullane shows that "there was no suspicion of ganja in the case," of which he, at the time, received a full account.

Case No. 5--(Jaganath).—Dr. Mullane shows that the insanity had nothing to do with ganja. The man was epileptic and "had a curiously malformed head."

Case No. 6—(Khadu).—The allegation that the man ever used ganja is based solely on a statement he made when insane "that he was addicted to ganja and Spirituous liquor." This statement cannot be accepted. Dr. Mullane does not think the insanity was due to ganja.

Case No. 9—(Bapu Ram).—Dr. Mullane did not regard this as a ganja case. The man " had a remarkably small brain development." He had been discharged from the police for insanity many years before. The event showed that he had not been fit for discharge from the asylum as he had an outbreak of homicidal mania immediately after.

Case No. 10—(Jagodhar).—There is nothing definite in the papers to show that the use of ganja preceded the onset of the insanity three years before the man's admission to the asylum, and there was no mental improvement up to the time of his death.

Case No. 11—(Mussamat Major).—The papers only show the use of ganja by this woman when already insane, and there was no improvement.

Case No. 12—(Mussamat Bedoma).—The papers show heredity; the woman's father was insane. They show that nothing is known of the woman's personal history or habits. They make no mention of ganja. There was no mental improvement. The Jamadar's entry is not explained.

Case No. 13—(Mussamat Kitni).—The papers contain no mention whatever of ganja, but distinctly state that nothing is known of the woman's past history ; and the entry by the Jamadar is not explained.

The remaining three cases have been accepted as " mixed " cases—

Case No. 3—(Jalim Ghatwai).—In this case the papers show heredity as well as the use of ganja. The case is an interesting one in view of the coincidence of both insanity and the ganja habit in both father and son. It may be noted also that the man was never insane in the asylum ; yet the type is shdwn as " melancholia."

Case No. 7—(Kisto Dass).—Doubt arises in this case from the recurrent character of the insanity and the fact that there is nothing beyond the descriptive roll to guide us as to cause ; but as it is stated clearly that he smoked " dhatura leaves with ganja," the allegation that his insanity is due to this may be accepted, as no other cause is apparent.

Case No. 8—(Chadi Gond).—The descriptive roll shows that this man used both ganja and liquor, and Dr. Mullane thinks the symptoms consistent with the ganja theory.

In this asylum there is no case clearly attributable to hemp drugs alone.

 

III.—North-Western Provinces.—

In the Benares Asylum only six cases were set down to hemp drugs in the returns for 1892. Of these only one has been rejected—

Case No. 1—(Bhawanidin).—It was shown by a perusal of the record of the trial in this case, that the Magistrate had attributed the insanity to ganja in direct contradiction to the evidence. There was nothing to explain his action.
Five cases have been accepted as due to hemp drugs alone—

Case No. 2—(Ramdas).—The descriptive roll attributes the insanity to ganja, and this is corroborated by Ramdas' statement after recovery.

Case No. 3—(Bhagwoti Pershad).—The symptoms led the Superintendent to doubt this being a case of toxic insanity ; but the further inquiry gives a clear history of the abuse of ganja and bhang, and no other cause can be assigned.

Case No. 4—(Ramlal).—The further inquiry shows that the man was addicted to bhang, and no other cause can be assigned.

Case No. 5—(Hinganlal).—Here also the bhang habit is established and seems to have led to two previous attacks of insanity.

Case No. 6—(Ram Smair).—This is a somewhat doubtful case ; but there appears in the evidence collected in the further inquiry sufficient ground for believing that bhang, which the young man occasionally used, may have at least contributed to his insanity.

An interesting feature of the Agra returns is the substitution of charas for ganja in the districts which lie far to the north-west. In this asylum eighteen cases were attributed to hemp in 1892 ; of these eleven must be rejected—

Case No. 2—(Motilal).—In this case the further inquiry clearly shows that on his mother's side Motilal had a strong hereditary predisposition to insanity, and that grief, business anxiety and mental strain were the exciting causes.

Case No. 3—(Gopal).—This man indulged in hemp drugs ; but there is no evidence that he did so before he became mad. The opinion of the Joint Magistrate and Civil Surgeon of Jhansi (which is adopted by the Superintendent of the Asylum) is based on the assumption that he had indulged in the drugs for ten years and been mad only five. But the papers show that he had been mad for ten years.

Case No. 8—(Narain Khatri).—The further inquiry shows that this man has six brothers, of whom one went mad at the same time as Narain. It has been established that neither of them took ganja or charas before becoming mad. Both took to these' drugs subsequently. Narain's madness "began with bad attacks of fever."

Case No. 9—(Nemur Passi).— This man was apparently not insane in the Asylum. The statement that the alleged temporary insanity was due to charas seems to be based on nothing except a statement made by the lunatic while still insane to the effect that he took bhang (sulfa) twice a day. Nothing more can be learned about him.

Case No. 10—(Murli Singh).—The further inquiry shows that this man " was never addicted to smoking charas, but that he was addicted to drink."

Case No. 11--(Bhowani Teli).—No trace of this man can be obtained. The papers make no mention of hemp drugs, while they do •show that his mother had been insane. There is nothing to show why Dr. O'Brien entered " ganja" (with a query) as the cause. But he clearly had not accepted this view finally.

Case No. 1 2—(Kundan Lail).—The use of hemp drugs is disproved in this case. Syphilis from which the lunatic suffered is suggested by the Superintendent as a possible cause of insanity.

Case No. 13—(Jbalka Rachhi).—Further inquiry shows that there is no evidence of the use of hemp drugs. There was no history of a hemp drug habit ; and the brother of the lunatic now says he never used hemp.

