No Credit Check Payday Loans
ALL BOOKS
Seeds

Pharmacology

Substances
Overdose

JoomlaWatch Agent

Visitors hit counter, stats, email report, location on a map, SEO for Joomla, Wordpress, Drupal, Magento and Prestashop

JoomlaWatch Users

JoomlaWatch Visitors



54% United States  United States
11.3% United Kingdom  United Kingdom
5.9% Australia  Australia
5.6% Canada  Canada
3.3% Philippines  Philippines
2.2% Kuwait  Kuwait
2.1% India  India
1.6% Germany  Germany
1.5% Netherlands  Netherlands
1.1% France  France

Today: 169
Yesterday: 310
This Week: 1532
Last Week: 2303
This Month: 5344
Last Month: 5638
Total: 24109


Notes PDF Print E-mail
Written by John Helmer   
Wednesday, 12 October 2011 00:00

CHAPTER 1. THE VICE'S CYCLE

1. See the pioneering report by Norman E. Zinberg and Richard C. Jacobson, The Social Basis of Drug Abuse Prevention, Washington, D. C.: The Drug Abuse Council, 1974.
2. Throughout the past century both terms, narcotics and addiction, have been used very loosely, so that, as I indicated, narcotic drugs will include not only the opiates but cocaine and marijuana, which are, of course, quite different, both in their pharmacological characteristics and their physiological effects. Also, addict and addiction will cover every pattern of drug use, from intermittent to constant. To avoid confusion I will use the specific names of drugs where it is appropriate and consider a narcotic addict one who is under the influence of the drug for more time than he is not. At the same time, the terms will appear in their indiscriminate sense 'whenever that is the meaning I must report.
3. Over the years each new control system or agency has issued its own code of accepted science on the narcotics problem. For SAODAP see Richard H. Blum, ed., "Origins of Drug Use and Drug Problems: Fact, Theory and Implications for Public Action," Washington, D. C.: SAO-DAP, 1973.
4. Address of Richard G. Kleindienst, 79th Annual Conference of the International Association of Chiefs of Police, Salt Lake City, Oct. 17, 1972, PP. 7-8.
5. H. H. Kane, Opium Smoking in America and China, New York: G. P. Putnam's, 1882, p. 8.
6. Testimony of Dr. Lin Bun Keng, of Singapore, quoted in Use of Opium and Traffic Therein, Report of the Committee Appointed by the Philippine Commission, 59th Congress, 1st Sess., 1906, Senate Doc. #265, p. 106.
7. Emphasis in original. Captain Edgar King, "The Use of Habit-Forming Drugs (Cocaine, Opium and Its Derivatives) by Enlisted Men: A Report Based on the Work Done at the United States Disciplinary Barracks," Military Surgeon, 39 (1916), 380.
8. My emphasis. James Q. Wilson et al., "The Problem of Heroin," Public Interest, no. 29 (Fall 1972), 7.
9. For example, William F. Wieland and Michael Yunger, "Sexual Effects and Side Effects of Heroin and Methadone," Proceedings: 3rd National Conference on Methadone Treatment, National Institute of Mental Health, Washington, D. C., Nov. 14-16,1970, pp. 51-53.
10. Wilson et al, p. 9.
11. Former President Nixon appears to have held this view. The touchstone for him was "permissiveness," a condition of individual morality which is sufficient in itself to lead to both drug use and crime:
We have passed through a very great spiritual crisis in this country—during the late 60's . . . many lost faith in many of our institutions. For example, the enormous movement toward permissiveness which led to the escalation in crime, the escalation in drugs in this country, all this came as a result of those of us who basically have a responsibility of leadership not recognizing that above everything else you must not weaken a people's character. . . . The average American is just like the child in the family. You give him some responsibility and he is going to amount to something. . . . If, on the other hand, you make him completely dependent, and pamper him and cater to him too much, you are going to make him soft, spoiled and eventually a very weak individual.
From the transcript of a preelection interview granted Garnett D. Horner and published in the New York Times, Nov. 10,1972, P. 20.
12. Use of Opium and Traffic Therein, P. 80.
13. Report on the International Opium Commission and on the Opium Problem as Seen Within the United States and Its Possessions, published as Message from the President of the United States of America, 61st Congress., 2nd Sess., 1910, Senate Doc. #377, p. 51.
14. King, P. 277.
15. Wilson et al., p. 14.
16. Kane, p. 4.
17. Some Reasons for Chinese Exclusion: Meat vs. Rice; American Manhood Against Asiatic Coolieism; Which Shall Survive?, published by the American Federation of Labor, 57th Congress., 1st Sess., 1902, Senate Doc. 137, p. 22.
In the case of the Chinese, the "quarantine" proposed was a combination of stopping further Chinese from entering the country and sending those already here home.
18. King, pp. 278,380.
19. From a speech to a conference, "The Problems of Adolescent Drug Ad-
diction—Prevention Through Education," quoted by James W. Hughes,
"The American Medical Profession and the Narcotics Policy Controver-
sy," Ph. D. diss., Department of Sociology, Indiana Univ., 1967, P. 131.
20. Wilson et al., pp. 10,22.
21. Quoted by Hughes, p. 20.
22. King, p. 275.
23. Quoted by Hughes, p. 134.
24. Ira Reiss, "Social Class and Pre-marital Sexual Permissiveness: A Reexamination," American Sociological Review 30, no. 3,1964,747-56.
25. Fred Strodtbeck and James F. Short, Jr., "Aleatory Risks Versus Short-Run Hedonism in Explanation of Gang Action," Social Problems 12, no. 1(1964), 127-40.
26. Walter Miller, "Lower Class Culture as a Generating Milieu of Gang Delinquency," Journal of Social Issues 14, no. 1(1958), 3-14.
27. Seymour M. Lipset, "Democracy and Working-Class Authoritarianism," American Sociological Review 24, no. 4 (August 1959), 482-501.

CHAPTER 2. THE CHINESE OPIUM CRUSADE

I. A useful, if incomplete, review of the economics of this arrangement is David Edward Owen, British Opium Policy in China and India, New Haven: Yale Univ. Press, 1934.
2. "Say's law"; Jean-Baptiste Say, A Treatise on Political Economy, C. R. Prinsep trans., London: Longman, 1821.
3. Use of Opium and Traffic Therein, p. 81 (testimony of Mr. Chao, Shanghai merchant), pp. 87 and 213 (extract of article by Dr. Dudgeon, a sometime medical resident).
4. Estimates from the San Francisco Customs Office listed the following arrival numbers by year:

1849    325
1850    450
1851    2,700
1852    20,000
From Ping Chiu, Chinese Labor in California, An Economic Study, 1850-1880, Madison: Univ. of Wisconsin, 1963, pp. 13,142. This relatively unknown work is one of the best available sociological analyses of the beginnings of Chinese life in America.
5. Chiu, p. 24.
6. H. H. Kane, Opium-Smoking in America and China, New York: G. P. Putnam's, 1882, p. 8. Wright, p. 37. See also George F. Seward, Chinese Immigration, Its Social and Economic Aspects, New York: Scribner's, 1881, p. 212; Gunther P. Barth, Bitter Strength: A History of the Chinese in the United States, 1850-1870, Cambridge: Harvard Univ. Press, 1964, pp. 196-97; Rose Hum Lee, The Chinese in the United States of America, Hong Kong: Cathay Press, 1960, p. 23; Ivan H. Light, "From Vice District to Tourist Attraction: The Moral Career of American Chinatowns, 1880-1940," Pacific Historical Review (1974) 367-94.
7. Chiu, p. 61.
8. Ibid., p. 136.
9. For a review of these arguments see Seward, Chinese Immigration, esp. pp. 160ff.
10. One of the reasons went to the heart of the "sojourner" code. Both to provide an incentive for the sojourning husband to remain loyal and send money home and to sustain the kin and village networks without him, it was the Chinese custom for the wife to remain while her husband immigrated. See Stanford M. Lyman, "Marriage and Family Among Chinese Immigrants to America, 1880-1960," Phylon, 29, no. 4, pp. 321-30.
11. For the lurid details see Seward, pp. 261ff.; Kane, pp. 8ff.; and The Social, Moral and Political Effect of Chinese Immigration, A report of Public Hearings Conducted by the Committee of the Senate of California, printed by the Committee on Education and Labor, House of Representatives, 45th Congress, 1st Sess., 1877, Misc. Document 9.
12. In no year did the Persian imports exceed 10 percent of the Indian shipments; Owen, p. 287.
13. Figures on the India-China trade are from Owen, British Opium Policy, p. 281; on U. S. imports, from Hamilton Wright, Report on the International Opium Commission for the Opium Problem as Seen within the United States and its Possessions, published as Message from the President of the United States of America, 61st Congress, 2nd Sess., 1910, Senate 6ocument 377, pp. 81-83.
14. In judging magnitudes like this, caution must be used, because side by side with the recorded entry of imported opium, there was a fairly brisk and unrecorded smuggling trade. The relative volumes of the two trades varied largely according to the attitude displayed toward the drug by U. S. Customs. According to Wright, between 1864 and 1870, when a 100 percent ad valorem tax was levied on imports, smuggling was particularly heavy. This then dropped between 1870 and 1883, when duties were reduced. Smuggling picked up in response to a provision in the 1880 treaty with China, according to which the importation of opium by Chinese subjects was prohibited (which left Americans free to import the drug and then sell it back to the Chinese). It got its biggest lift when duties rose again to $10 and $12 a pound.
15. See O. N. Reynolds, "The Chinese Tongs," American Journal of Sociology, 40, no. 5 (March 1935), 612-23; also, H. M. Lai, "A Historical Survey of Organizations of the Left Among the Chinese in America," Bulletin of the Committee of Concerned Asian Scholars, 4, no. 3 (Fall 1972), 10-20.
16. See Light, "From Vice District to Tourist Attraction," passim. For an account of contemporary tong roles and activities, see Virginia Heyer, "Patterns of Social Organization in New York City's Chinatown," Ph.D. diss., Columbia Univ. 1953.
17. Light, pp. 19-29.
18. Although there is little concrete evidence of this for this period, that the involvement existed and continued for quite a while among the "legitimate" merchants is clear from the following news item which appeared in the New York Times, February 27, 1915, P. 7: "Tam Shi Yan, who was elected President of the Chinese Merchants Association of New York, an office to which the title of 'mayor of Chinatown' is accorded, was found guilty at his second trial in the Federal District Court yesterday of manufacturing opium for smoking in Doyers Street. His defense was that members of a rival tong planted the opium and apparatus in his room during his absence."
19. Gunther P. Barth, Bitter Strength, pp. 196-97.
20. Wright, p. 41. Indirect support for this can be inferred from what we know of the social class in China from which the immigrants of this period came and from the rough correlation that holds between this and the incidence of the opium habit. Earlier I made the point that the first wave of the Chinese immigration was a petite-bourgeoisie one, that only later did a laborer class predominate. In fact, even among the latter group, there were few who were from poor peasant or urban laborer strata in China, among which opium use was prevalent. James W. Loewen's findings for the Chinese immigrants entering the Mississippi delta between 1870 and 1880 have general applicability: "the Delta Chinese probably came from peasant and artisan families who because of their earlier emigrant connections were better off than the mass of rural Chinese but who were clearly not in the landlord class. Within their families the individuals who left were probably those least well off. Most had little business background but were oriented toward independent business as a means of future advancement." Loewen, The Mississippi Chinese: Between Black and White, Cambridge: Harvard Univ. Press, 1971, p. 28. Loewen recorded no use of opium in a century of Chinese life in the Mississippi Delta.
21. Reynolds, "Chinese Tongs," p.616.
22. Wright's arithmetic is off. The total population represented fractionally by his percentages is approximately 149,000, but not until 1950 did the Chinese population of the country actually reach this number. According to the census, population figures were as follows:
1860    34,933
1870    63,199
1880    105,465
1890    106,488
1900    118,746
1940    106,334
1950    150,005
1960    237,292
1970    435,062
It seems reasonable to conclude, therefore, that Wright overstated the incidence of opium-smoking among the Chinese. Since he further relied on these numbers to obtain estimates for the total amount of opium consumed by Chinese and non-Chinese for the period 1900-1909, it is highly probable that he underestimated the extent of opium use among the non-Chinese of the time.
23. Treadway reported in 1930 that nearly 21 percent of the narcotics violators reported to the U. S. Public Health Service during 1929 were Chinese. Public Health Reports, 45, No. 11 (1930), pp. 541-53. A California State Narcotic Committee report on arrests for narcotics violations during 1928 showed nearly 28 percent Chinese (The Trend of Drug Addiction in California, Sacramento: State Printing Office, 1930). A report by the same Committee for 1931-32 showed 26 percent Chinese statewide. In 1935 the Federal Bureau of Narcotics annual report, Traffic in Opium and Other Dangerous Drugs, indicated 9 percent "Oriental" among 946 addicts reported for the year. The following year, the California Senate Interim Narcotic Committee reported 16 percent Chinese among federal narcotic law violators for the year (Report on Drug Addiction in California, Sacramento: State Printing Office, 1936). In Chicago for 1937 Dai found 5.6 percent "yellow and red" addicts among the institutionalized population of Cook County over the six-year period, 1931-37 (Bingham Dai, Opium Addiction in Chicago, Shanghai: Commerical Press, 1937). In 1943 Pescor reported on addict patients admitted to Lexington Hospital from 1936 to 1937 and found 0.9 percent Chinese. Finally, in 1966 Ball and Lau, summarizing the ethnic data on all male addicts treated at Lexington from 1935 to 1964, found nearly 3 percent Chinese, as compared with 0.2 percent Chinese in all of the male population of the United States (John C. Ball and M. P. Lau, "The Chinese Narcotic Addict in the U. S.," Social Forces, 45, no. 1 [19661, pp. 68-72).
24. The California state legislature had preceded this action with a bill in 1872 to outlaw the administration of a narcotic drug to any person where there was intent to facilitate commission of a felony. Possession of the drug, smoking, or the operation of an opium den were made illegal in Arizona and Californaia in the early 1880s. Nevada prohibited the retail sale of opiates for nonmedical purposes in 1877. Data from Richard J. Bonnie and Charles H. Whitebread II, "The Forbidden Fruit and the Tree of Knowledge: An Inquiry into the Legal History of American Marijuana Prohibition," Virginia Law Review, 56,6 (October 1970), 970-71.
25. Loewen, Mississippi Chinese, p. 23.
26. For a useful summary of historical material, see Edna Bonacich, "A Theory of Ethnic Antagonism: The Split Labor Market," American Sociological Review, 37, no. 5 (October 1972), 547-49. "To be split, a labor market must contain at least two groups of workers whose price of labor differs for the same work, or would differ if they did the same work. The concept 'price of labor' refers to labor's total cost to the employer, including not only wages, but the cost of recruitment, transportation, room and board, education, health care, and the costs of labor unrest," p. 549.
27. Social, Moral and Political Effect of Chinese Immigration, p. 19.
28. Kane, Opium-Smoking in America and China, p. 3.
29. Seward, Chinese Immigration, pp. 217-22,261-91.
30. Mayo-Smith, Emigration and Immigration—A Study in Social Science, New York: Scribner's, 1890, p. 244.
31. Use of Opium and Traffic Therein, p. 79.

