Modular Infotech Pvt. Ltd. - DSpace

C 188
3II4. Mr. McLeGII.-Could not you prevent a man from taking out
more than one licence by taking his finger print ?-Some people would .end
their men to take out hcences when they did not like to take out licences
themselves. They may send non-smokers to have themselves registered and
licensed.
3IIS. M,.. Lim Nee Sooll.-Is the work of the opium smoker as good
as that of the non-smoker ?-The non-smoker works better.
3Il6. How many per cent. better ?-About 20 per cent.
3Il7. Do smokers frequently go back to China ?-No, very seldom,
3Il8. Why?-Because they save nothing.
3Il9. M,.. Me Leall.-'Does the labour force in your mine change much?
Supposing you had a thousand coolies at the beginning of this year; how
many of these would still be be on the mine at the end of the year ?-Mor.
than half would have changed.
3120. When the coolies had left your mine, would ther probably stay
in Kinta or go somewhere else?-The majority would remam in Kinta and
shift from mine to mine.
3121. Would a coolie usually stay for at least 6 months on your mine?­
About half of them would remain more than 6 months. They are free to
go anywhere after giving 10 days' notice.
3122. Chairman.-Have you anything to add ?-Mr. LEONG SIN NAM­
Yes. The Chamber of Commerce begs to ask the Government to assi6t
those who want to give up the habit. The increasing number of opium
smokers would tend to increase the number of robbers and thieves. Less
smokers, less thieves; that can be verified by investigation. They can do
without wine, but they cannot do without chandu once they have taken to
the habit, and they will resort to anything to get chandu. They are more to
be pitied than condemned. When they can find enough to eat, they cannot
find enough to clothe themselves. If they are assisted to give up the habit,
they will use the money which they would have used on opium for the
purchase of other things more wholesome to themselves. This will lessen
the burden on the employers as well. The opium smoker, as a rule, spends
more than he earns, and the difference is usually borne by the employer, who
has to dismiss him before he can pay it all back.
This concluded the evidence given by Messrs. LEONG SIN NAM
and L!'u EK CHING.
The committee adjourned.