Sessional_Paper_1884 — Page 558

36. On these experiments of Mr. MCCALLUM's a series of questions were asked in the Friend of China, by Dr. KERR of Canton, and others concerning my own investigations, which I consider it necessary to answer for the satisfaction of the Government, as it must be interested in the controversy going on about Opium in China, more especially as Dr. KERR seeks to cast ridicule on work done in good faith without any animus against one side or the other in the controversy.

From the questions asked, Dr. KERR does not seem to have read the report he is so contemptuous about in his letter with much attention, or if he had, there was no necessity to put them.

The first series of questions are--

"1st. Was the Morphia added to the Opium Farmer's Opium, the alkaloid, or was it a salt of

Morphia containing a mineral acid?

2nd. If it was the alkaloid, did the addition of the Morphia make a smokeable compound, equivalent in all respects to what it would have been if the Morphia had existed in the larger proportion in the native state, that is, combined with the native vegetable acids? 3rd. If it was Morphia combined with a mineral acid, was it more or less volatile than as it

exists in the prepared opium?

4th. How long had the Opium smoker, who tried these four mixtures, abstained from his customary pipes, or was he at the time of the trial more or less under the influence of the Opium he used daily?

5th. How many trials were made of each of the four mixtures? Were they all made at one time or was one day, one week, or one month given to each of the four mixtures? These are points bearing more or less directly on the trustworthiness of these experiments. Dr. AYRES and Mr. MCCALLUM have concluded from them that 'the great principle of the Opium, Morphia, in smoking seems to vanish, certainly has no effect upon the smokers.'"

1st. The Morphia added was the alkaloid. No chemist would have added a salt of Morphia contain- ing a mineral acid.

2nd. The Opium Extract with the added Morphia was not only smokeable, but was actually smoked and pronounced in three cases out of four to be good by the old Opium smoker, and there is no good reason to suppose that it was not in every way equivalent to an extract containing naturally the same amount of the alkaloid. This and the previous question were hardly necessary under the circumstances.

3rd. 4th and 5th questions hardly require answering. The quantities given in each specimen were more than equal to a hundred pipes. Of the specimens containing no Morphia whatever, double quantities were given. The Opium smoker fairly tested all the specimens by themselves, and was not under the influence of Opium at the time of testing them. No tobacco smoker would require such large samples to pronounce an opinion upon their quality, neither would a smoker of Indian Hemp.

Surely the Opium smoker should be able to detect the value of the drug in less quantities than this, or how should he know at all. Hundreds of Opium smokers only smoke from six to twelve pipes a day, say half a mace to a mace of Opium; at this rate the quantity in each specimen would last him from a week to a fortnight. I think under the circumstances a very fair trial was made.

The Opium smoker got a number of specimens that lasted him some months, which thoroughly contented him, and he was not likely therefore to spend his money in getting other Opium; on the contrary he would have liked to have some more of the specimens he pronounced very good. Yet this man has been smoking the Opium Farmers' Opium for nearly twenty years, and was an old Opium smoker when I made his acquaintance more than ten years ago.

The second series of questions, had they not been printed in the Friend of China with Dr. KERR'S name attached, I should not have noticed.

"Dr. AYRES claims to have dealt with facts which came under his own notice. But scientific

investigation requires the collection of all available facts. I therefore take the liberty of asking a few suggestive questions.

1st. Does a Chinaman acquire a habit of using Opium, which in time becomes so confirmed

that he must have his smoke twice daily?"

1st. Nobody that I am aware of disputes this fact. But then comes the question, why do they remain content with so few pipes daily as half a mace or a mace will provide, and remain so for many years; and why does the drug not lose its effect on them in these small doses, as it is known to do in the case of Opium eating if it has any effect at all?

"2nd. If Opium smoking is without effect on the smoker, what is the inducement for so many to keep it up year after year, even when he must deprive himself and his family of many comforts and necessaries ?"