CHAPTER 3. BLACKS AND COCAINE

1. The available history of drug use in those years and of narcotics policy appears almost completely divorced from the affairs of the rest of America. As a result, the forces which shaped that history are not easy to see. For general histories see Charles E. Terry and Mildred Pellens, The Opium Problem, New York: Bureau of Social Hygiene, 1928, reprint, Montclair, N. J.: Patterson Smith, 1970, chaps. 10-13; Rufus King, The Drug Hang-Up, America's Fifty-Year Folly, New York: Norton, 1972; David Musto, The American Disease: Origins of Narcotic Control, New Haven: Yale University Press, 1973. An article by Musto, "The American Anti-Narcotic Movement: Clinical Research and Public Policy," in Clinical Research, 29, 3 (1971), 601-605, is an unanalytical but useful account of the role of the medical profession in the early years of the Harrison Act; the thesis by James W. Hughes, The American Medical Profession and the Narcotics Policy Controversy, Ph.D. diss., Indiana Univ., 1967, covers similar ground over a longer time span and is equally uninformative on the deeper roots, though it is descriptively worthwhile. There is a comparable study of the legal history: Richard J. Bonnie and Charles H. White-bread, II, "The Forbidden Fruit and the Tree of Knowledge: An Inquiry into the Legal History of American Marijuana Prohibition," Virginia Law Review, 56, 6 (October 1970), 971-1,220. There is no adequate, or even approximate, study of the narcotics enforcement bureaucracy; Laurence F. Schmeckebier, The Bureau of Prohibition, Its History, Activities and Organization, Washington, D. C.: Brookings Institution, 1929, is a simpleminded manual of the government's approaches; Arnold H. Taylor, American Diplomacy and the Narcotics Traffic, 1900-1939, Durham: Duke Univ. Press, 1969, has limited relevance for an understanding of the domestic situation.
2. See James Harvey Young, The Toadstool Millionaires, A Social History of Patent Medicines in America Before Regulation, Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press, 1961, pp. 228ff.
3. Ibid., p. 161.
4. See Terry and Pellens, The Opium Problem, pp. 631ff, 745.
5. Quoted by Terry and Peliens, p. 750.
6. Wright, pp. 50-51.
7. Ibid., p. 48.
8. For a full account see Musto, "American Anti-Narcotic Movement."
9. Ibid., p. 604.
10. Quoted by Hughes, American Medical Profession, p. 20.
11. The case was Ex parte Yung Jon (1886); judgement quoted by Bonnie and Whitebread, "Forbidden Fruit," p. 997.
12. Ibid., pp. 999ff.
13. Both quotations, ibid., p. 1,003.
14. Terry and Pellens, pp. 757ff.
15. Brooks Adams (1913), quoted by Bonnie and Whitebread, "Forbidden Fruit," p. 1,009.
16. Terry and Pellens, p. 478. The same judge, Justice Collins, told a New York State joint legislative committee in 1916: "from my observation I would say it is the young men generally who are affected," New York Times, December 6, 1916, p. 6.
17. Bloedorn, "Studies of Drug Addicts," United States Naval Medical Bulletin, 11, no. 3 (1917), 315-16.
18. Kane, Opium-Smoking in America and China, p. 2.
19. In a 1924 survey of the published data on addiction, Kolb and DuMez raised an objection to extrapolating from New York City data to the situation throughout the country. They argued that this data overstated the youth of addicts because "young addicts are attracted to large cities, and conditions exist in them which cause a delinquent type of addiction, and it is also due in part to the fact that some of the older addicts were being taken care of (privately) by physicians and were not counted when the survey was made"; Lawrence Kolb and A. G. DuMez, "The Prevalence and Trend of Drug Addiction in the United States and Factors Influencing It," Public Health Reports, 39, no. 21 (May 23, 1924), p. 1,188. The claim that there was an unusual increase in adolescent drug use at this time must therefore be restricted to cross-time comparisons within the city of New York.
20. Bloedorn, "Studies of Drug Addicts," pp. 313-15.
21. Quoted by Lauretta Bender, "Drug Addiction in Adolescence," Comprehensive Psychiatry, 4, no. 3 (June 1963), 183.
22. Lichtenstein, "Narcotic Addiction," New York Medical Journal (November 14, 1914), p. 962.
23. Ibid., p. 964. Lichtenstein was one of those who subscribed to the pusher theory of contagion, according to which drug pushers created a demand for the drug by giving it away free or in candy to school children. No evidence for this was or ever has been offered and substantiated. Cf. Terry and Pellens, Opium Problem, p. 481.
24. New York Times, December 5, 1916, p. 4.
25. Although no data of this type exist, I would guess that the high rates of unemployment for teenagers that prevailed in 1914 and 1915 would have stimulated both drug use and the decision to enlist in the military. General unemployment rates for all persons 14 or over for 1914 and 1915 were 8 and 9.7 percent, respectively—almost double the average rate from 1910 to 1913; Historical Statistics of the United States, p. 73.
26. Review of article by S. R. Leaky, "Some Observations on Heroin Habitués," United States Naval Medical Bulletin, 10 (1916), pp. 129-30, published in New York State Hospital Bulletin (August 1915).
27. Kolb and DuMez, "Prevalence and Trend of Drug Addiction," p. 1,181.
28. Ibid., p. 1,186.
29. Ibid., p. 1,185.
30. King, "Use of Habit-Forming Drugs," p. 274.
31. Toward the end of the war, when the draft was first introduced, the prevalence of drug use came to light even more dramatically. In a report released by the New York City Parole Commission, approximately 8,000 men between 21 and 31 years of age were rejected from the call-up in New York because of alleged drug addiction, and a total of 80,000 men were rejected out of the draft of 1918 nationwide. New York Times, April 15, 1919, p. 24.
32. "I believe I am correct in saying that I can now name four interior ports and several points along the Mexican border in which distinctive 'epidemics' of drug using have occurred since 1912"; King, "Use of Habit-Forming Drugs," pp. 383-84. Since it was well known that heroin had been developed by German chemists, the patriotic fervor of the war years made current the notion that drug addiction was being spread in the United States by enemy agents; see The Drug Hang-Up, p.25.
33. Bloedorn, "Studies of Drug Addicts," p. 309.
34. Lichtenstein, "Narcotic Addiction," p. 964.
35. Ibid., p. 964.
36. New York Times, July 15, 1914, p. 18.
37. Ibid., June 24, 1914, p. 6. This article is especially interesting, for it summarizes the confession of Annie Goldstein, a dealer who turned state's evidence against her lover and his associates. His name was James Blutier and his occupation was that of a truck driver. He had begun his career as a cocaine dealer in an operation run by Jack Sirocco in the Bowery. But Blutier broke away to set up for himself, and, according to Goldstein, the two did well. It was not uncommon for them to make $35 a day. After all expenses were paid, they were saving $600 a year of the proceeds.
38. See, for example, Troy Duster, The Legislation of Morality, Law, Drugs and Moral Judgment, New York: Free Press, 1970; Bonnie and White-bread, pp. 981ff: Patricia M. Wald et al., Dealing with Drug Abuse: A Report to the Ford Foundation, New York: Praeger, 1972.
39. J. M. Hull, in Biennial Report of the State Board of Health of Iowa (1885), summarized in Terry and Pellens, pp. 16-18, 99.
40. 0. Marshall, "The Opium Habit in Michigan," in Annual Report, Michigan State Board of Health (1878), ibid., pp. 9-16, 96-97.
41. E. G. Eberle, "Report of Committee on Acquirement of Drug Habits," American Journal of Pharmacology (October 1903), ibid., p. 23.
42. Wright, p. 49.
43. Lichtenstein, "Narcotic Addiction," p. 962.
44. Dr. Jackson R. Campbell, in New York Times, December 6, 1916, P. 6.
45. Wright, p. 50.
46. Lawrence Kolb, "Drug Addiction in Its Relation to Crime," Journal of Mental Hygiene, 9, no. 1 (January 1925), 88.
47. Major Sylvester, in a letter quoted by the Reports of the President's Homes Commission, 61st Congress, 1st Sess., 1909; Senate Document #644, p. 255.
48. Statement by Dr. Lyman F. Kebler, chief of the Division of Drugs, Bureau of Chemistry, U. S. Department of Agriculture, as quoted in the Homes Commission Report, p. 254; also quoted (though without acknowledgement) by Wright, p. 48.
49. New York Times, August 1, 1914, p. 16.
50. William M. Tuttle, Jr., Race Riot, Chicago in the Red Summer of 1919, New York: Atheneum, 1970, pp. 22-31.
51. Green, "Psychoses Among Negroes-A Comparative Study," Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 41 (1914), 697-708. It may be of interest that the psychoses attributed to a larger population of blacks than ,whites were schizophrenia and manic-depressive syndrome.
52. Ibid., pp. 701-702.
53. Reports of the President's Homes Commission, pp. 252, 254.
54. Ibid., p. 255. The date this was written was December 1908.
55. Wright, p. 50.
56. Reports of the President's Homes Commission, p. 210.
57. W. E. B. DuBois, ed., The Negro American Family, (originally published in 1909), Cambridge: MIT Press, 1970, pp. 111-122.
58. John C. Kennedy et al., A Study of Chicago's Stockyards Community III: Wages and Family Budgets in the Chicago Stockyards, Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1914, p.74.
59. Testimony of John C. Kennedy, in Life and Labor Conditions of Chicago Stockyards Employees, Final Report and Testimony, Commission on Industrial Relations, vol. 4, Washington, D. C.: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1916, pp. 3,468ff.
60. G. H. Weber, "Sociological Study of 1,251 Families," Reports of the President's Homes Commission, p. 288.
61. Lyman F. Kebler, "Soft Drinks Containing Caffeine and Extracts of Coca Leaf and Kola Nut," appendix, Reports of the President's Homes Commission, pp. 372-73, notes that some of the manufacturers of the drinks cited as containing extract of coca leaf claimed to use only the decocainized leaf, a by-product of the manufacture of cocaine but without the drug's potent properties.
62. Ibid., p. 372.
63. For example, Magistrate Simms of the Yorkville District Court, New York, in New York Times, December 15, 1916, p. 19.
64. Wright, p. 49.
65. Wright, p. 33. These statistics may not be correct; Kolb and DuMez report that between 1908 and 1915, 962, 281 pounds were imported legally (smuggling began after the 1909 act), whereas for two years alone, 1908 and 1909, Wright gives the total imports as 1,733,770 pounds.
66. New York Times, May 6, 1915, p. 22.
67. Ibid., May 27, 1919, p. 17.
68. For the role of the newspapers in the Washington riot in July 1919 see Arthur I. Waskow, From Race Riot to Sit-In, 1919 and the 1960s, Garden City: Doubleday, 1967, pp. 22-33.
69. Tuttle, Race Riot, pp. 22-23.
70. New York Times, October 19, 1919, p. 6. The reference here was to W. E. B. DuBois, editor of a radical black journal, The Crisis, and a Ph. D. graduate of Harvard.
71. Wright, p. 51.
72. See James Arthur Estey, Business Cycles, Their Nature, Cause and Control, Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1956, p. 20.
73. For the details, see Tuttle, Race Riot, Graham Adams, The Age of Industrial Violence, New York: Athenum, 1965; Jeremy Brecher, Strike!, San Francisco: Straight Arrow Books, 1972.

