To the Editor of the Norra-Cama Dairy News.
Sm,—In a leader in your valuable paper of 28th April on the above subject, apparently from the pen of one of your sinologues, judging from the reference to Chinese sources, we have some fresh and striking information presented to the public. "To the uninitiated these Chinese quotations must appear to place the question beyond all doubt, But is it quite 0 certain that the conclusion reached are trustworthy? I feel some hesi and fragmentary information should from time to time be presented to the public on this topic, inasmuch as they are calculated to mislead.
In your leader, it is boldly stated that the' Mohammedans brought opium and poppy seed to China, We are surely permitted to ask by what route they came—land or sea? When did they reach Chiva? Where did they land? Wher the first poppies cultivated, and wh the Chinese authority for the assertion? The one solitary statement, sv far as know, in Chinese books, which relates to the Arabs at all in this connexion found in the Great Herbal, where it is said by Wang Li "The poppy is planted in the red variety is used, and the flowers fall in the 7th or 8th month." Li the author of the Herbal points out that the flowers are over in' the 5th moon Mr. Wang lived in the 15th century an he seems to be the first Chinese author who mentions opium. But it is evident he
from hearsay. It is nowhere said that had not seen it graning and only wrote the Arabian travellers brought opium and poppy seeds, either by their own writers, or by Chinese, neither by the travellers themselves, if the two that came to China in the 9th century be meant, Another misleading statement in the first sentence of your that the Portuguese conducted the trade in Indian opium'at Canton previous to 1775. It is nowhere said that the Portugu the exclusive carriers of the clu; European nations had their factories at Canton and elsewhere along the Southera coast, and they too were engaged in the trade. This is particularly true of the Dutch or red-haired barbarians, among whom are included the English; for by some strange coincidence Bugland was supposed to be tributary to Holland, whose factories existed in Formosa and at Amoy.
told on all hands that the E.I.C.
their first venture in opium in 1,773.
LI seo presently whether this is actually true or not; but at all events it does not exclude participation in the trade by English adventurers previous to this period. This is all woe contend for at present.
We are next treated to a little dissertation on the time the Mohammedans entered China and the articles introduced by them, among which opium is mentioned; but no authority is quoted. Then follows some remarks about the "rice bag" and " jar millet" terms applied to the poppy capsules and seeds which were well known; the former medicinally and latter dietetically, for the seeds could be eaten and from them an oil could be expressed. But the species then known and cultivated in gardens was not the papaver somniferum or opium loppy, but the ying-suwa, papaver hocus or field poppy. Upon this point there can be no difference of opinion. The Chinese there knew nothing about opium the inspissated juice of the poppy.
We are also told the Mohammedans introduced the practice of drinking an infusion of poppy juice. We know not where to look for the authority. of this statement. Eating opium has been the usual practice among Islam nations. What is an infusion of poppy-juice? We know an_ infusion of poppy-heads.
That is followed by another equally unguarded statement, that this drinking of the infusion of the poppy-juice (?) continued till tobacco-smoking was introduced at Amoy about 1610 A.D. In the work quoted "Trifling Notes on Natural History" the atithor certainly says tobacco was brought towards the end of the reign of Wi 1573-1620) to Chang-chow and Tsuan-chow Fukien, from which it gradually dispersed in all direct Another writer, Yao Lit, asserts that it was introduced fromthe Philippine islands; but when or by whom there is no record to prove. Another writer, Li Sze-hung, stales that it was first brought from Japan and introduced in the Chang-chow
Amoy.) It was introduced into Japan prefecture in Fukien (probably through about the middle of the period between 1573 and 1591 by the Portuguese. It was early introduced also into Corea and Manchuria, for we find an edict against its uso in the Manchu army in 1641, and Chinese writer a few years ago in the Shen Pao newspaper says that during the Ming dynasty tobacco was imported from beyond the Palisade, and ne to the accession of this dynasty, it was still bought outside the Great Wall.
