§ MR. CAINEI beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for India whether the attention of the Secretary of State has been called to a passage in a Report written by Mr. Skrine, of the Imperial Civil Service, on the condition of the inhabitants of Bengal, in which he calls attention to the fact that a free use of salt is specially necessary in the case of dwellers in swampy countries, and asserts that the low vitality which is increasingly seen in the Bengali peasant is in a great measure due to the impost on salt; that in consequence of the scarcity of salt for human consumption the lower Provinces of Bengal have become the nidus of cholera; whether he is aware that the average annual consumption of salt per head in Bengal is about 11½ lbs. as against 18½ lbs. in the Madras Presidency, and 36⅔ lbs. in the Bombay Presidency; while in Northern India (including the Punjab, the North- Western Provinces, Oudh, and Behar, the average annual consumption is actually only 8½ lbs. per head; and if the facts are as stated, what steps the Secretary of State intends to take to provide the people with salt at a reasonable rate, and so relieve the Lower Provinces of Bengal of the inception of cholera, and India the ravages of this disease?
*MR. GEOEGE RUSSELLThe Secretary of State has seen the Report to which my hon. Friend refers; but the opinions therein expressed as to the effects of the Salt Duty are not generally accepted, nor are the figures contained in the second part of the question correct, 192 so far is the Secretary of State's information goes. It is a matter of regret that it should be necessary to retain this duty on salt at its present amount, and, if the state of the finances should permit, the Government of India would gladly take an opportunity of reducing it; but at present there is unfortunately no prospect of any such reduction.