CHAPTER 4. MEXICANS AND MARIJUANA

1. Throughout this chapter the term marijuana refers to each and every preparation of cannabis sativa, or the hemp plant. Although a few early writers on the drug were acquainted with the Indian preparations known as ganja, bhang and chores, there was almost no awareness of the difference between them or between marijuana and hashish in pharmacological or psychological terms.
2. Dr. George F. Roeling, city coroner, had sent inquiries to the United States Dispensary and to the botanical division of the Department of Agriculture, which were fruitless. See A. E. Fossier, "The Marihuana Menace," New Orleans Medical and Surgical Journal, 84, no. 4 (October 1931), 250.
3. Washington, California, and Texas had felony laws; Mississippi, Louisiana, and Kansas had misdemeanor laws. For a full account see Bonnie and Whitebread, "Forbidden Fruit," pp. 1,010-20.
4. Paul Livingstone Warnshuis, "Crime and Criminal Justice Among the Mexicans of Illinois," part 3, section 3 of Report on Crime and the Foreign Born, report no. 10, National Commission on Law Observance and Enforcement, Washington, D. C.: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1931, p. 281. Hereafter cited as Crime and the Foreign Born.
5. Quoted by David Musto, "The Marihuana Tax of 1937," Archives of General Psychiatry, 26 (February 1972), 104. Anslinger had insisted earlier, in 1932, on the reintroduction of marijuana as a "narcotic drug" to the draft provisions of the Uniform Narcotic Drug Act which was passed by Congress in the same year. See Bonnie and Whitebread, "Forbidden Fruit," pp. 1,030-34.
6. King, Drug Hang-Up, p. 75.
7. Musto, "Marihuana Tax," p. 105. Let it be noted that 1936 was a presidential election year.
8. Ibid., p. 105; Bonnie and Whitebread, "Forbidden Fruit," p. 1,037. Mus-to, who wrote two years after Bonnie and Whitebread, appears to have been unaware of their article, as was I when the first draft of this chapter was composed.
9. Sources for these figures are the Fifteenth Census of the United States: 1930, vol. 1, pp. 149, 153; vol. 3, part 1, Table 17; and the Sixteenth Census of the United States: 1940, vol. 2, part 1, pp. 711, 718, 743.
10. Cf. Paul S. Taylor, Mexican Labor in the United States: IL Valley of the South Platte, Univ. of California Publications in Economics, 6, no. 2, (1929). Also, in the first volume of this work, Taylor provides estimates for harvest labor requirements for various crops and by each month of the year. See Mexican Labor in the United States Imperial Valley, Univ. of Califomia Publications in Economics, 6, no. 1, (1928), p. 36.
11. For the details of nativity and country of birth of the foreign-born residents of the county, see Fifteenth Census, vol. 3, part I, Table 17.
12. See the Annual Report of the Secretary of the Treasury for fiscal years 1938, 1939, 1940: Report of the Bureau of Narcotics.
13. H. J. Anslinger and William F. Tompkins, The Traffic in Narcotics, New York: Funk and Wagnalls, 1953, pp. 18-26.
14. Sixteenth Census, vol. 2, part 1, p. 743.
15. The crusade of the Rowells may be mentioned in this context as forming popular ideas about the drug without any predisposing experience of the "Mexican problem." See Earl A. and Robert Rowell, On the Trail of Marijuana, the Weed of Madness, Mountain View, Cal.: Pacific Press, 1939.
16. Although marijuana is not regarded as a narcotic drug today, it was considered so during the Depression. When the Marijuana Tax Act was introduced in Congress, the following exchange occurred:
Mr. Snell. What is the bill?
Mr. Rayburn. It has something to do with something that is called marihuana. I believe it is a narcotic of some kind.
Quoted by Bonnie and Whitebread, "Forbidden Fruit," p. 971. For the text of the Marihuana Tax Act see the Annual Report of the Secretary of the Treasury for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1938, Washington, D. C., 1938, Exhibit 43, pp. 275-79.
17. Immigration statistics are a poor measure of the actual numbers of Mexicans moving into the United States in any particular period. This is because an uncounted number did not register at a border station or paid no head tax, worked only temporarily in the United States, and then moved back home. These statistics are, however, a useful guide to the relative magnitude of population movements from period to period. For an early analysis of these statistics and their problems, see Paul S. Taylor, Mexican Labor in the United States Migration Statistics, vols. 1-3. Volume 1 was published as University of California Publications in Economics, 6, no. 3, (1929); Volumes 2 and 3 appeared in the same series, 12, nos. 1 and 2(1933).
18. Between 1916 and 1917 agricultural wages in California rose by 40 percent, and losses of crops were reported in the state for lack of labor to harvest them. Before recruiting Mexicans, the state's agriculturalists tried raising a work force from among women, children on school vacation, and convicts. Drinking saloons were closed and antivagrancy laws were stiffly enforced. See Vanden Fuller, The Supply of Agricultural Labor as a Factor in the Evolution of Farm Organization in California, printed in Hearings before a Subcommittee of the Committee on Education and Labor, United States Senate, 66th Congress, 3rd Session, 1940, Violations of Free Speech and Rights of Labor, Part 54, Exhibit 8762-A, pp. 19,847ff.
19. Carey McWilliams, North from Mexico, the Spanish-Speaking People of the United States, New York: Monthly Review Press, 1948 and 1961, p. 181.
20 Fuller, Supply of Agricultural Labor, pp. 19,854, 19,865. See also Musto, "Marihuana Tax of 1937," pp. 103-104.
21. Ibid.
22. Sixteenth Census, vol. 2, p. 41ff. See also, Fuller, Supply of Agricultural Labor, p. 19,852.
23. Max Sylvius Handman, Preliminary Report on Nationality and Delinquency: The Mexican in Texas, in Crime and the Foreign Born, part 3, section 2, p. 250.
24. Ibid., p. 254.
25. Ibid., pp. 256-57.
26. Paul S. Taylor, Crime and the Foreign Born: The Problem of the Mexican, in Crime and the Foreign Born, part 3, section 1, pp. 218-19.
27. In 1930 Colorado had just over 4 percent of the Mexicans in the United States; in terms of state population they amounted to 5.6 percent of the total.
28. Taylor, Crime and the Foreign Born, pp. 216-17.
29. Table appears in Fuller, Supply of Agricultural Labor, p. 19,860. Source of data: United States Department of Agriculture, Crops and Markets, monthly supplement.
30. Mexicans in California, Report of Governor C. C. Young's Mexican Fact-Finding Committee, orig. San Francisco: State Printing Office, 1930, reprint, San Francisco: R&E Research Associates, 1970, p. 168. This section of the report summarizes questionnaire responses to a query about the effect putting the Mexicans on a quota basis would have.
31. Taylor, Imperial Valley, p. 31.
32. Fuller, Supply of Agricultural Labor, p. 19,861.
33. For a valuable analysis of Japanese farming methods and economic organization, see Ivan H. Light, Ethnic Enterprise in America: Business and Welfare Among Chinese, Japanese and Blacks, Berkeley: Univ. of California Press, 1972, pp. 72-78.
34. Taylor, Mexican Labor in the Imperial Valley, pp. 70-71.
35. Quoted by Fuller, Supply of Agricultural Labor, p. 19,864.
36. Taylor, Crime and the Foreign Born, p. 212.
37. The sheer physical and social isolation enforced on Mexicans when they lived in California made a custom such as smoking marijuana more or less invisible to the Anglo population until other factors led to the belief that the drug, in fact, encouraged its users to cross racial boundaries and attack whites.
38. See H. M. Lai, "A Historical Survey of Organizations of the Left Among the Chinese in America," Bulletin of the Committee of Concerned Asian Scholars, 4, no. 3 (Fall 1972), p. 11.
39. See Light, Ethnic Enterprise in America, pp. 72-78.
40. For an account of the ruthless profiteering involved in the labor contract system for Mexicans, see McWilliams, North from Mexico, "Coyotes and Man-Snatchers," pp. 178-79. Among the native American unions in the 1920s, only the socialist International Workers of the World did not bar Mexicans from membership.
41. Taylor, Mexican Labor in the Imperial Valley, pp. 61-64.
42. The first labor unions established among Mexicans were chapters of the Confederacion de Uniones Obreras Mexicanas which began in November 1927 in Los Angeles, also at the initiative of the mutual aid associations. At the first convention of this group in May 1928, 24 unions were represented from all over the United States.
43. For comparable, if biased, accounts see Taylor, Mexican Labor in the Imperial Valley, pp. 45-54; Mexicans in California, pp. 135-150.
44. Taylor, Mexican Labor in the Imperial Valley, p. 41.
45. Fuller, Supply of Agricultural Labor, p. 19,874.
46. Ibid., p. 19,866; and Max Sylvius Handman, "Economic Reasons for the Coming of the Mexican Immigrant," American Journal of Sociology, 35, no. 4 (January 1930), 601-11.
47. Brawley News, April 15, 1930, quoted by Paul S. Taylor and Clark Kerr, "Documentary History of the Strike of the Cotton Pickers in California 1933," in Violation of Free Speech and Rights of Labor, p. 19,953. This is an excellent source for the details of labor strife in the early Depression years in California.
48. Quoted by M. H. Hayes and L. E. Bowery, "Marihuana," Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 23, no. 6 (March-April 1933), 1,071, 1,088.
49. Vernon Monroe McCombs, From Over the Border, A Study of the Mexicans in the United States, New York: Council of Women for Home Missions and Missionary Education Movement, 1925, reprint (San Francisco: R&E Research Associates, 1970), p. 36.
50. Taylor, Crime and the Foreign Born: The Problem of the Mexican, p. 205.
51. Ibid.
52. Robert M. Fogelson, The Fragmented Metropolis, Los Angeles, 1850-1930, Cambridge: Harvard Univ. Press, 1967, pp. 76-79.
53. Mexicans in California, pp. 97-121.
54. Jacqueline Rorabeck Kasun, Some Social Aspects of Business Cycles in the Los Angeles Area, 1920-1950, Los Angeles: Haynes Foundation, 1954, pp. 96-97.
55. Mexicans in California, p. 186.
56. McCombs, From Over the Border, p. 36.
57. Ibid., p. 37.
58. Computed by Kasun, Social Aspects of Business Cycles, p. 122.
59. Ibid., pp. 120-21.
60. Ibid., p. 135.
61. ' Paul S. Taylor, Crime and the Foreign Born: Stockton, California, in Crime and the Foreign Born, part 4, section 3, p. 380. "In commenting upon the use of marijuana, our informant said that its use was not extensive and was usually limited to unmarried men working under unendurable conditions who used it to relieve the dreariness of their existence," p. 381. Only 3.3 percent of all offenses involving Mexicans in Stockton were for violations of the State Poison Act (marijuana).
62. Mexicans in California, pp. 123ff.
63. Taylor, Crime and the Foreign Born: Stockton, California, pp. 379-81.
64. Taylor, Crime and the Foreign Born: The Problem of the Mexican, p. 243.
65. See Kasun, Social Aspects of Business Cycles, p. 32.
66. Quoted by McWilliams, North from Mexico, p. 193.
67. Leo Grebler et al., The Mexican-American People: The Nation's Second Largest Minority, New York: The Free Press, 1970, p. 538.
68. McWilliams, North from Mexico, p. 193.
69. Emory S. Bogardus, "Repatriation and Adjustment," in Manuel P. Ser-vin, The Mexican-Americans: An Awakening Minority, Beverly Hills: Glencoe Press, 1972, p. 90.
70. McWilliams, North from Mexico, p. 193.
71. The text of a resolution adopted at the convention of the Confederacion de Uniones Obreras Mexicanas, Los Angeles, May 1928. See Mexicans in California, pp. 125, 127.
72. The California State Narcotic Committee did acknowledge the qualitative difference between marijuana and the drugs we are accustomed today to calling narcotics, even if few police officers or ordinary citizens realized this. "Fortunately," the committee reported in 1931, marijuana "will never be as serious a problem as the narcotic drugs, because it is not cumulative in its effect and the sudden discontinuance of its use produces no withdrawal symptoms"; quoted by Taylor, Crime and the Foreign Born: The Problem of the Mexican, p. 205.
73. E. Stanley, in American Journal of Police Science, 2(1931), 252.
74. Bonnie and Whitebread, "Forbidden Fruit," pp. 1,026, 1,044.
75. A. E. Fossier (with comments by others), "The Marihuana Menace," New Orleans Medical and Surgical Journal, 84, no. 4 (October 1931), 247-52.
76. Ibid., p. 250.
77. Ibid., p. 249.
78. Ibid., p. 250. For a more elaborate and quasi-empirical version of this, see Hayes and Bowery, "Marihuana," p. 1,092.
79. F. F. Young, "The Marihuana Menace," p. 251.
80. Ibid., p. 251.
81. Anslinger and Tompkins, Traffic in Narcotics, p. 283.
82. Jesse F. Steiner, Crime and the Foreign Born: New Orleans, in Crime and the Foreign Born, part 4, section 1, p. 337.
83. Kasun, Social Aspects of Business Cycles, pp. 127-34.
84. Steiner, Crime and the Foreign Born: New Orleans, p. 336.
85. Musto, "Marihuana Tax of 1937," p. 102.
86. Steiner, Crime and the Foreign Born: New Orleans, pp. 341-42.
87. Ibid., p. 344.
88. Walter Bromberg, "Marihuana Intoxication: A Clinical Study of Cannabis Sativa Intoxication," American Journal of Psychiatry, 91, no. 2 (September 1934), 303-30. Bromberg identified marijuana use as being most common among Puerto Ricans, Mexicans, and blacks (p. 307). He was one of the early proponents of the view that the use of marijuana may lead to heavier drugs such as heroin. Commissioner Anslinger frequently resorted to this view when challenged to demonstrate the harmfulness of marijuana per se. See Anslinger and Tompkins, Traffic in Narcotics, p. 168.
89. Sixteenth Census, vol. 2, pp. 67ff.: Historical Statistics of the United States, p. 47.
90. Perry H. Howard, Political Tendencies in Louisiana, rev. ed., Baton Rouge: Louisiana State Univ. Press, 1971, pp. 243-50. For general background see George M. Reynolds, Machine Politics in New Orleans, 1897-1926, New York: Columbia Univ. Press, 1936.
91. Montana Standard, January 27, 1929; quoted by Bonnie and Whitebread, "Forbidden Fruit," p. 1,014.
92. Quoted from the Tax Act Hearings by Bonnie and Whitebread, ibid., p. 1,055.