We are told that opium smoking is first mentioned in the laws of China in the year 1730. It would be more correct to say 1729 (Yung Cheng 7th year) but there is fe shall find still of the vice. Wel in our possession that it had become in Formosa during the latter past of Kang-his reign (1662-1722) and that it had existed there for several years previously and before this for ten or twenty years. in Amoy, whether the Dutch, English, Portuguese and Spavianis traded. Tol is said fore the first mention of opium-smoking in the laws of China. The first edicts against tobacco were in the 1638 and 1641, aid to have soon spread to North China from the South. And this is extremely unlikely. Itis more probable that it was introduced into Manchuria through Corea, also from Japan, for the Manchus had an extensive commerce invaded Gorea in the beginning of the 17th with the people of the latter country, They century. The Shen Pao writer's evidence, already quoted, points also in this direction, have no knowledge of the trade at that time between Fukien and Newchwang. If the beancake trade existed then, it might have come North in this way.
Opium and arsenic are said to have been added to the tobacco to increase and modify the narcotic effect. The union of two narcotics would necessarily increase the general effect. Opium and tobacco would be more valuable than either singly 5 but I hardly understand how they would at the same time modify the narcotic effect. Arsenic moreover is not a narcotic but an irritant poison, and if added it must have been with some other object than increasing the narcotic properties of the tobacco. Although the Chinese early aware of the anti-periodic properties of arsenic, we do not suppose they added this substance with any curative notion. More than likely it was added to give colour or some sharpness of taste. Being volatile when burned, a large quantity would pass off, some of the metal would remain behind in the ashes, and if the fumes were passed through water as in the water-pipe, the greater part would get absorbed. But, if I am rightly informed, the arsenic is never added to the water tobacco, Shui-yen, but to the Chow-yen. The writer's argument therefore built so much upon this must fall to the ground. Dr. Williams is the authority for saying that tobacco leaf is often steeped in a solution of opium. This practice obtained in the Malayan islands and was doubtless the first form in which opium was used in China, In fact opium smoking I believe to be closely connected with and to have arisen out of tobacco smoking, and in this way to have come from Java. "This identical practice was common, as I shall point out, in Formosa in Kanghi's time. I differ from the writer of the leader in being convinced it came from the Archipelago and had no North Western origin whatever. The ex-agencies of the case do not necessitate our getting as far away as possible from India and the route by sea to China, in order to free British subjects from the charge of pandering to Chinese vices. There are some other interesting points will appear in my history of opium smokii The writer of the leader in question, supposes both substances to have been previously known as narcotics, and therefore smoked experimentally. I feel inclined to reverse the mental process; that they knew nothing about them at first except as toyland pastimes, but that through experiment they came to know them as stimulants or narcotics or both as the case may be. The next step supposed to the writer would be the smoking of opium by itself by burning it in the flame by lamp, instead of mixing it with tobacco. This is indeed a big step, from tobacco at the end of a bamboo tube, to a fully equipped modern opium This was most certainly not the course followed. The firat attempt to smoke opium alone would be precisely like the tobacco, at the end of a bamboo tube as the beggars at Po till. 'The present pipe is " compa late invention and perhaps the drawing the opium smoker given in Davis' Chin is not so much a caricature as we somees suppose. The chief objection to our present supposition, is the bond fide opium pipe of the present day which the mandarin is enjoying in a sitting position, The reason assigned for the change from compound of opium and tobacco to opium alone is to increase as much as possible enlivening effect which it produces." But opium produces these effects, however taken, whether eaten or drunk or smoked, standing or recumbent. It was perhaps the Chinaman's love of and the necessity for some arrangemente head that would prevent it filling with the hot liquid extract and ashes of the burnt extract would enable it to be easily cleaned out and prevent the ingress of atmospheric air, and perhaps a regard to the form of the poppy head, which determined the construction of pipe, and nothing whatever to do with effect contemplated. We are apt uow to reason backwards; the smokers then reasoned forwards.
are told also that the wat was invented in Kansuh during the reign of Kienlung (1736-96) and, it is added, thie suggests a northern of northweatert gin for opium smoking and in the absence of definite information we shall.
quire to be content with this supposition, the writer's own admission opium smoking was known in 1730; how then account for its origin during a latter reign? And why go to the Northwest; not surd; cause farthest removed from India Besi the radical difference in the form of opium pipe and tobacco water pipes rend such a supposition utterly improbable, even supposing the period agreed. The writer himself starts as a valid objection, that the edicts all point to Canton as the originating centre of the evil. But he goto out of that difficulty by asserting ' that the eyes were fixed upon the foreigner and foreign trade as bringing the misfortune on their country, while the existence of the habit in connexion with the native poppy cultivation excited less of their attention "—which is just the thing re: quired to be proved. The paper is a series
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.