Case No. 14—(Tulsi Bania).—Further inquiry shows that there is no ground for attributing this case to hemp drugs. The Joint Magistrate and. Civil Surgeon of Jhansi report that " the impression that his insanity was due to hemp drugs appears to have rested mainly on his own statements to the Civil Surgeon. From the statements now made before us this appears to have been an hallucination on his part." The lunatic's father declares that he never indulged in hemp drugs at all.

Case No. 15—(Ralla Singh).—As the Superintendent says, " there is no evidence of indulgence in bhang," it is not clear why in spite of this he should attribute the insanity to this cause from the symptoms. Apparently he bases this opinion on the transient character of the mania. This cannot be accepted.

Case No. 18—(Hari Kishor).—Nothing further can be ascertained about this man. Even his home is " not known." The insanity is ascribed to charas " from his own statement " in an entry in the asylum register, which also records that he" talks nonsense." This, of course, cannot be accepted.

There are two out of the eighteen cases which may be accepted as " mixed" cases—

Case No. 16—(Kishan Lall).--The further inquiry shows that this man was given to sexual excess as well as to charas. His brother adds : " In his youthful days he contracted syphilis and then he took to drugs." He used opium as well as ganja.

Case No. r7—(Ganga Lohar).—The further inquiry shows that this man's father's brother was insane. There was probably therefore hereditary predisposition. But there is good ground for thinking that the insanity may have been directly due to the abuse of hemp in all its forms.

In the remaning five cases it seems reasonable to believe that hemp alone may have caused the insanity. In four the cause is the abuse of charas. In one (Krishna Parshad) the insanity is attributed to bhang—

Case No. 1—(Ram Lally.—The evidence collected in the further inquiry seems to show that charas smoking was the cause of insanity.

Case No. 4—(Jugla).—This man seems to be an excessive consumer of charas, and the resumption of the habit appears to have brought on a second attack of insanity.

Case No. 5—(Deoki Das).—Nothing more can be learned of this man. The insanity was attributed to charas on the authority of a statement he made apparently after recovering his reason.

Case No. 6—(Krishna Parshad).—This case is precisely like the last, except that bhang, not charas, is the cause assigned.

Case No. 7—(Gulab, Mussalman).—This also is a similar case. No doubt in these three cases there must be some hesitation in accepting the statement alleged to have been made in the asylum by the lunatics. But it is b est to do so, as the statement seems to have been made after the lunatics' recovery in each case and to have been accordingly accepted by the Superintendent.

In the Bareilly Asylum returns for 1892, eleven cases were attributed to hemp drugs. Of these, five must be rejected—

Case No. I—(Nathu).—The further inquiry shows that this man never took intoxicants before he became insane. It was not till " after he lost his senses " that he was seen to take charas.

Case No. 2—(Fackeray).—The evidence collected in the further inquiry from the man himself, his mother and his friends, shows that this man never used charas, and the entry in the descriptive roll seems to be without foundation.

Case No. 5—(Dariao Singh).—The further inquiry establishes heredity, Dariao's father and two sons being insane ; but there is no satisfactory evidence of the use of hemp drugs. The evidence on this point was conflicting.

Case No. 7—(Bhowani Singh).—" The Civil officer who conducted the further inquiry in consultation with the Civil Surgeon, reported that * * * ' the only reason they (Bhowani Singh's mother and brother) are able to suggest for his going mad is that he smoked some charas at the Holi festival. He never smoked before or since, or used any intoxicant.' " In accepting this suggestion as to cause, the Superintendent has overlooked the fact that this was Bhowani's fourth attack of insanity. If the man never smoked before the occasion referred to, his recurrent insanity cannot have been due to smoking. Of course, the smallest excitement or indeed no apparent cause, may bring on a fresh outbreak of recurrent insanity ; but the insanity itself must clearly be due to some cause, predisposing or otherwise, which existed before the first outbreak.

Case No. 10—(Balak Ram).—The further inquiry shows heredity, and that bhang was not the cause.

There are four cases which may be accepted as " mixed " cases—

Case No. 3—(Moti).—The insanity followed immediately on a bereavement ; but the lad was a charas smoker, and this may have rendered him more predisposed to mental breakdown.

Case No. 4—(Jamna).—There is no further information about this man. The cause "fever" mentioned in the papers cannot be ignored, but the case (especially in view of the previous seizure in March) is more probably due to charas smoking.

Case No. 8—(Devi).—This man cannot be traced. The descriptive roll ascribed the insanity to " ardent spirits and ganja."

Case No. 9—(Shamsher Bahadur).—Further inquiry shows that this man was addicted both to liquor and charas.

The remaining two cases may be set down as due to hemp drugs without other apparent cause.

Case No. 6—(Mahangu Singh).—The further inquiry seems to show that insanity was due to the excessive consumption of bhang.

Case No. 11—(Niadar).—This is a doubtful case : it is attributed to one chillzim of charas, and it is not certain "whether any other drug was mixed with the charas." It is only possible the charas may have been the cause.

In the Lucknow Asylum seventeen cases were attributed to hemp drugs in 1892. Of these, thirteen must be rejected :—

Case No. 1—(Jaffir    this case the descriptive roll distinctly stated that "the
insanity is not attributable to over-indulgence in ardent spirits or in bhang ganja or similar drugs." The Superintendent, however, takes his stand on a statement, alleged to have been made in May 1890, by a brother of the insane man who visited him during a previous period of confinement. There is no record of this alleged statement to enable one to judge of its value ; and it is distinctly contradicted by the evidence of the three witnesses examined in the further inquiry and cannot be accepted. The careless manner in which such alleged statements are entered, sometimes long after they are believed to have been made, renders it impossible to attach weight to this alleged statement in face of the clear evidence to the contrary.

Case No. S —(Manohar).—In this case the further inquiry clearly disproves the use of ganja ; yet the Superintendent holds to his original entry on the strength of a vague state. went in the descriptive roll, although there is a perfectly adequate cause for insanity in the death of the man's wife.