CHAPTERS. RACE OR CLASS, 1949-1953

1. Patricia M. Wald et al., Dealing with Drug Abuse: A Report to the Ford Foundation, New York: Praeger, p. 4. In terms of arrests, only between 1950 and 1960 did blacks outnumber whites.
2. According to the 1970 Census there are still more blacks in the South (nearly 12 million) than the total from all other regions combined, and it is likely to stay that way. For a discussion of the Southern pattern of addiction predominant among whites, see John C. Ball, "Two Patterns of Narcotic Drug Addiction in the United States," Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology and Police Science, 56, no. 2 (June 1965), 203-11; William M. Bates, "Narcotics, Negroes and the South," Social Forces, 45, no. 1 (September 1966), 61-67.
3. J. D. Roberts, "Opium Habit in the Negro," North Carolina Medical Journal, 16 (1885), 207.
4. Ibid.
5. Green, "Psychoses Among Negroes—A Comparative Study," Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 41 (1914), p. 110.
6. Charles E. Terry and Mildred Pellens, The Opium Problem, New York: Bureau of Social Hygiene, 1928, p. 25.
7. Lucius P. Brown, "Enforcement of the Tennessee Anti-Narcotic Laws," reprinted in John A. O'Donnell and John C. Ball, eds., Narcotic Addiction, New York: Harper & Row, 1966.
8. According to the survey of physicians reported in Traffic in Narcotic Drugs, Report of the Special Committee of Investigation, U. S. Department of the Treasury: Washington, D. C., 1919. It is also confirmed by reports on the major narcotics clinics in operation in the early 1920s; for example, see the report on the Shreveport (La.) Clinic by Willis P. Butler, American Medicine, 17 (1922), pp. 154-162. In 1923 the Bureau of the Census carried out an extensive survey of all prisoners and commitments to penal institutions throughout the country. By this time, and for this category of drug offender (including marijuana offenders), the Middle Atlantic, Mountain, and Pacific states had supplanted the Southern states in their totals. Expressed as rates per 100,000 population, the Pacific states (primarily California) led the country with 11.1 commitments for drug offenses; the Middle Atlantic states (primarily New York) followed with 5.2; in contrast, the Southwest region had a rate of 1.3. See Bureau of the Census, Prisoners, 1923: Crime Conditions in the United States as Reflected in Census Statistics of Imprisoned Offenders, Washington, D.C., 1926, P. 41.
9. Kolb and DuMez, "The Prevalence and Trend of Drug Addiction in the United States and Factors Influencing It," Public Health Reports, 39, no. 21 (May 23, 1924), p. 1,184.
10. Green, "Psychoses Among Negroes," p. 702.
11. Sources:
1913—C. E. Terry, Annual Report of the Board of Health, Jacksonville, Florida, 1913, quoted by Terry and Pellens, The Opium Problem, p. 25.
1915—L. P. Brown, "Enforcement of the Tennessee Anti-Narcotic Law," American Journal of Public Health, 5, no. 4 (1915), quoted by Terry and Pellens, The Opium Problem, pp. 27-29.
1919-20—S. Dana Hubbard, "The New York City Narcotic Clinic and Differing Points of View on Narcotic Addiction," Monthly Bulletin of the Department of Health, City of New York (February 1920), reprinted in Illicit Narcotics Traffic, Hearings Before the Subcommittee on Improvements in the Federal Criminal Code, Committee on the Judiciary, U.S. Senate, 84th Congress, 1st Sess. (September 1955), part 5, P. 1,719 (hereafter cited as Daniel Hearings).
1926—Percent distribution of male prisoners received in federal and state prisons and reformatories during 1926 by race and nativity and by offense: Alida C. Bowler, "Recent Statistics on Crime and the Foreign Born," in Crime and the Foreign Born, part 2, p. 153.
1928—Arrests, drug offenses, California Narcotic Division: Paul S. Taylor, "Crime and the Foreign Born: The Problem of the Mexican," in Crime and the Foreign Born, part 3, p. 206.
1929—Walter L. Treadway, "Further Observations on the Epidemiology of Narcotic Drug Addiction," Public Health Reports, 44, no. 45 (1929), 2,702-2,704.
1930—Walter L. Treadway, "Further Observations on the Epidemiology of Narcotic Drug Addiction," Public Health Reports, 45, no. 11 (1930), 541-53.
1935(1)—Arrests, Federal Bureau of Narcotics: Traffic in Opium and Other Dangerous Drugs, U. S. Treasury Department (1936), quoted by Alan S. Meyers, ed., Social and Psychological Factors in Opiate Addiction, New York: Bureau of Applied Social Research, Columbia Univ. (1959), p. 33.
1935(2)—Arrests, drug offenses, California Senate Interim Narcotic Committee, A Report on Drug Addiction in California (1936), quoted by Meyers, p. 34.
1930-36—Sample derived from a variety of institutional and police sources: Bingham Dai, Opiate Addiction in Chicago, Shanghai: Commercial Press, 1937.
1931-36—Records of 300 male addicts in Detroit House of Corrections: Edward C. Jandy and Maurice Bloch, Narcotic Addiction as a Factor in Petty Larceny in Detroit, Detroit: Bureau of Governmental Research, 1937, Report #145. Quoted in Meyers, Social and Psychological Factors, p. 35.
12. Royal S. Copeland, "The Narcotic Drug Evil and the New York City Health Department," American Medicine, 15 (January 1920); reprinted in Daniel Hearings, p. 1,707.
13. Hubbard said: "Cocaine was distributed on the first day the clinic operated, but on ascertaining the fact regarding its effect on the individual [depressive], it was immediately discontinued and not again prescribed or dispensed," Daniel Hearings, p. 1,715.
14. A third usable source of time series statistics is the Census of Prisoners compiled for 1923 and then from 1926 through 1946 by the Bureau of the Census. The annual publication was titled Prisoners in State and Federal Prisons and Reformatories.
15. Computed from figures supplied as Exhibit 8, Daniel Hearings, pp. 272--75.
16. Daniel Hearnings, p.30.
17. Alfred R. Lindesmith, The Addict and the Law, Bloomington: Indiana Univ. Press (1965), pp. 122-24.
18. Ibid., p. 121.
19. Ortiz M. Walton, Music: Black, White and Blue, New York: William Morrow, 1972, p. 98.
20. Race Riot, p. 104.
21. David Katzman, personal communication, November 13, 1972.
22. Testimony of Harry J. Anslinger, Daniel Hearings, p. 10.
23. In 1954, 85 percent of narcotics violators arrested by the Chicago police were repeat offenders. See the testimony of Lt. Joseph J. Healy (Narcotics Bureau, C. P. D.) in Daniel Hearings, p. 4,252.
24. The Kefauver Committee Report on Organized Crime [Report of The Special Senate Committee to Investigate Organized Crime in Interstate Commerce], New York: Didier, 1951, p. 146.
25. FBN figures for 1954 indicated that among reported addicts, 35 percent were from New York State, 27 percent from Illinois, and 9 percent from California, for a total share of 71 percent. Arrests were somewhat differently distributed, but these states alone shared 66 percent of the national total; Daniel Hearings, p. 110.
26. Ibid., p. 1,643.
27. Ibid.
28. Joseph L. Coyle, "The Illicit Narcotics Problem," New York Medicine, 14 (1958), 528.
29. Daniel Hearings, p. 10.
30. Terranova, p. 81.
31. Isidor Chein et al., The Road to H: Narcotics, Delinquency and Social Policy, New York: Basic Books, 1964, p. 32. According to Dr. Harold Jacobziner, assistant commissioner of health in New York City, no cases of narcotics use were known to the school health service until the summer of 1950. "The epidemic reached its peak in May 1951 and then gradually abated toward the end of the school year." Thirty percent of the cases surveyed by Jacobziner were aged 16; 60 percent were 16 or older. Among 754 schools surveyed, drug use was concentrated in the vocational high schools; three schools alone were responsible for 54 percent of all cases, and over 25 percent came from just one school. See Harold Jacobziner, "Epidemic of Narcotic Use Among Schoolchildren in New York City," Journal of Pediatrics, 42 no. 1 (January 1953), 65-74.
32. Chein et al., Road to H, p. 39.
33. Ibid., pp. 57-65.
34. Ibid., p. 73.
35. Testimony of Lt. Joseph J. Healy, Narcotics Bureau, Chicago Police Department, Daniel Hearings, p. 4,256.
36. Solomon Kobrin and Harold Finestone, Drug Addiction Among Young Persons in Chicago, A Report of a Study of the Prevalence, Incidence, Distribution and Character of Drug Use and Addiction in Chicago During the Years, 1947-53, in James F. Short, ed., Gang Deliquency and Delinquent Subcultures, New York: Harper & Row, 1968, p. 113.
37. Dr. Edward Kelleher, testimony given before a meeting of the Legislative Committee of the Chicago Crime Prevention Bureau, printed in Control of Narcotics, Marihuana and Barbiturates, Hearings before a Subcommittee of the Committee on Ways and Means, U.S. House of Representatives, 82nd Congress, 1st Session, April 1951, p. 100. This will be cited hereafter as Boggs Hearings.
38. Daniel Hearings, p. 4,238.
39. Daniel Hearings, pp. 4,295-96.
40. Testimony of Peter Grosso, assistant state's attorney for Cook County, Daniel Hearings, p. 4,297.
41. Daniel Hearings, p.4,252.
42. Ibid., pp. 4,247-48.
43. Kobrin and Finestone, p. 114.
44. Chein et al., p. 123.
45. Kobrin and Finestone, p. 115.
46. Daniel Hearings, p. 4,227.
47. Kobrin and Finestone, Drug Addiction, p. 115.
48. Report on Organized Crime, p. 146.
49. Ibid., p. 131.
50. Ibid., pp. 19, 63, 130, 148-49.
51. Ibid., p. 149.
52. Ibid., p. 147.
53. Boggs Hearings, p. 48.
54. Of all cases brought to court, the national conviction rate was 89 percent, imprisonment in 69 percent of all cases, and an average sentence of 21.9 months. In Louisiana (eastern division) the corresponding figures were 94 percent, 85 percent, and 24.7 months. From 1950 Narcotic Violations, data supplied by the Administrative Office of the United States Courts, Boggs Hearings, p. 109.
55. See testimony of Sheriff Frank J. Clancy, Hearings Before the Special Committee to Investigate Organized Crime in Interstate Commerce, U.S. Senate, 82nd Congress, 1st Session, Part 8 (Louisiana), January-February 1951, p. 413. Hereafter cited as Kefauver Hearings (Louisiana).
56. Ibid., p. 427.
57. Political Tendencies in Louisiana, pp. 280-87.
58. Report on Organized Crime, p. 128.
59. In the end he lost, but more successful was Senator Price Daniel, chairman of the Senate narcotics hearings in 1955. He ran for governor of Texas the year after the hearings and won.
60. Testimony of Mrs. Lois Higgins of the Crime Prevention Bureau, Chicago, Boggs Hearings, p. 104.
61. Testimony of Congressman Sidney R. Yates, ibid., p. 44; see also pp. 1, 46.
62. ,- Ibid., p. Ill.
63. Ibid., p. 206.
M. Ibid., p. 53.
65. Ibid., p. 59.
66. Ibid., p. 208.
67. The one exception occurs in the testimony of Dr. Harris Isbell, director of research at the Public Health Service hospital at Lexington: "in recent years the increase has been particularly bad among the colored population in the large cities in the East and Middle West," Boggs Hearings, p. 202.
68. Ibid., p. 203.
69. Daniel Hearings, pp. 657, 4,184; Treatment and Rehabilitation of Juvenile Drug Addicts, p.81.
70. Cf. testimony of FBN agent, James C. Ryan, in Daniel Hearings, p. 796.
71. Boggs Hearings, p. 56.
72. Report on Organized Crime, p. 149.
73. Ibid.
74. Ibid., p. 203.
75. Ibid., p. 84.
76. Text of Anslinger's remarks before Tenth Session of the UN Commission on Narcotic Drugs, April-May, 1955; reprinted in Traffic in and Control of Narcotics, Barbiturates and Amphetamines, Hearings before a subcommittee of the Committee on Ways and Means, U.S. House of Representatives, 84th Congress, October-December 1955, January 1956, pp. 200-203.
77. Daniel Hearings, pp. 205, 701, 771, 1,305.
78. Ibid., p. 205.
79. Testimony of Robert A. Neeb, Jr., in Treatment and Rehabilitation of Juvenile Drug Addicts, p. 8.
80. See Alfred W. McCoy et al., The Politics of Heroin in Southeast Asia, New York: Harper & Row, 1972.
81. Ibid., pp. 30-47.
82. See, for example, the case and testimony of Edward Y.T. Lin, Daniel Hearings, pp. 710-44. Lin was alleged to have been a Communist who organized a tong to cover heroin smuggling from Hong Kong.
83. Cited above as Traffic in and Control of Narcotics, Barbiturates and Amphetamines and Treatment and Rehabilitation of Juvenile Drug Addicts, respectively.
84. Copeland, "Narcotic Drug Evil," p. 1,707.
85. Even among the foreign-born white patients, the number of Jeits was over 45 percent-assuming that those listing their nationality as Russian or Rumanian were in all likelihood Jewish. See Hubbard, p. 1,720, and Lichtenstein (1914), p. 964.
86. Hubbard, "New York City Narcotic Clinic," p. 1,720.
87. Historical Statistics of the U.S., From Colonial Times to the Present, p. 66. Statistics cover the United States as a whole.
88. Paul S. Taylor, "Mexican Labor in the United States, Chicago and the Calumet Region," University of California Publications in Economics, 7, no. 2(1932), 40.
89. Ibid., pp. 42-43.
90. Cf. Gerald Rosenblum, Immigrant Workers, Their Impact on American Labor Radicalism, New York: Basic Books, 1972.
91. Cf. Tuttle on the latent functions of the YMCA and the Urban League from 1917, pp. 98-102.
92. Thomas Vietorisz and Bennett Harrison, "A Theory of Sub-employment and the Labor Market," paper presented to annual meeting of the American Economic Association, Toronto, December 1972, p. 5. Cf. Edna Bonacich, "A Theory of Ethnic Antagonism: The Split Labor Market," American Sociological Review, 37, no. 5 (October 1972), 549.
93. Vietorisz and Harrison, "Theory of Sub-employment," passim.
94. Frank G. Davis, "Problems of Economic Growth in the Black Community: Some Alternative Hypotheses," Review of Black Political Economy, 4, no. 1(1972), 75-107.
95. Ibid., pp. 94-97.
96. Note that this was not true in 1940. That year unemployment was very high, at 14.6 percent, and the labor force participation rate of teenagers (male) was at the wartime low of 35.4 percent. At the same time, drug arrests (FBI series) shot up nearly 130 percent.
97. Quoted by Bonnie and Whitebread, "Forbidden Fruit," pp. 1,009-10.
98. For a discussion of theories as to why this is so, see Edward Kalachek, "Determinants of Teenage Employment," Journal of Human Resources, 4, no. 1(1969), 3-4.
99. Robert I. Lerman, "Some Determinants of Youth School Activity," Journal of Human Resources, 7, no. 3 (1972). Also by the same author, "An Analysis of Youth Labor Force Participation, School Activity and Employment Rates, " Ph.D. thesis, MIT, 1970.
100. Youth Unemployment and Minimum Wages, U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics Bulletin No. 1657, Washington, D.C., 1970, pp. 4-29.
101. Historical Statistics, p. 71.
102. This describes the national situation. In New York and Chicago labor statistics for the period are not exactly comparable in age group. However, the evidence (for 16-26 year olds) clearly shows the same pattern—a rise in white participation and a decline in black.
103. A teenager cannot qualify for unemployment compensation unless he or she can show earnings of no less than $900 in the preceding 12 months. The only other option is welfare—either aid for dependent children or general relief—which is applied for and received by the individual's family. It is contingent not only on family cohesion and living together at this stage but on the individual's willingness to satisfy a complex system of registration and job search rules.
104. Another source of statistics on this, Youth Unemployment and Minimum Wages, p. 20, shows a steady increase in the gap between the black and white jobless rates between 1948 and 1951.
105. Ibid., p. 19.
106. In 1949 there were more black families than white in New York earning up to $2,499, up by a factor of two. The difference was only a little less in Chicago.
107. Youth Unemployment and Minimum Wages, pp. 104-105. The data is for 1967.
108. From Chein (see Table 5-3) we can see that adding a specific race variable to his multiple correlation of economic (class) factors with drug use adds a very small amount to the variance explained—about 7 percent for Manhattan and none at all in the Bronx and Brooklyn. Eisner, who analyzed juvenile delinquency in general in San Francisco during the 1960s, found that most changes in time between racial or ethnic groups and their delinquency rates were due to demographic changes. See Victor
Eisner, The Delinquency Label: The Epidemiology of Juvenile Delinquency, New York: Random House, 1970.

