The
Online Reefer Madness Teaching Museum
Marijuana Tax Act of 1937
TAXATION
OF MARIHUANA
Hearings
Before the
Committee on Ways
and Means
House
of Representatives
Seventy-fifth
Congress
First
Session on
H.R.
6385
April
27-30, and May 4, 1937
SECTION
1 SECTION
2 SECTION
3 SECTION
4 SECTION
5
Answers
to Marihuana Questionnaire by Dr. W. L. Treadway Division of Mental Hygiene
Public Health Service
Additional
Statement of Clinton M. Hester
Statement
of Dr. James C. Munch, Pharmacologist, Temple University
Statement
of Herbert J. Wollner, Consulting Chemist, Office of the Secretary of the
Treasury
Answers
to Marihuana Questionnaire
by
Dr. W. L. Treadway
Division
of Mental Hygeine
Public
Health Service
1.
Cannabin. Contained in the resin produced by the female pistillate plant of
Indian hemp.
2.
Cannabin is considered as the active principle. Any active principle, may be
curtailed by other substances which, in themselves, are inert, or it may be
enhanced, but I do not know of any substance in hemp which activates Cannabinis
regarded as the active principle or substance. You may have a drug which has a
specific physiological action but that drug may be enhanced by the addition of
some other substance which, in itself, is probably inert. For example, take
calomel combined with soda -- you would enhance the action of the calomel by the
presence of that alkali.
3.
It occurs largely in the resin that is found in the flowers of the tops of the
pistillate plant. It also occurs in small quantities in the smaller leaves of
the tops of the plant and, possibly, to a slight extent, in the fresh or young
stalk of the plant.
4.
In the seed.
5.
I do not know. That would depend upon further experimentation. I do not think it
woud be practical, from a commercial standpoint, to attempt to get any
considerable yield from any part of the plant other than the resin. It would
involve great technical knowledge to make it commercially possible in terms of
contraband trade. The small quantitiess in the leaves and stalks would hardly be
sufficient to warrant anyone going to the trouble to get a satisfacgtory yield
from it. In other words, it may be technically possible but it would be
impractical.
6.
That is a moot point. I think it is most generally accepted, however, that the
resin from the female plant conains the largest amount of Cannabin..
7.
Yes. Top leavews and resin dried and kept for from a year to eighteen months
becomes practically inert. It loses the strength rapidly. This is also true of
the fluid extract of Cannabis. It tends to become inert, or lose its
physiological strength.
8.
Yes, if kept in dry storage for a long time it deteriorates.
9.
Hemp fiber has almost been replaced by cotton because it can be produced cheaper
(clothing, etc.) It is also cultured for rope but has been replaced by Sesseli,
of the Cactus family, and Abacca fiber, grown in the Philippine Islands, both of
which are more desirable for rope and cheaper. Sesseli is the more desirable of
these two.
10.
It is difficult to say whether the seed in its early development or in its
embryonic form, may be contaminated by the presence of this resin. The resin
acts as a medium for the collection of pollen. The seed does not contain the
active principle of Cannabin.
Theoretically,
and from the standpoint of tradition, hemp seed is included in bird seed --
probably because of the idea that it did contain this resin and make the birds
peppy.
11.
I suppose you could pinch off the tops of the plants but it would have to be
done two or three times for, after each pruning, theyy would produce another
series of buds. Like chrysanthemums, after each pruning, they would probably
make an extra effort to produce more fruit and, while this pruning would
probably temporarily stop the production of ths deleterious substance it would
eventually enhance and increase it.
12.
I do not know.
13.
It has been employed since about 500 B.C. for its sedative action. The principle
pharmaceutiical product is the fluid extract but it is very rarely used now in
medicine because there are so many more desirable hypnotics. It is used,
however, as an
analgesic
in corm plaster. From the standpoint of the Pharmacopoeia, it has been in each
revision, but in talking with some of the men interested in the new revision
they question whether it is desirable to continue including it.
14.