Case No. 6 —(Ramcharan).—In this case there is indeed the history of the occasional use of bhang "every third or fourth day ; " but the word " intoxicated" does not necessarily mean that that occasional use was excessive. This lad has a brother. Both of them became insane at the age of 21. The brother never takes intoxicants. In Ramcharan's own case the descriptive roll attributed the insanity to overstudy.

Case No. 7—(Durga).---The Superintendent accepts this as a ganja case, because the man was "a confirmed ganja smoker." But he omits to notice that the man's history is that he had suffered from recurrent insanity for twenty years ; that there is no evidence that he took ganja before he became insane ; and that business losses are assigned as the cause of the first attack.

Case No. 8 —(Kirhi).--The Superintendent bases his opinion solely on the police statement that the man used ganja. The Civil Surgeon of Sitapur, who had the case originally, and has again considered it, is of opinion that there is not sufficient ground for believing that the insanity was due to ganja, and seems to suggest a beating as having perhaps, some connection with the attack. Dr. Hooper's abstract of the Civil Surgeon's opinion in this case is very incomplete.

Case No. 10—(Parag).—In this case also Dr. Hooper gives a very inadequate abstract of the Deputy Magistrate's report. Dr. Hooper also seems to attach undue importance to the entry in the descriptive roll, merely because it was made by the Cantonment Magistrate, although the grounds of it were not given. On the other hand he disparages the present inquiry, of which the records were before him, because it was "made by a native." The Deputy Magistrate's inquiry was full and satisfactory: it is correctly summarized in his report. The Commission accept his conclusion.

Case No. 11 —(Bindeshwari Singh).—In this case the Joint Magistrate who conducted the further inquiry is spoken of by the Superintendent as "the reporter ; " and the report is very incompletely abstracted. It appears that the man's consumption of bhang was extremely moderate and that his insanity is universally ascribed to grief at the loss of his father, which occurred when he was in very bad health.

Case No. 12 —(Bihari).—Nothing more can be learned of this man. The only ground for ascribing his insanity to hemp drugs is that while still insane he said "he was a ganja smoker." He never recovered his reason. The symptoms, " bloodshot eyes and violence." relied on by the Superintendent, are certainly not typical of hemp drug insanity.

Case No. 13—(Ramanand).—The ground for ascribing this man's insanity to hemp is that when in the asylum and insane "he sometimes recognises bhang and sometimes says he used to drink it occasionally ; sometimes he says he did not ". The report of the further inquiry is imperfectly abstracted by the Superintendent and is erroneously attributed by him to "a native official." The statements of the residents of the village recorded at the further inquiry clearly prove that the man was not a consumer of hemp.

Case No. 14—(Mahadeo).—In this case the Superintendent suppresses the Deputy Commissioner's condemnation of the original police report on which he relies. The further inquiry shows that the boy did not use hemp, and that both this attack and a previous attack of insanity were preceded by fever.

Case No. 15—(Raghunath).—The further inquiry shows that this man did not use hemp or other intoxicants, and suggests grief as the case of his insanity; yet the Superintendent relies on a statement alleged to have been made by the lunatic, while still insane, that he smoked ganja. The Superintendent also omits in his abstract any reference to the suggestion regarding grief.

Case No. 16—(Baldeo).—This man was not insane either when under the Civil Surgeon's observation or in the asylum. There is actually no professional opinion that the man was insane ; yet Dr. Hooper finds that the case was "something like delirium tremens." In the circumstances it is scarcely necessary to consider causation. But it may be noted that there was hereditary predisposition, and that a previous outbreak was attributed to fever. That was the first attack.

Case No. 17—(Mullu).--This man also was not insane. There is no professional opinion as to the fact of insanity. As to habits, he (when sane of course, for he was never seen insane) "admitted that he had been drinking spirits freely and a little bhang very often."

There is one case which may be accepted as a "mixed " case—

Case No. 2—(Mithu).—In this case the further inquiry shows clearly the use of liquor and taxi (as also opium) as well as ganja.

The remaining three cases may be accepted as reasonably attributable to hemp drugs alone, no other contributing cause being known—

Case No. 3—(Madan Lall).—Further inquiry shows that this man was given to the excessive use of ganja and charas, and no other cause of insanity is known.

Case No. 4—(Lalta).—This man cannot be traced. The statements contained in the original papers are accordingly accepted, as they receive some measure of support from the fact that the Superintendent certifies that the man " had a ganja corn on his right thumb."

Case No. 9—(Jagmohan).—The further inquiry seems to disprove the allegation that madness was in the family and to leave charas as the only established cause of insanity in this case.

It should perhaps be noted, as a possible explanation of the incompleteness and even grave inaccuracy found to characterise some of the abstracts submitted by the Superintendent of the "facts ascertained from .local inquiries," that these abstracts may have been prepared not by Dr. Hooper, but by 'some subordinate. Dr. Hooper may have confined himself to filling up the fifth column of his final report. It is hardly possible that Dr. Hooper could have himself read and abstracted the papers in these cases.

IV.—Punjab.—

In the Punjab the asylum cases would seem to show that ganja is little known, and that charas is the form in which hemp is usually smoked. In the Delhi Asylum there were ten cases attributed to hemp in 1892. Under circumstances explained by the Superintendent in his letter No. 1 2, dated 13th January 1894, the papers and registers for 1892 were found by the members of the Commission, who visited the asylum, to be in an unsatisfactory state. It was found, among other defects, that entries regarding cause have been made in several cases by the Deputy Superintendent without authority and without good ground. Surgeon-Major Dennys took some trouble regarding the further inquiry, and he has reported carefully on each case. It is, however, much to be regretted that in none of the ten questions drawn up for guidance in that inquiry was any reference made to any other cause of insanity than hemp. Even the reference to drink distinctly made in the original papers in Case No. 9 is not inquired into, and no attempt is made in any case to ascertain whether any other cause than hemp could be discovered. This is surprising in view of the clear instructions issued by the Commission and quoted in the report.

