Lest objection should be taken to this large annual revenue derived from the cultivation of a drug, the unnatural consumption of which would be suppressed under any other European government, the Court of Directors is very anxious to show the benefit which the country derives from this monopoly; they say “that as the price of opium is almost wholly paid by foreign consumers, and the largest return is obtained with the smallest outlay, the best interests of India would, appear to be consulted.”  Nobody at all acquainted with the financial resources and the capabilities of any country, would hazard such an assertion.  By paying cultivators for the restricted growth of the poppy a price hardly yielding more than the average rate of wages to the common laborer, I do not see in what way the best interests of India are consulted, nor is it clear that the population derives any benefit by being prohibited altogether from manufacturing a drug, which may be brought from another country in transitu on the payment of a heavy duty; unless indeed the Court of Directors are of opinion that in the event of the abolition of the monopoly, the people of the country would have to make up for the loss of the revenue by submitting to some other mode of direct or indirect taxation.  There is an inconsistency in the statements of the Court of Directors, which is absolutely amusing.  “The free cultivation of the poppy,” say the Directors, “would doubtless lead to the larger outlay of capital, and to greater economy in production; but the poppy requires the richest description of land, and its extended cultivation must therefore displace other products.”  How very considerate on the part of the Directors, but how strongly at variance with facts, since all the fear of displacing other products, and all this appropriation of the richest description of land for other purposes has not prevented the Indian Government, within less than ten years, from more than doubling the cultivation of the poppy and the manufacture of opium.  The Directors tell us that the heavy transit duty charged at Bombay is to discourage production, but they do not say whether that discouragement applies, as one would imagine, to those foreign districts which have to pay the transit duty for their production.  If so, the assertion is again at variance with facts, because in a subsequent statement they say, “It is stated that neither the price of opium, nor the extent of cultivation in Malwa, has been affected by the great enhancement of the pass duty, which has taken place since 1845.”

The following will show that the Company loses no opportunity of applying the screw:—­