Cannabis Activism in South Asia During the 1910s

The policy landscape entering the 1910s

By 1910, cannabis in British India was not prohibited but taxed and licensed through provincial excise systems. This framework was shaped by the Indian Hemp Drugs Commission inquiry of 1893–94, which took evidence from roughly 1,193 witnesses across India and concluded that moderate use of bhang caused 'no appreciable physical injury' and that prohibition would be unjustified and impractical Strong evidence^[1]. The Commission's seven-volume report remained the intellectual anchor of Indian cannabis policy throughout the 1910s and was repeatedly cited by Indian officials when international pressure to restrict cannabis grew ^[2].

Ganja (flowering tops) and charas (resin) were more tightly controlled than bhang (leaf preparation), which was culturally embedded in Holi celebrations and everyday consumption across northern India. Excise revenue from cannabis was modest compared to opium and alcohol but politically sensitive because restricting it would affect religious and working-class users.

The Hague 1912: Colonial officials resist international control

The International Opium Convention, signed at The Hague on 23 January 1912, is best known for opium and cocaine controls, but cannabis (termed "Indian hemp" in the convention) appeared on the agenda largely at the insistence of the United States and Italy. The final convention contained only a single, non-binding clause on cannabis in its final protocol, calling for further study Strong evidence^[3].

This weak outcome reflected direct resistance from the British Indian delegation. India's representatives argued that cannabis use was culturally entrenched, that the 1894 Hemp Commission had already found no public health justification for prohibition, and that restrictions would harm ordinary Indians without benefit Strong evidence^[2]. Historian James Mills has documented this as a decisive moment where South Asian administrative interests, channeled through the colonial delegation, blocked comprehensive global cannabis prohibition for over a decade—until the 1925 Geneva Convention ^[2].

This was not grassroots "activism" in the modern sense, but it was substantive advocacy by colonial officials representing Indian excise interests and, indirectly, Indian consumers. The delegation's influence derived from their administrative control over the largest cannabis market in the British Empire, not from public pressure.

Who was pushing back on the ground?

Popular online histories sometimes describe organized 1910s Indian cannabis movements with named leaders and manifestos. There is no strong evidence for this No data. What the archival record does show is a diffuse set of stakeholders:

• Excise department officials in Bengal, Bombay, and the United Provinces, who argued in internal correspondence that ganja licensing raised revenue and displaced worse substances ^[2].
• Ayurvedic and Unani practitioners, who used cannabis preparations (siddhi, majoon) medicinally and whose professional associations were beginning to organize in the 1910s, though explicit cannabis advocacy by these groups is thinly documented in surviving records Weak / limited.
• Sadhus and religious users, particularly Shaiva ascetics for whom charas and ganja were sacramental. Their consumption was noted as a factor in policy by the 1894 Commission ^[1] and remained a live consideration in licensing debates.
• Licensed cultivators and vendors, especially in the ganja-growing tracts of the Rajshahi division of Bengal (now in Bangladesh), whose livelihoods depended on continued legal cultivation Strong evidence^[4].

Indian nationalist leaders of the 1910s—Gandhi, Tilak, Gokhale—did not champion cannabis. Gandhi in particular was hostile to intoxicants of all kinds. The independence movement is not part of this story.

Regional variation: Bengal, Burma, and the Princely States

Cannabis policy in the 1910s was strikingly uneven across South Asia. Bengal operated the most systematic ganja monopoly, with cultivation restricted to licensed tracts and product moved through government warehouses Strong evidence^[4]. Burma (then administratively part of British India) had banned cannabis outright in 1873 under pressure from a temperance-influenced administration, and this prohibition remained in force through the 1910s—an important counterexample often overlooked in narratives that treat British India as uniformly permissive Strong evidence^[2].

Several Princely States set their own rules outside the direct control of British excise administrators. Some, like Baroda, maintained relatively free consumption; others imposed stricter licensing. This patchwork meant that any policy advocacy was necessarily local, focused on provincial excise commissioners rather than an imperial policy framework that could be reformed centrally.

Myths and misconceptions

Several claims about 1910s South Asian cannabis politics circulate widely and warrant correction:

• "There was an organized ganja rights movement in 1910s India." No credible archival evidence supports this No data. The pushback against prohibition came primarily through colonial administrative channels and excise department correspondence, not popular mobilization.

• "Gandhi supported cannabis or bhang." No record supports this Disputed. Gandhi campaigned against alcohol and all intoxicants; there is no evidence of pro-cannabis advocacy from him.

• "The 1894 Hemp Commission legalized cannabis in India." This is imprecise. Cannabis was already legal and taxed; the Commission recommended against prohibition and in favor of continued regulated sale Strong evidence^[1]. It did not create legality but reinforced it.

• "India single-handedly stopped global cannabis prohibition at The Hague." This overstates the case. The British Indian delegation was the most influential voice against comprehensive cannabis inclusion in the 1912 text, and their objections substantially weakened the cannabis clause Strong evidence^[2][3]. However, Italy and the United States also had divergent interests, and the final protocol's weakness reflected multiple negotiating positions. India did not act alone, but their role was decisive.

What the 1910s set up for later decades

The 1910s ended with cannabis still legally sold and taxed across most of British India, still prohibited in Burma, and still contested at the international level. The unresolved cannabis clause from the 1912 Hague Convention fed directly into the 1925 Geneva Opium Convention, where Egypt and Turkey—not India—drove the successful push to add cannabis to the international control regime. India ultimately accepted the 1925 treaty but continued domestic licensing until the NDPS Act of 1985 finally criminalized ganja and charas, while preserving bhang as a state-regulated exception Strong evidence^[5].

The 1910s are best understood not as a decade of cannabis activism in the modern sense, but as the decade when the intellectual framework of the 1894 Hemp Commission was actively deployed by colonial administrators to resist an emerging international prohibition trend—buying South Asian cannabis culture roughly seventy more years of legal life.

Sources

How this page was made

Related

• Cannabis Activism in Canada During the 1910s — Cannabis activism did not exist in 1910s Canada; prohibition arrived quietly in 1923.
• Cannabis Activism in East Asia During the 1910s — No organized cannabis activism existed in East Asia during the 1910s; the era was defined...
• UN Drug Treaties and Cannabis — Three UN treaties control cannabis globally; legalization exists despite treaty language f...