Of the ten cases above referred to five must be rejected—

Case No. 3—(Hari Ram).—Nothing can be ascertained about this case ; the Superintendent remembers nothing of it ; and the papers have no reference to hemp drugs.

Case No. 4—(Narain Singh).—The use of hemp is disproved. The man " had never been in the habit of using hemp in any form," and " there was never any suspicion that the case was one of toxic insanity."

Case No. 5—(Charata).—The use of hemp is disproved. The man "himself (now sane) and his brother-in-law both testify that he never used the drug.

Case No. 6—(Sheri).—The use of.hemp is disproved. It has been ascertained that the man never used hemp or intoxicating drugs of any kind.

Case No. 8—(Dhuman).—Nothing more can be ascertained regarding this man. The paper shows that the man's mother was insane. There is no proof of the ganja habit, except his own statement while still "violent and incoherent."

One case has been accepted as a " mixed "—

Case No. 1—(Daya Lall).—This man took bhang to excess and mixed with dhatura, and also used charas. The use of dhatura, as the excessive habit developed, is interesting.

Four cases have been accepted as due to hemp drugs alone, no other cause being discovered.

Case No. 2—(Nath).—The further inquiry shows that he was a confirmed smoker of both charas and ganja.

Case No. 7 —(Joseph Lalchand).—Indulgence in charas rests on the statement of a Native Baptist Missionary.

Case No. 9—(Adhan).—The further inquiry shows that the man was addicted to charas-smoking.

Case No. 10—(Nand Lally.—The man attributes his insanity to charas and has given -up the use of the drug since recovery from his last attack of insanity.

In coming to these conclusions, the Commission have considered Dr. Dennys' oral evidence as well as the information collected in the Asylum and in the further inquiries. They have been able to accept Dr. Dennys' views.

In the Lahore Asylum twelve cases were attributed to hemp drugs in 1892. Of these three must be rejected—

Case No. 4—(Maula Dad).—In the further inquiry the only witness that was found showed that this man, who died in the asylum immediately after admission, never used bhang or other form of hemp. There are no grounds known for the entry in the descriptive roll.

Case No. 9—(Ida).—The evidence in the further inquiry is against the use of hemp, while it proves that this man's brother was an epileptic and died in a lunatic asylum. Dr. Coates very properly rejects the alleged statement of Ida (while insane) that he used hemp.

Case No. 10—(Subhan).—The Superintendent points out that there is no evidence of the use of hemp by this man. The only evidence is that of his brother that he did not use the drug. The Superintendent omits to add that the papers show that he was an epileptic.

Three out of the twelve cases may be accepted as " mixed " cases—

Case No. 3—(Mahtab Din).—As the Superintendent says, this is a doubtful case ; but there is a history of the use of both alcohol and hemp drugs.

Case No. 8—(Mussamat Mooranl.—Grief, prostitution, and her hard life may have contributed to this woman's insanity. There is also evidence of the use of bhang and sometimes liquor.

Case No. 11—(Dullo).—This man, while yet a child, acquired the habit of smoking both madak and charas.

The remaining six cases may be accepted as reasonably attributable to hemp alone, no other cause being established—

Case No. 1—(Kadir Baksh).—This man and his father both assert that he used bhang.

Case No. 2—(Mana Singh).—Dr. Coates seems quite to have misread Dr. Mulroney's report. He is mistaken in saying that "his mind and temper were in youth uncertain and unstable. He had no peculiarity ; and his father has always attributed his insanity to bang drinking."

Case No. 5—(Somirgir).—The statement in the papers is far from conclusive, but no further information can be obtained. That statement is therefore accepted.

Case No 6.—(Mohna).—This man, now quite sane, gives an intelligent account of his acquiring the habit of charas smoking and attributes his insanity to that drug.

Case No. 7—(Tehl Shah).—Opium and syphilis are both mentioned as possibly contributing to this man's insanity ; but the most definite information is about hemp, which he consumed in the forms of bhang and charas.

Case No. 12—(Jinda Shah).—This is apparently a very bad case of excessive use of hemp. This wretched man used even to pick up the dregs thrown away by bhang drinkers and eat them.

Dr. Coates' oral evidence, as well as the information collected in the asylum and in the further inquiry, has been considered in coming to these conclusions.

V.—Central Provinces.—

In the Central Provinces we return to a ganja-consuming country and hear nothing of charas. In the Jubbulpore returns for 1892 there were six cases attributed to ganja or bhang. But there is not satisfactory ground for accepting this as the cause in five cases. All these five cases are rejected—

Case No. 1—(Rathi Ram Singh).—The cause of insanity was entered in the papers as "unknown." The man was a passed candidate for the police, and his habits had no doubt been inquired into. As long as he was in his own village he never smoked ganja. This is established by evidence. On the other hand the police enquiry into his later habits, though they were likely to be known, disclosed no use of hemp. The only ground for attributing the insanity to ganja was the man's own statement now alleged to have been made in the asylum. But there is no record of that statement, and it was not known to Dr. Gaffney when the asylum was visited after the man's escape.

Case No. 2—(Dalthaman Singh).—The only ground for attributing the insanity to ganja in this case was an alleged admission of the ganja habit by the lunatic in the asylum. He now denies the habit and states that he has no recollection of having made the admission.