CHAPTER 6. VIETNAM

1. Traffic in and Control of Narcotics, Barbiturates and Amphetamines (October 1955-January 1956), P. 88.
2. Provisions of this kind were held unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court in Robinson v. California, 1963.
3. Traffic in and Control of Narcotics, Barbiturates and Amphetamines, p. 1,230.
4. Ibid., pp. 89-100.
5. Ibid., p. 1,229.
6. Ibid., p. 1,230.
7. Ibid., p. 158.
8. The text of the original bill and related resolutions is printed at the beginning of the hearings document, ibid., pp. 3-21.
An important but often overlooked provision in the legislation when it was first introduced was that it ordered a complete overhaul of the Bureau of Narcotics and substantially expanded its operating powers. The overhaul was planned under congressional authorization to transfer the organization from the Treasury Department, where it had been since the Harrison Act of 1914, to the Department of Justice. Undoubtedly this was looked for by Commissioner Anslinger in order to raise the status and appropriations of his unit on a par with the FBI. This was not just a matter of status and prestige but of manpower, money, and a degree of bureaucratic independence which the Bureau of Narcotics did not have in the Treasury where historically it had been overshadowed (and outreached at budget time), first by the Bureau of Prohibition and then by the Internal Revenue Service and Customs units.
Additional powers proposed for the federal narcotic agents by the legislation included the power to subpoena witnesses and records and to issue and execute search warrants, together with the right to carry firearms and make arrests without warrants so long as the agents had "reasonable grounds" for suspecting an offense had been committed. This last represented a big step in allowing the FBN to operate exactly as it wished, and in the reports on the legislation submitted to Congress by various departmental officials, no objections to this were raised on legal or any other grounds.
However, Justice, Treasury, and other agency representatives were united in opposing the transfer of the bureau. As Chapman Ross, the acting Treasury secretary, wrote in his report, "the federal narcotic laws are primarily revenue rather than police measures and the agency which administers them should be in the same department as the revenue agency" (ibid., p. 16). This pointed up the fragile constitutional nature of the entire federal system of narcotics policy, which was indeed based on revenue or tax measures in the case of both the standard narcotics and marijuana. These, of course, had been written that way in order to provide the government with real police powers while sidestepping the big constitutional issue of whether self-administered, voluntary use of such drugs amounted to a crime.
To his superiors Commissioner Anslinger's ambitions looked likely to blow the cover on a legal subterfuge which had secured the government's drug legislation from the beginning.
This was just one of the chronic dilemmas confronting the policy makers on the drug issue. The legal rationale for a powerful police apparatus virtually denied that that was what it was, and the rationale for progressively increasing its powers, as had occurred at the end of each of the episodes we have looked at, was that the drug problem was getting out of hand. But since increased statutory power, as well as manpower, can result in increased arrest totals, and since the size of the addict population is figured from these, the problem may only seem to get worse, and a vicious cycle results. An improvement, as reportedly occurred in the late 1930s and early 1940s, can do the police organization no good either, for it is threatened with cutbacks appropriate to the diminished need for enforcement. Precisely this threat had faced the Bureau of Narcotics at the end of the war until Anslinger, with the help of Senator Kefauver and Congressman Boggs, was able to mobilize new public concern.
In any event, the plan to move the Bureau of Narcotics was dropped before the bill went to a vote. The loss was not complete, however, for the expanded powers passed intact.
Twelve years later, in 1968, the reorganization plan was finally implemented, the old Bureau of Narcotics becoming the Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs (BNDD) within the Justice Department. The Treasury retained a portion of its old sovereignty by keeping Customs on the track of drug smuggling (i.e., almost the whole of the drug traffic), and a situation of intense interorganizational rivalry arose between the two units and departments in this area. For a description of this see John Rothchild and Tom Ricketts, "The American Connection," Washington Monthly, 4, no. 4 (June 1972), 33-44.
The Nixon Administrion's contribution to this bureaucratic evolution was, first of all, to bypass the existing authorities and create the brand new executive agency, the Special Action Office for Drug Abuse Prevention (SAODAP), which had great policy powers by virtue of the enormous appropriations at its disposal but no enforcement authority as such. Subsequently the President proposed to eliminate interagency competition and facilitate more centralized control of the burgeoning police apparatus by amalgamating all units into a single agency to be known as the Drug Enforcement Administration. In departmental terms, victory went to Justice, under which the new unit will operate.
9. Narcotics Research, Rehabilitation and Treatment, Hearings before the Select Committee on Crime, House of Representatives, 92nd Congress, 1st Sess. (April 1971), p. 1 (hereafter cited as Pepper Hearings). For a survey of Congressional testimony on the amphetamine, barbiturate, LSD, and heroin epidemics during the 1960s, see Rufus King, The Drug Hang-Up, America's Fifty-Year Folly, New York, Norton, 1972, pp. 247-322.
10. Youth Unemployment and Minimum Wages, pp. 19-20.
11. The Employment Situation: January 1973, release from Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor, Washington, D.C., February 2, 1973, Table A-6.
12. Bureau of the Census, Employment Profiles of Selected Low-Income Areas—New York, N.Y.—All Survey Areas, PHC[3]-2, Washington, D.C., 1972, pp. 3, 5.
13. Employment Profiles of Selected Low-Income Areas—United States Summary, PHC[31-1, pp. 145-47.
14. Frank G. Davis, "Problems of Economic Growth in the Black Community, Some Alternative Hypotheses," Review of Black Political Economy, 4, no. 1(1972), pp. 85ff.
15. R. Levengood, P. Lowinger, and K. Schooff, "Heroin Epidemics in the Suburbs: An Epidemiological Study," paper presented at 99th Annual Meeting, American Public Health Association, Minneapolis, 1971. Also P. Kroll, P. Diamond, and K. Schooff, "Psychodynamics of a Gr9up of Middle Class Heroin Addicts from a Suburban Community," addendum 3, vol. 2, Committee on Problems of Drug Dependence, Washington, D.C., National Academy of Sciences, 1971.
16. Statement of Howard A. Jones, chairman of the New York State Narcotic Addiction Control Commission, Pepper Hearings, p. 581; Patricia M. Wald et al., Dealing with Drug Abuse: A Report to the Ford Foundation, New York: Praeger, 1972, p. 4.
17. Narcotic Addiction Control Commission (NACC), State of New York, First Annual Statistical Report—For the Fiscal Yar Ended March 31, 1968, Albany: NACC, 1968, pp. 81, 86.
18. NACC. Fourth Annual Statistical Report, Albany: NACC, May 1971, p. 132.
19. Carl D. Chambers, An Assessment of Drug Use in the General Population, Special Report No. 1, Drug Use in New York State, Albany: NACC, May 1971, p. 132.
20. S. Dana Hubbard, "The New York City Narcotic Clinic and Differing Points of View on Narcotic Addiction," reprinted in Daniel Hearings, p. 1,720.
21. David H. Nurco et al., "Drug Abuse Known to the Maryland Psychiatric Case Register," in vol. 1, Committee on Problems of Drug Dependence, Washington, D.C.: National Academy of Sciences, 1971, pp. 901-48.
22. NACC Report, 1968, p. 44.
23. Chambers, Assessment of Drug Use, p. 132.
24. Ursula M. von Eckhardt, "Cultural Factors in Heroin Addiction in Puerto Rico," paper presented at 17th Winter Meeting, American Academy of Psychoanalysis, New York, December 1972, p. 5.
25. NACC Report, 1968, p. ix. The general distribution of the two Puerto Rican racial categories in the sections of New York surveyed by the Census in its low-income area analyses in 1970 was 80.4 percent white and 19.6 percent black.
26. For detailed data see two reports from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor: Labor Force Experience of the Puerto Rican Worker, Regional Reports No. 9 (June 1968); The New York Puerto Rican: Patterns of Work Experience, Regional Reports No. 19 (May 1971); both were published by the Middle Atlantic Regional Office, New York.
27. Employment Profiles of Selected Low-Income Areas—New York, p. 5.
28. Similar findings have been reported from both Washington, D.C. and Boston.
29. Addiction Services Agency, City of New York, A Plan to Rehabilitate Addicted and Drug-Abusing Veterans in New York City (November 1971), p. 40.
30. Addiction Services Agency, Ambulatory Detoxification Program, Program Report (preliminary) (April 25, 1972); supplied by Alan J. Gibbs, Department of Health, New York.
31. Plan to Rehabilitate, p. 40.
32. Nicholas J. Kozel, et al., "Narcotics and Crime: A Study of Narcotic Involvement in an Offender Population," International Journal of the Addictions, 7, 3 (1972), p. 445.
33. John Helmer, Bringing the War Home: The American Soldier in Vietnam and After, New York: Free Press, 1974, p. 82.
34. Ibid., p. 87.
35. Vernon D. Patch et al., "Vietnam Heroin Addicts in Boston," Proceedings, Fourth National Conference on Methadone Treatment, Washington, D.C.: National Institute of Mental Health, 1971.
