|
|
Page 20
1910.81 Their arrival sparked an uproar of protest from Asian exclusionists, who pronounced them to be even more unfit for American civilization than the Chinese. Their influx was promptly stanched by immigration authorities, leaving only about 2,600 in the state, mostly in agricultural areas of the Central Valley.82 The “Hindoos” were widely denounced for their outlandish customs, dirty clothes, strange food, suspect morals, and especially their propensity to work for low wages.
Aside from Finger's letter, however, there are no known reports that they ever used cannabis in California.83 Some 90% of the “Hindoos” were Sikhs, who had initially come from British military service in China. The Sikhs were by religion opposed to smoking and the consumption of alcoholic beverages. On the other hand, Sikh soldiers were said by the British Indian Hemp Drugs Commission to be "extremely partial to bhang," a beverage concocted from hemp leaves.84 On the West Coast, the “Hindoo” immigrants were praised by employers as "temperate" and "the most sober of races.”85 "The taking of drugs as a habit scarcely exists among them," stated one sympathetic observer, a surprising fact given that many had resided in China and West Coast Chinatowns where opium use was rampant.86 A few critics charged that the Hindus did drink, but did not mention cannabis or other drugs.87
At the insistence of California exclusionists, the Congress held hearings on Hindu immigration. There the question of drug use was raised briefly once and dismissed:88
Rep. Manahan: Are they addicted to any kind of intoxication or drugs?
Mrs. R.F. Patterson: I know that they do not drink. They do not indulge in drink. I don't know anything about their habits; no morphine, for instance; not to my knowledge. 89
81 On the East Indian immigration to California, see Jogesh C. Misrow, East Indian Immigration on the Pacific Coast (M.A. thesis, Stanford University, 1915); H.A. Millis, "East Indian Immigration to the Pacific Coast," The Survey 28:379-86 (June 1, 1912); Rajani Kanta Das, Hindustani Workers on the Pacific Coast ((W. de Gruyter & Co., Berlin, 1923); and H. Brett Melendy, Asians in America (Twayne Publishing, Boston, 1977).
82 Cal. State Board of Control, "California and the Oriental" (1922) p.122.
83 According to Patricia Morgan , "the author systematically reviewed all indices related to the Hindu or East Indian population in California from 1910 to 1920 for information on this matter. None was found in the San Francisco Chronicle or Examiner. In addition the author reviewed the Senate and Assembly journals for those years and found no mention of the drug under any name except in the California statutes" (op. cit., p.89 n5). Similar negative results were obtained by this author in a review of West Coast newspaper indices and pharmacy journals up through 1915.
84 Report of the Indian Hemp Drugs Commission, 1893-94, Ch. VIII, Section 410, p152.
85 Jogesh Misrow, op. cit., p. 14.
86 Rajani Kanta Das, op. cit., p. 82.
87 Millis, op. cit., p. 385; Hindu Immigration, hearings of the House Committee on Immigration relative to restrictions of immigration of Hindu laborers, 63rd Congress, 2nd Sess, Pt. II, Feb. 19, 1914, p. 75 and Pt V, Apr. 30, 1914, p. 170.
88 Hindu Immigration, hearings of the House Committee on Immigration relative to restrictions of immigration of Hindu laborers, 63rd Congress, 2nd Sess, Pt I: Feb. 13, 1914, p. 22.
89 Mrs. Patterson had resided ten years in Calcutta, a center of Indian ganja culture, but had apparently not been impressed by a problem. Calcutta had the highest rate of ganja usage in India, amounting to 5.4% of the population, according to the Report of the Indian Hemp Drugs Commission: Ch. VIII, pp. 128-131.
|
|
|