Case No. 3—(Umrao Gond).—The second attack in this case occurred in jail, where the man suddenly murdered a warder without provocation. As to the origin of the first attack, Dr. Gaffney hardly summarises correctly what the Civil Surgeon said at the man's trial. There was hereditary predisposition, for the man's grandfather was insane ; and the explanation that "possibly insanity was coming on gradually and measles accelerated it" seems quite adequate in that case. His people say that the insanity came on after an attack of measles. The Civil Surgeon at first stated that, hearing that the man took both alcohol and ganja, he would conclude that these were the cause of insanity ; but afterwards he accepted the explanation of the friends as given above.

Case No 5—(Gulbia).—There is no proof here that the man ever used ganja before becoming insane, but distinct evidence that he did not. After becoming insane, he used both liquor and ganja.

Case No.6—(Hari).—There is no evidence of the ganja habit except the man's own statement made while still insane, and the further report of the Civil Surgeon is clearly against the theory that ganja caused the insanity.

The one remaining case has been accepted as a " mixed " case—

Case No. 4—(Udai Ram).—Here there is, as the lucid account given by the Civil Surgeon of Khandwa shows, a clear history of excessive use of ganja as well as of syphilis; and it may be accepted that these two causes might combine to produce the "general paralysis of the insane," of which this man died.

In the Nagpur Asylum seven cases were attributed to hemp drugs in 1892 ; of these three must be rejected—

Case No. 2—(Tajodin).— The evidence in the further enquiry shows that this man did not take ganja. His own statement that he took liquor and ganja cannot be accepted ; and there is no other ground for ascribing this case to hemp drugs. Dr. Harris clearly shows how untrustworthy such statements are.

Case No. 5—(Rudraya).—There is no history of ganja apart from the man's alleged statement quoted by the asylum clerk from memory. This statement the man now contradicts. When the malguzar and people gave him ganja, if that story is to be accepted, he was already insane. The case is interesting as showing how ganja may be taken by insane persons in such cases.

Case No. 6—(Kalekhan).—There is no evidence of ganja smoking in this case. There is a statement in the papers that " the man is a ganja smoker," but the only evidence obtainable points to liquor and not to ganja. The man was suspected of secret liquor-drinking, and there is a history of bad living and disappointment in love.

There are two " mixed" cases —

Case No. 1—(Atmaram).—In this case there is history of indulgence in stimulants, of liquor in greater degree than ganja, and of "vicious habits." The Superintendent says his condition " resembles an early condition of general paralysis of the insane." Altogether this is a doubtful case, but may be accepted as " mixed."

Case No. 4—(Akbar Khan).—The further enquiry shows liquor as well as ganja.

The remaining two cases are, so far as known, attributable solely to ganja—

Case No. 3—(Itwargir).—The further inquiry shows this man to have been "a terrible smoker of ganja."

Case No. 7—(Lachhman).—There is little information about this case, and it is doubtful. But as on both occasions of the man's admission to the asylum the cause of insanity was (without probably any recollection by the police on the second occasion of the first) set down as ganja, the probability is that there was evidence of the ganja habit.

Dr. Harris' report is carefully prepared and interesting. It is necessary, however, to bear in mind that all that is written regarding reflexes, all the careful examination of the symptoms, and the full account of the features of the cases are new. Such records were not made before the present inquiry. These facts then refer to the present state of the lunatics.

VI.—Madras.---

In the Madras Asylum seventeen cases were attributed in 1892 to hemp drugs (sixteen to ganja and one to bhang) ; of these eleven must be rejected—

Case No 1.—(Kamal Sahib).—There is no reference whatever, to ganja in the papers or in the asylum registers. In his oral evidence, Dr. Dobie (Madras witness No. 84) says: "I must have found that he took ganja," but this can hardly be accepted. Dr. Dobie's oral evidence as to his procedure forbids weight being attached to the entry of cause in the annual statement.

Case No. 3—(Tanikachellum).—The further report of Surgeon-Major Evans on this case quite misrepresents the results of the inquiry. The evidence clearly disproves the ganja theory. All the witnesses state clearly that this man never took ganja so far as they know. One brother admits the possibility of his having done so when he was absent at Trevellore ; but he does not say he thinks he did ; and he is positive that he never took it before or since. The insanity is attributed to anxiety.

Case No. 5—(Moorthy Veeraswami).—There is no history of ganja. There is nothing in the descriptive roll to show the ganja habit. And in the further inquiry nothing can be learned of the man. "Probably starvation " (as entered in the asylum register) is as reasonable an explanation as "probably ganja" (in the descriptive roll), especially as the man had recovered and anything about ganja could easily have been learned in the asylum.

Case No. 6—(Madula).—The evidence clearly shows that the man never took ganja, and suggests a quite different and perfectly adequate explanation of the insanity.

Case No. 7—(Pappa).—The further inquiry clearly shows that there is no ground for assigning ganja as the cause of insanity. No body can tell on what authority the late Civil Surgeon made this entry. None of the people had heard about ganja in the case.

Case No. 9—(Nabi Saheb).—There is no mention of ganja in the papers. The man was said to have admitted the use of the drug while insane in the asylum, but subsequently (to the members of the Commission) he denied it altogether. The alleged admission cannot be accepted as trustworthy.

Case No. 10—(Hari Mohanti).—Here again the only ground for attributing the insanity to ganja is that the man is said to have admitted the use. To the members of the Commission who visited the asylum he denied this. The evidence recorded at his trial shows that he took mercury for 'venereal disease and also took opium, but apparently not hemp drugs. Theie is one reference to hemp drugs in the record of a statement made by the prisoner on 3rst December 1878. But in the statementof 5th March 1879 it is recorded as opium, and the prisoner points out that he was allowed opium in jail. The judge described the man as " suffering from the effects of the excessive use both of mercury and opium."

Case No. 12—(Mahadil Saheb).—Dr. Evans' final report is in this case also inaccurate. He has not read the papers carefully. The further inquiry shows that the man did not take hemp. The inquiry was full and careful ; and the relatives as well as the neigh.. hours of the lunatic clearly testify that he never used hemp drugs.