36. Profile of Drug Abusers in Vietnam, release of Department of Defense, Office for Health and Environment (December 1971). The benchmarks against which these percentages should be compared are themselves difficult to establish. One source of figures has estimated there to have been 11.7 percent blacks among army men assigned to Southeast Asia in the first six months of 1968; 10.5 percent in the armed forces altogether (Charles C. Moskos, Jr., The American Enlisted Man, New York: Russell Sage, 1970, p. 218). This includes all ranks, unfortunately, and the available racial breakdown by rank or pay grade does not count Vietnam or Southeast Asian assignees separately. In 1967 blacks made up 12.1 percent of all army enlisted men (from grades E-1 through E-9) (Moskos, American Enlisted Man, p. 215). On the other hand, blacks were much more numerous in the combat arms. In 1967, 28.6 percent of enlisted personnel in these arms were black (Moskos, ibid., p. 216). According to Veterans' Administration data, whites make up 84 percent of all Vietnam era veterans (all personnel serving after August 5, 1964); blacks, 11 percent (Louis Harris et al., A Study of Problems Facing Vietnam Era Veterans: Their Readjustment to Civilian Life, Washington, D.C., 1971, p. 265).
37. Fact Sheet to Commanding General, U.S. Army Support Command, Saigon, 27 September 1971, concerning command-wide attitude survey of 530 lower-ranking EM; unpublished document made available by Capt. J.E. Engstrom, retired, former SSC Command Drug Control Officer.
38. Letter from J.A. McIntyre, Director, Reports and Statistics Service, Veterans' Administration, March 20, 1972.
39. Lee N. Robins et al., A Follow-up of Vietnam Drug Users, Interim Final Report, Washington, D.C.: Special Action Office for Drug Abuse Prevention, Monograph Sec. A, no. 1 (April 1973), p. 8; also, Lee N. Robins et al., The Vietnam Drug User Returns, Final Report (same place, same issuing authority, May 1974).
40. From statistics supplied by the Veterans' Administration (Reports and Statistics Service).
41. Both the prewar Japanese and Communist Chinese regimes have had unusual success in eliminating the use of opiates in their societies. Field reports also indicate that the North Vietnamese and N.L.F. forces rarely used opiates or marijuana during the Vietnam War.
42. Thomas Flemming, The Forgotten Victory—The Battle for New Jersey, n.p., n.d., quoted in New York Times, August 30, 1973, p. 37.
43. Charles E. Terry and Mildred Pellens, The Opium Problem, New York: Bureau of Social Hygiene, 1928, p. 69.
44. Figures provided by Hamilton Wright in Report on the Opium Commission . . . (1910), pp. 81-83.
45. E.G. Eberle, "Report of Committee on Acquirement of Drug Habits," American Journal of Pharmacology (October 1903); quoted by Terry and Pellens, Opium Problem, pp. 23-24.
46. R.M. Blanchard, "Heroin and Soldiers," Military Surgeon, 33, no. 2 (August 1913), 142.
47. Cf. King, "The Use of Habit-Forming Drugs (Cocaine, Opium and Its Derivatives) by Enlisted Men: A Report Based on the Work Done at the United States Disciplinary Barracks," Military Surgeon, 39 (1916), 277.
48. W.B. Meister, "Cocainism in the Army," Military Surgeon, 34, no. 4 (April 1914), 348.
49. King, "Use of Habit-Forming Drugs," pp. 273-74.
50. Pearce Bailey, "Nervous and Mental Disease in United States Troops," Medical Progress, 36, no. 416 (September 1920), pp. 193-97.
51. J.F. Siler, "Marijuana Smoking in Panama," Military Surgeon, 73, no. 5 (November 1933), 269-70.
52. Ibid., p. 274.
53. Ibid., p. 275.
54. Ibid., p. 280.
55. The typical use of these quasi-psychiatric labels to refer to working-class drug-users (delinquents, criminals, etc.) has been noted. One study of "mental deficiency" among World War I servicemen found a close correlation between psychopathology, the prevalence of "morons," and such typical class indices as educational attainment, occupation, immigration status, and race (large black representation). See Pearce Bailey and Roy Haber, "Mental Deficiency," Mental Hygiene, 4, no. 3 (July 1920), 589ff.
56. Siler, "Marijuana Smoking in Panama," pp. 277-78.
57. Ibid., p. 279.
58. "The Marihuana Bugaboo," editorial, Military Surgeon, 93, no. 1 (July 1943), 94-95.
59. H.L. Freedman and M.J. Rockmore, "Marihuana: A Factor in Personality Evaluation and Army Maladjustment," Journal of Clinical Psychopathology, 7, no. 2 (1946), 765-82; and 8, no. 1(1947), 221-36.
60. Eli Marcovitz and Henry J. Meyers, "The Marihuana Addict in the Army," War Medicine, 6, no. 6 (December 1944), 387.
61. D. B. Davis et al., "Absence Without Leave," War Medicine, 7, no. 2, (1945), 145-51.
62. A.C. Cornsweet and B. Locke, "Alcohol as a Factor in Naval Delinquency," U.S. Navy Medical Bulletin, 46 (1946), 1,690-95.
63. See note 59.
64. Daniel Hearings, pp. 224-27.
65. Data for 1953-54 only. Other reports put the percentage of blacks at 78. See Daniel Hearings, pp. 176, 224-27.
66. Ibid., pp. 176-77.
67. Testimony of Major General William H. Maglin, Army Provost General, and Lt. Colonel George C. Williams, in Traffic in and Control of Narcotics, Barbiturates and Amphetamines, p. 1,092.
68. Ibid., pp. 1,090, 1,092.
69. Ibid., p. 1,093.
70. Alfred W. McCoy et al., The Politics of Heroin in Southeast Asia, New York: Harper & Row, 1972, pp. 72-75. This is the best book to date on the drug trade.
71. Raw opium is obtained from a variety of poppy plant by extracting and drying its juice. By boiling this to 143°F, a derivative alkaloid, morphine, can be collected as the condensation. This much is easy. The morphine is then treated with acetic acid to obtain heroin, which is about three times more potent than morphine. The use of other chemical reagents has been developed for refining to grades of extremely high purity and potency. The last stage is the dangerous one and requires skill in handling.
72. McCoy, Politics of Heroin, pp. 75, 183.
73. Report concerning command-wide attitude survey of 570 lower-ranking Ems, (results, p. 3).
74. New York Times, May 16, 1971, p. 1.
75. Allen H. Fisher, Jr., Preliminary Findings from the 1971 Department of Defense Survey of Drug Use, Human Resources Research Organization (HumRRO) Technical Report #72-8 (March 1972).
76. New York Times, April 24, 1973, p. 1, reporting on the release of Robins et al., A Follow-Up of Vietnam Drug Users (see note 39 above).
77. As reported in Staff Report on Drug Abuse in the Military, Report of the Subcommittee on Drug Abuse of the Senate Committee on Armed Services, 92nd Congress, 1st Sess. (1971), p. 8. Also, Alfred V. McCoy et al., The Politics of Heroin in Southeast Asia, New York: Harper & Row, 1972, p. 181.
78. The Army Provost Marshal reported from Saigon in 1971 that North Vietnamese opium cultivation was strictly for the production of morphine for medical purposes: "the Drug Abuse Problem in Vietnam," U.S. Military Assistance Command Vietnam, quoted by McCoy, Politics of Heroin, p. 182.
79. Ibid., pp. I85ff.
80. Ibid., p. 184.
81. See C. R. Sanders, "Doper's Wonderland: Functional Drug Use by Military Personnel in Vietnam," Journal of Drug Issues, 3, 1 (Winter 1973), pp. 65-78; John Helmer, Bringing the War Home: The American Soldier in Vietnam and After (New York: The Free Press, 1974), pp. 76-77.
82. Robins, The Vietnam Drug User Returns, p. 25.
83. Ibid. p. 38; Larry H. Ingraham, "'The Nam' and 'The World', Heroin Use by U.S. Army Enlisted Men Serving in Vietnam," Psychiatry, 37, I (May 1974), 121-22; M.A. Farber, "Veterans Still Fight Vietnam Drug Habits," New York Times, June 2, 1974, p. 1.
84. Robins, Vietnam Drug User Returns, p. 33.
85. "Here I must emphasize that the Vietnam War was planned by college-educated and relatively affluent Americans in Washington and fought in the field by the less educated, the economically disadvantaged, and the poor. For no other war in our history can it be said that the American Army was a poor man's army and that this was so by design"; Helmer, Bringing the War Home, pp. 9-10.
86. Harvey Feldman, "The Sheet System, Drugs and Military Service," in Andrew Swenson, ed., Confronting Drug Abuse, Philadelphia: Pilgrim Press, 1972; Vernon Patch, personal communication, January 24, 1972.
87. The same finding has been noted by Norman Zinberg, "Rehabilitation of Heroin Users in Vietnam," unpub. ms., 1971, p. 6.
88. Helmer, Bringing the War Home, pp. 328-30.
89. Engstrom, Fact Sheet, p. 5.
90. A revised text is in Journal of Drug Issues, 4, 1 (Winter 1974), 11-31. See also the text for Wilbur's Press Conference, releasing the Interim Final Report by Robins, April 23, 1973, p. 11, and the departmental news release of the same date.
91. New York Times, June 2, 1974, p. 1.
92. See Helmer, Bringing the War Home, p. 184.
93. Robins, Vietnam Drug User Returns, p. 42.
94. Ibid., p. 38.
95. Ibid., p. 40.
96. For a complementary account of the heads and juicers, see Ingraham, Walter Reed Army Institute of Research, pp. 124-28.
97. Zinberg, p. 6; Ingraham, p. 119.
98. New York Times, June 2, 1974, P. 1.
99. Richard G. Wilbur, Text for Press Conference, Apri123, 1973, pp. 11-12.
100. Helmer, Bringing the War Home, p. 84.
101. Ibid.
102. Robins, Vietnam Drug User Returns, p. 80.
103. Ibid., p. 80.
104. Hearings of the Subcommittee on Drug Abuse, Committee on Armed Services, U.S. Senate, 92nd Congress, 2nd Sess: (June 1972), pp. 5ff.
105. Robins, Vietnam Drug User Returns, pp. 35, 36, 61.
106. Ibid., p. 67.
107. Senator Alan Cranston, "Legislative Approaches to Addiction Among Veterans: The Nation's Unmet Moral Responsibility," Journal of Drug Issues, 4, 1 (Winter 1974), 1-10.
108. New York Times, June 2, 1974, p. 1. For corroboration see Paul Starr et al., Epilog to Vietnam, New York: Charterhouse, 1974.
109. Robins, Vietnam Drug User Returns, pp. 93-94.
110. Ibid., pp. 57, 79.
111. Separations from the Armed Forces of Veterans Who Served in the Vietnam Theater of Operations, Office of Controller, Veterans' Administration, April 11, 1972. The total for 1971 was 560,000.
112. The Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health and Environment was an M.D. and occupied his Pentagon office while on leave from his permanent job as deputy executive vice-president of the AMA.

