Circular N. 4142 of the Territorial Department Revenue from the Officiating Secretary to the Government at Bombay Castle, Charles Edward Fraser Tytler, to the Resident in the Persian Gulf [‎14v] (18/44)

[ 8 ]
number would not probably have exceeded 7 or 8,000 chests. (See note to para. 20 of this
minute.) Admitting that during this season the quantity of opium produced fell far short
of that of the preceding season, which was estimated at 30,000 chests, (letter from the
Government of India, dated the 13th November 1846,) the inference is inevitable that smug
gling to a large extent must occur through some channel, which apparently yet remains to
be discovered.
24. In these remarks, however, I am anticipating what may be more appropriately in
cluded in the concluding observations of my minute, and I shall now proceed to the second ^
branch into which I have divided it, and explain as well as I am able* the past and present
condition of the opium trade in foreign States, with whose territory our own is so much
intermixed.
25. A glance at the map will show that the territory of this Presidency The name given to each of the three divisions of the territory of the East India Company, and later the British Raj, on the Indian subcontinent. is so much inter
mixed with that of foreign States, that the system adopted in the former for regulating the
opium trade, and securing the important revenue derived from this source, could not possi
bly have succeeded, unless it had been simultaneously introduced into the latter. Accord
ingly, I shall now show that that system was introduced and enforced with the consent of
all the States and Chiefs of Guzerat, Cutch, and Kattiawar, and even in the Deccan, although,
for reasons I have not been able satisfactorily to ascertain, in some of them the restrictions
imposed on the trade appear to have gradually become a dead letter.
26. I shall commence with Baroda, the capital of the Guicowar State, as being the most
important. There can be no doubt that our restrictive system was, with the free consent of
the Guicowar, introduced throughout his territor}^. The exportation of opium was first
prohibited* in this State by an edict of that Government dated the 2nd July 1817, as fol
lows :—" An arrangement has been made this year by this Government, in concert with
the Government of the Honorable Company, that merchants are not to export for sale opium
from the Guicowar districts to other territories, nor to the sea-ports. If they convey it to
sea-ports, or to other countries, the property will be confiscated." On the 24th April
1818, another proclamation was issued explanatory of the first, prohibiting the exportation
of opium to foreign countries, except on payment of a duty of Rs. 12 per seer, and directing
registers to be kept of all exports, and the places of exports, and declaring opium clandestine
ly conveyed liable to confiscation, two-thirds of the proceeds being paid to the Government,
and one-third to the seizer. By this, in fact, Regulation I. of 1818 was extended to the Gui
cowar territory. On the 10th October of the same year, a third order was issued to the Ka-
mavisdars of districts referring to the second, declaring, l.s^, that opium required for internal
consumption in the Mahals was to pay a duty of Rs. 2 per seer; 2nd, that opium intended for
exportation by sea was to pay a duty of Rs. 12 per seer; and Sn/, that opium clandestinely
conveyed should be confiscated. In May 1820 (letter dated the 16th May 1820), the Collect
or of Ahmedabad discovered that a very extensive trade in opium was illicitly carried on
through the western ports of Kattiavvar, and effected some large seizures of the drug at Drang-
dra, and other places in that province. Among other measures adopted to put a stop to this
trade, the Resident at Baroda was instructed to obtain the Guicowar's assent to our local
officers seizing all opium in transit through his districts intersected by ours. This was
immediately given, (letter from the Resident dated the 21st June 1820), and in November of
the same year our Resident forwarded (letter dated 1st November) the following order
dated the 21st October, issued by His Highness the Guicowar to the Kamavisdars of districts,
prohibiting the import of opium into his dominions:—' ; An arrangement is in progress
under the authority of the Sirkar regarding opium. Therefore make known to merchants
and others, that none is to be imported after the 1st of Asoo Shood (18th October 1820).
If any one should introduce it, his property will be confiscated. This is to be proclaimed in
* This information will be found in a letter from the Acting Resident at Baroda, dated the 21ith July 1820,
reporting on a seizure of opium effected by the Collector of Ahmedabad in the Guicowar district of Kunee. 1 he
proclamations are there recited at length.