Casi No. 14—(Tadiya).—The papers contain no reference to ganja. The only ground for attributing the insanity to ganja is the lunatic's own statement that he took ganja and liquor. The man was fairly rational, but still insane when he made this statement.

Case No. 15—(Dona Papada).—There is nothing in the papers to connect this case with ganja except a " probably " in the descriptive roll. This is unexplained. There is not even any statement that he was addicted to hemp drugs in any form.

Case No. 16—(Mahomed Osman).—There is no reference to ganja in the papers and the man denies the habit. There is no explanation of how the case came to be attributed to ganja.

There are four cases which may be accepted as " mixed " cases—.

Case No. 2—(Mustan Saheb).—This case depends on the admission of the lunatic ; but when the members of the Commission visited the asylum in September 1893, the man was represented as practically sane, and he gave a very rational account of the use of ganja with dhatura leaves. It is not considered safe therefore to reject this case.

Case No. 11—(Kunji Kalappen).—The further inquiry shows that alcohol, sexual excess, and ganja may all have contributed to the insanity.

Case No. 13—(Coopen).—Dr. Evans in his final report neglects altogether to notice the clear statement of this man's brother, that the luantic's frequent attacks of insanity were always preceded by " fits," apparently of epilepsy. The case must be accepted as a mixed case, due to ganja and alcohol acting on a neurotic diathesis evidenced by epilepsy.

Case No. 17—(Abdul Kadir).—Besides the mention of ganja in the papers there is also mention of heredity. The man's father was insane.
The two remaining cases have been accepted as soley due to hemp drugs—

Case No. 4—(Sheikh Hussain).—This man was sentenced to ten years' imprisonment for a crime committed (as supposed) when he was in a state of intoxication from ganja. Further inquiry shows that he had taken the drug. But his jail and asylum history shows recurrent insanity, the outbreaks of which are quite independent of ganja. This is a doubt. ful case ; but as there is a clear history of the excessive use of ganja before the first outbreak of insanity, the Commission have accepted the case.

Case No. 8—(Ramaswami).—There is nothing here but the entry in the papers ascribing the insanity to ganja. But as the man was a sepoy, and his habits were probably known, it has been accepted.

It cannot be said that Dr. Evans has carefully considered the reports submitted by the officers who conducted the further inquiry into these cases. His conclusion that "cases 8, 11, 12, and 13 seem to have been men who used ganja" cannot be accepted. Only case No. i t has been accepted of these four. Dr. Evans' phrase above quoted is interesting as bearing out Dr. Dobie's remark in his oral evidence, that " when people find a lunatic takes ganja, they stick it down [as the cause]."

In the Vizagapatam Asylum only one case was attributed to hemp drugs in 1892. In this case there was hereditary predisposition; and insanity is now attributed directly to debility, to which several causes (indulging in alcohol and ganja) contributed. But it is impossible to say definitely that ganja did not so contribute. This case is accordingly accepted as a " mixed " case.

In the Calicut Asylum, also only one case was attributed to hemp drugs in 1892. The insanity in this case has been found to be due to hard drinking of toddy and arrack. The man was not given to the use of hemp drugs at all.

VII.—Bombay.—

In the Colaba Asylum, thirteen cases were attributed to hemp drugs in 1892. After perusing the records of the further inquiry into these cases Surgeon-Major Boyd proposes to reject eight of these. Apparently, his opinion is that where hemp appears to be only an exciting cause, the case ought not to be regarded as a hemp case. It is impossible to accept this view. Of the thirteen cases, the Commission reject five—

Case No. 2—(Yesu Ragho).—Dr. Boyd's view of this case differs from that of Surgeon. Major Kirtikar (vide oral examination of Bombay witness No. 73). But Dr. Boyd's seems the more reasonable view ; and it must be noted that though Surgeon-Major Kirtikar now.says positively that "the cause was ganja smoking," the papers show that he regarded the cause as "unknown" when he had the man under observation ; and the letter quoted by Dr. Boyd shows that Dr. Kirtikar had no record.

Case No. 3—(Moti Ram).—The use of ganja is disproved in the further inquiry. The man's friends deny that he ever used ganja.

Case No. 11—(Dealo).—There is no evidence to support the habit entry in Form C except the statement of the lunatic while still insane. This statement of an insane man on which the habit entry is probably based, cannot be accepted. The Commission therefore concur with the Superintendent in rejecting this case. They see no adequate ground to believe that ganja was even an exciting cause.

Case No. 12—(Vishnu Laxman).—The Superintendent Dr. Boyd's evidence before the Commission shows not only that the man's father was epileptic, but that the man did not take ganja.

Case No. 13—(Nevel Singh). There is no history of ganja in this case and no reason to differ from the Superintendent's rejection of this as a ganja case.
There are three cases which may be accepted as " mixed " cases—

Case No. 4—(Damodhar).—The further inquiry seems to show that the death of this man's wife and child led to his indulgence in ganja, bhang and majun ; and that his insanity was probably due to grief, combined with the use of these drugs.

Case No. 8.—(Vithu).—This man was admitted to the asylum within a week after the date of the medical certificate, and was by that time quite sane. But the oral evidence of Dr. Kirtikar shows that in these Thana cases sun and malaria are also contributing causes.

Case No. 9—(Gurudatt).—This is another Thana case. The " frequent attacks of fever " with delirium are more a marked feature of the case ; but ganja may also have contributed to cause the insanity.

The remaining five cases are accepted as due to hemp drugs alone—

Case No. 1—(Nama).—The history of ganja is said to have been derived from the statements of friends, and seems probable.

Case No. 5—(Moti Hemraj).—There appears to be a reasonable history of the use of the drug, and the Superintendent's reasons for rejecting the case do not seem conclusive.