CHAPTER 7. DRUGS AND CLASS CONFLICT

1. News item from the Badger State Banner (Wisconsin), April 2, 1885; quoted by Michael Lesy, Wisconsin Death Trip, New York: Pantheon Books, 1973, n.p.
2. New York Times, August 1, 1914, p. 16.
3. Denver Post (Colorado), April 17, 1929, p. 2, quoted by Richard J. Bonnie and Charles H. Whitebread H, "The Forbidden Fruit and the Tree of Knowledge: An Inquiry into the Legal History of American Marijuana Prohibition," Virginia Law Review, 56, 6 (October 1970), p. 1,015.
4. From Nelson Algren, The Man with the Golden Arm, New York: Pocket Books, 1951, p. 79.
5. Helmer, Bringing the War Home: The American Soldier in Vietnam and After, New York: Free Press, 1974, pp. 205-6.
6. See Robert P. Bomboy, Major Newspaper Coverage of Drug Issues, Washington, D.C.: Drug Abuse Council, 1974, p. 2.
7. Thus, from the judicial opinion in an 1890 case:
Smoking or inhaling opium injures the health of the individual, and in this way weakens the state . . . it tends to the increase of pauperism . . . it destroys the moral sentiment and leads to the commission of crime. In other words . . . it has an injurious effect upon the individual, and, consequently, results indirectly in an injury to the community.
(Quoted by Bonnie and Whitebread, "Forbidden Fruit," p. 1,004.) From the Chairman of the National Advisory Commission on Drug Abuse Prevention, 1972:
A society is therefore unworthy if it permits, or is indifferent to, any activity that renders its members inhuman or deprives them of their essential (or "natural") capacities to judge, choose, and act. If heroin use is such an activity, then its use should be proscribed.
James Q. Wilson et al., "The Problem of Heroin," The Public Interest, no. 29 (Fall 1972), 7.
8. For a broad review of and full bibliographical references to the literature, see John H. McGrath III, "A Comparative Study of Adolescent Drug Users, Assaulters, and Auto Thieves, New Brunswick: Department of Sociology, Rutgers Univ., Ph.D. diss., 1967, pp. 1-44. Also, Richard H. Blum, ed., "Origins of Drug Use and Drug Problems: Fact, Theory and Implications for Public Action, Washington, D.C.: Special Action Office for Drug Abuse Prevention, unpub. doc., 1972, part 4.
9. Ibid., p. 14.
10. McGrath, "Comparative Study," p. 8.
11. Isidor Chein et al., The Road to H: Narcotics, Delinquency and Social Policy, New York: Basic Books, 1964, p. 255.
12. See, inter alia, Percy Mason, "The Mother of the Addict," Psychiatric Quarterly Supplement, 32 (1958), 189-99; C. M. Rosenberg, "Determinants of Psychiatric Illness in Young People," British Journal of Psychiatry, 115 (1969), 907-15; McGrath, "Comparative Study," p. 7. For a general review of the literature, see David Paul Leeds, "Personality Patterns and Modes of Behavior of Male Adolescent Narcotic Addicts and Their Mothers, Yeshiva University, Ph.D. diss., 1965, pp. 20-53; Robert S. Lee, "The Family of the Addict: A Comparison of the Family Experiences of Male Juvenile Heroin Addicts and Controls," New York University, Ph.D. diss., 1960.
13. See, for example, Chein et al., Road to H, pp. 256-65.
14. Conalee Levine, "A Comparison of the Conscious and Unconscious Identification with Both Parental Figures among Addicted and Non-Addicted Male Adolescent Character Disorders," New York University, Ph.D. diss., 1959.
15. Leeds, "Personality Patterns," p. 242.
16. George D. Jackson, "Personality Characteristics of Narcotics Users," New York University, Ph.D. diss., 1970.
17. McGrath, "Comparative Study," 98, 190, 192, 222.
18. Ibid., p. 208.
19. Ibid., p. 209.
20. From the report in the New York Times, January 21, 1914, p. 3.
21. See Rufus King, The Drug Hang-Up, America's Fifty-Year Folly, New York: Norton, 1972, p. 52.
22. This is the key to the comparison at the most general level between those who use narcotics and those who do not, which is roughly all the difference public policy and the law have essentially been concerned with. That users differ among themselves is not to be denied; indeed, the analysis of this will take up a full and subsequent book. But see, for example, Zinberg and Jacobson, The Social Basis of Drug Abuse Prevention Washington, D.C.: The Drug Abuse Council, 1974; Patrick H. Hughes et al., "The Social Structure of a Heroin Copping Community," American Journal of Psychiatry, 128, 5 (November 1971), 551-58; Peter Albin, John Helmer, Thomas Vietorisz, et al., Labor Markets and Drug Involvement, research „proposal submitted to the National Institute of Mental Health, Center for Studies on Narcotic Addiction and Drug Abuse (May 1974).
23. "On the General Features and the Medical Aspects of the Opium Habit in India," Memorandum I, Royal Commission on Opium, part 1, vol. 6, London: HMSO, 1895.
24. The initial announcement and supporting papers were released on May 10, 1972. See New York Times, May 11, 1972.
25. Cf. Edward Jay Epstein, "Methadone: the forlorn hope," The Public Interest, no. 36 (Summer 1974), 3-24.

Last Updated on Tuesday, 21 February 2012 22:02
 

Our valuable member John Helmer has been with us since Tuesday, 21 February 2012.

Show Other Articles Of This Author