Case No. 6—(Mahomed Safdar).—It is stated that the cause of this man's insanity was entered as ganja "on the examination of his friends" in the asylum.

There does not seem sufficient ground for reconsidering this now. There is no further information about the man.

Case No. 7—(Chintamon).--There is a clear history of the use of the drug here.

Case No. 10—(Birj.i Makji).—The Superintendent does not seem to have sufficient reason for reconsidering now his former opinion in this case, which was based on the statements of the man's friends.

In the Poona Asylum six cases were attributed to hemp drugs in 1892. One of these cases must be rejected—

Case No. 5—(Paras Ram).—There is no evidence of the ganja habit except statements made in the asylum to the members of the Commission. At that time the man was not sane, though his answers had the appearance of being rational. Further inquiry shows that nothing is known in the man's own district of his having used hemp drugs ; and Dr. McConaghy's diagnosis "from appearance of patient" can hardly be accepted. In his oral examination before the Commission (Bombay witness No. 69) he abandoned this case.

There is one case accepted as a " mixed " case—

Case No. 4—(Laxman Nand Ram).—There is here a clear history of both liquor and ganja.

The remaining four cases may be accepted as due to hemp drugs—

Case No. 1—(Guljarsha).—No further information can be obtained about this man;. and the statements in the descriptive roll, which seem reasonable, are accepted.

Case No. 2—(Rang Nath).—There is a history of the use of bhang, apparently to excess. There are, however, grave discrepancies between (a) the previous papers, (b) the further report, and (c) Dr. McConaghy's evidence in this case.

Case No. 3—(Trimbak).—The hospital papers give a history which justifies the acceptance of ganja as the cause.

Case No. 6—(Hari Trimbak).—The excessive use of ganja is established ; and the Superintendent's seems a reasonable explanation of the insanity.

In coming to the above conclusions, the Commission have considered the evidence of Dr. Burke (Bombay witness No. 75) as well as that of the Asylum Superintendent, Dr. McConaghy, and the information collected in the asylum and in the further inquiry.

In the Ahmedibad Asylum nine cases were attributed to hemp drugs in 1892. Surgeon-Lieutenant-Colonel Bartholomeusz was prevented by ill-health from appearing before the Commission for examination, and this ill-health probably accounts for the difficulty experienced in having the further inquiry conducted and reported on satisfactorily. The Collector of Surat did not fully carry out the instructions of the Commission, and there was no time to refer the matter after his reply was received. The information contained in the papers must now be accepted as the best the Commission could obtain under the circumstances. Six of the nine cases have been rejected—

Case No. 1—(Shariz Hamid Gul).—The Collector of Surat has forwarded the report of a Chief Constable. This is no doubt at least more authoritative than the original police papers. It may therefore be accepted as containing the best information available. If so, then there is not reasonable ground for attributing the insanity to ganja. The man who has been sane some time denies the use of the drug ; and the Chief Constable only speaks of occasional use and attributes the insanity to quite another cause.

Case No. 2—(Chhotu Singh).—The " constant headache " preceding the insanity points to some other cause than ganja, and the evidence collected by the Magistrate of Broach disproves the ganja habit.

Case No. 3—(Mohandass Tulsidas).—Nothing more can he ascertained about this man in the further inquiry. The only reference to intoxicants in the papers is "This man does not seem to be given to any indulgence." It is impossible to say why this case was attributed to ganja. There is nothing in the Asylum Registers to show.

Case No. 4—(Mahomed Bhai).—In this case there is injury to the head, fever, and epilepsy ; and the further inquiry disproves the ganja habit.

Case No. 7—(Gulab Khan).—The further inquiry shows that this. man drank " spirits frequently to excess " and was given to excessive sexual indulgence. His use of ganja was only occasional.

Case No. 9—(Ashraf Chhitan).— The use of ganja and other intoxicants is clearly disproved. Religious excitement and insomnia seem to have been connected with his insanity.

There is one " mixed " case :-

Case No. 6—(Ravishankar).—There is in the further inquiry a clear history both of grief and of the ganja habit.

There are two cases which may be accepted as solely due to ganja :—

Case No. 5—(Jetha Manji).—The further inquiry confirms the view that ganja caused the insanity.

Case No. 8—(Raja Josa).—The use of liquor is disproved, and the ganja habit established, in the further inquiry.

The further report submitted by Surgeon-Major Lyons, Superintendent of the Ratnagiri Asylum, is very meagre and unsatisfactory. In this asylum five cases were attributed to hemp drugs in 1892. Of these, two must be rejected—

Case No. 1—.(Sidram bin Rama).—There is nothing to show why the Civil Surgeon of Belgaum now says that this man " smoked ganja for many years." He gives no explanation of his statement, and in that statement there is nothing to show that the man smoked before becoming insane " about ten years" ago. On the other hand the four months' fever that preceded his attack is a quite adequate cause of insanity.

Case No. 3—(Dinkar Gopal).—Thereis nothing in the papers to show that the use of ganja preceded the insanity, and there is no confirmation of the alleged ganja habit in the further inquiry. The young man has "naturally a somewhat imbecile appearance " and appears to be given to masturbation. The experience of the Commission does not lead them to concur with the Magistrate in thinking " that the information given in Form C may be presumed to be correct."

There is one " mixed " case—

Case No. 5—(Rama Pillai).—We have in the papers a history of fever, sun and liquor, as well as ganja.

There are two cases which may be attributed solely to hemp—

Case No. 2—(Gobind Wasadeo).—The previous papers show that this man was an excessive consumer of ganja. This may be accepted.

Case No. 4—(Nanachandra Dudhan).—This is a Thana case. It is the seventh case in the list submitted by Dr. Kartikar in his examination before the Commission (Bombay witness No. 73).

In the Dharwar Asylum one case was attributed to ganja in 1892. It was really (vide papers) a " mixed " case, with a history of both liquor and ganja. It may be accepted as a " mixed " case, as Dariappa's mother's story is very improbable.

In the Hyderabad (Sind) Asylum there were thirteen cases set down to hemp drugs of these, nine must be rejected—

Case No. 1—(Mulchand).—The inquiry in this case was not conducted in a fully satisfactory manner. Dr. Keith, Superintendent of the Asylum, recorded merely the impression created by an " inquiry made in the neighbourhood of the lunatic," without stating what witnesses were examined or what they said. It is impossible to receive this comparatively vague statement as against the clear statement of the lunatic's father. He speaks to one attack of insanity in Bombay, due to sunstroke ; to the fact that thereafter Mulchand lived five years at home without his ever seeing him take narcotics ; to his then being seized with sudden pain in his head and becoming insane ; and to his falling into bad Company after his recovery, and using hemp drugs and other intoxicants for five years more, when he again became insane (on the present occasion). Thus we have two attacks of insanity before the hemp drug habit was formed.

Case No. 2—(Lachhman Walji).—Here there is no history of the use of the drug apart from the admission of the lunatic himself, who is still insane and unable to give even the address of any of his relations. In his oral examination before the Commission, Dr. Keith, (Sind witness No. 16) said that he accepted " the statement of the insane after he had recovered his witS." In practice, however, he admits that he attaches weight to the statement of a man still insane ; and the Commission cannot concur in this.

Case No. 3—(Parto).—This is a case of dementia. There is no history of the drugs ; but Dr. Keith relies solely on the man's asking for liquor and drugs while still insane in the asylum.

Case No. 4—(Hiramon).—There is no evidence of the use of hemp in this case. The relapse in the asylum (where he got no hemp), is not conclusive as against the drug, bet certainly must strengthen doubt. The statements now alleged to have been made by the lunatic in the asylum while still insane, and relied on by Dr. Keith, cannot be accepted.

Case No. 5—(Soba).-1-lere again there is no valid evidence of indulgence in hemp. The entry in the papers rests on Dr. Bainbridge's idea that there was " good symptomatic evidence of hemp intoxication "(vide Sind witness No. 34); and Dr. Keith relies entirely on the lunatic's statements while yet insane.

Case No. 6—(Metho).--In the further inquiry conducted by the Civil Surgeon and a Magistrate of Karachi, Metho's two brothers and a brother-in-law and his master were examined. All of them say that he never took ganja ; two of them say that he occasionally took liquor. Yet Dr. Keith adheres to his ganja theory solely on the ground of alleged admissions made by the lunatic, although the lunatic has also made statements to the opposite effect.

Case No. 7— (Dholu).—The further inquiry conducted at Karachi led the Civil Surgeon there to decide most reasonably that there was no evidence that the insanity was due to hemp drugs ; yet Dr. Keith adheres to his view on the ground of a statement alleged to have been made by the lunatic's father, though this man's evidence shows clearly that what he said must have been misunderstood. Dr. Keith nowhere says the statement was made to him. This is an interesting case as illustrating how very perfunctory the " examination of friends " at the asylum may be. This is quite in accordance with Dr. Keith's statement in his oral evidence as to the manner of his inquiries regarding the hemp habit.

Case No. 12--(Gulazim).—The insanity in this case occurred after the man had been in jail for a month under sentence as well as for the period under trial ; and there is no satisfactory evidence of the use of hemp drugs. There is nothing but the insane man's statement in the jail.

Case No. 13—(Dulsingar Singh).—The man was insane to the last ; yet Dr. Keith relies entirely on statements alleged to have been made by him in the asylum, but not recorded.

There is one " mixed " case—

Case No. 11—(Sevo).--The further inquiry gives a clear history of grief, opium and charas.

There are three cases which may be accepted as solely due to hemp drugs—

Case No 8.—(Matadin).—The further inquiry shows a history of ganja and charas. The man himself attributes his insanity to these drugs.

Case No. 9—(Shikro).—This is a somewhat doubtful case, for the use of bhang was apparently moderate. But as no other cause is indicated, it is accepted.

Case No. zo—(Baxali).—Dr. Keith's summary of this case is strangely inaccurate. The man distinctly says that he did not take charas every day, and he distinctly attributes his insanity to bhang and not to charas. However, there is a clear history of the drug and the case is accepted.

It may be noted here that Dr. Keith has used in three cases (those of Mulchand, Dholu and Baxali) the phrase, "the man seems under the influence of some narcotic." In his oral evidence he explains this to mean that the man was in "the drowsy, sleepy, wandering state of intoxication—a state of inco-ordination of the physical functions." No description could well be more unlike the symptoms recorded in these cases at the time. The type in two of the cases is shown as " mania," with a description of symptoms in accordance therewith ; and the symptoms in the third case are thus recorded : " The man talks incoherently, is very noisy, abuses every one, tears his clothes, runs about naked, sings and laughs without cause, and in a moment cries without reason."

This does not seem like a " drowsy, sleepy state."

If would appear from a careful examination of the record made at the time in these cases that "talking incoherently" was all that was required to make a man seem "under the influence of some narcotic."

VIII.—Burma.—

All may be accepted ; one is a mixed case.

In the Rangoon Asylum three cases were set down to hemp drugs in 1892.

Case No. 3—(Narada).—The papers indicate heredity as well as the use of bhang. The man had a brother who was insane.

Two see, due solely to hemp drugs

Case No 1 - Zinulabdin

Case No. 2 —(Jung Bahadur).

—In both these cases there are only the previous papers to assist in coming to a decision. But these bear the marks of careful preparation, And the views they contain seem reasonable. They are therefore accepted, as it is impossible to obtain further information.