Cannabis Indica does not produce a dependence such as in opium addiction. In
opiium addiction there is a complete dependence and when it is withdrawn there
is actual physical pain which is not the case witth Cannabis. Alcohol more
nearly produces the same effect as Cannabis in that there is an excitement or
ageneral feelingg of lifting of personality, followed by a delirious stage, and
a subsequent narcosis. There is no dependence or increased tolerance such as in
opium addiction. As to the social or moral degradation associated with Cannabis
it probably belongs in the same category as alcohol. As with alcohol, it may be
taken a relatively long time without social or emotional breakdown. Marihuana is
habit-forming, altthough not addicting, in the same sense as alcohol might be
with some people, or sugar, or coffee. Marihuana produces a delerium with a
frenzy which might result in violence; but this is also true of alcohol.
Additional
Statement of Clinton M. Hester
Taxation
of Marihuana
Wednesday,
April 28, 1937
House
of Representatives
Comittee
on Ways and Means
Washington,
DC
Additional
Statement of Clinton M. Hester, Assistant General Counsel, Office of General
Counsel for the Department of the Treasury.
MR.
HESTER: Mr. Chairman, I prepared last evening a brief summary of the effect of
the marihuana bill upon legitimate industry which I thought would be of interest
to the committee.
MR.
CULLEN: If there is no objection, the statement referred to will be inserted in
the record.
MR.
HESTER: The statement I have referred to is as follows
All
legitimate users of marihuana are exempted from the provisions of this bill
which imposes taxes upon transfers of marihuana and require such transfers to be
made on order forms obtained from the collector of internal revenue, except
purchasers of marihuana seeds for use in the making of bird seed, or marihuana
seeds as bird see, and purchasers of the flowering tops and leaves of marihuana
for use in the making of the refined drug product.
These
legitimate users of marihuana who are exempted from these transfer taces and
order form requirements, are purchasers of the mature stalk of marihuana for use
in the making of fiber products such as twine, purchasers of marihuana seed for
the further
planting
of marihuana and the manufacture of oil, and purchasers of such oil for use in
the manufacture of paints and varnishes.
Although
all of the above manufacturers or dealers who use marihuana are exempted from
the transfer tax and order form provisions of the bill (with exceptions noted),
they are, nevertheless, required to pay occupational taxes and register with the
collector of internal revenue, with two exception: Dealers in paint and varnish
which contains marihuana; and manufacturers of and dealers in fiber products
manufactured from the mature stock of marihuana. Likewise, all producers of
marihuana, whether they grow marihuana for hemp fiber, for seeds, or for the
drug, must register as producers and pay the occupational tax.
I.
Hemp. Since the definition of marihuana in the bill excludes the mature stalk of
the plant and any product or manufacture of such stalk such as twine, all hemp,
fiber, or cordage manufacturers and dealers would not be subject to any
provision of the bill.
It
is possible too safely exclude all such persons from the purview of the bill
because the mature stalk does not contain any of the harmful drug ingredient.
However, any person who grows marihuana, even if for the sole purpose of sale to
a hemp manufacturer, would have to pay an occupations tax as a producer. the
reason for this is that such production cannot be limited to the mature stalks
of such plant since the stalk cannot be grown without also producing the
flowering tops and leaves. Unless the legitimate producer transfers the tops and
leaves to a drug manufacturer, his product will not be subject to a transfer tax
for the flowering tops and leaves are removed from the mature stalk and left on
the field.
II.
Marihuana seed for planting purposes. - All persons who produce marihuana for
seeds must pay the occupational tax as producers, but all transfers of marihuana
seeds to persons registered as producers for use by such persons for the further
production of marihuana are exempted from the transfer tax and order form
provisions of the bill.
III.
Marihuana as used in the pain and varnish industry.
It
appears that there is some use of marihuana seeds for the production of oil
which is sold to paint and varnish manufacturers, to be used as a constituent of
their products. The bill requires manufacturers and importers of oil, paint, and
varnish dealers in oil, to pay occupational taxes but exempts from occupational
taxes dealers in paints or varnishes.
The
reason why manufacturers and importers must pay the occupational tax and
register is that they will have raw marihuana in their possession and the reason
why their products are exempt is because the drug cannot be extracted from the
products. However, paint and varnish and the oil to be used in paint and varnish
would be exempted from the transfer tax. Thus, a transfer of seed from a
marihuana producer to a registered oil manufacturer would be exempted as would a
transfer of the manufactured oil to a registered paint manufacturer and a
transfer off the completed paint or varnish to a dealer or by a dealer to the
consumer.
IV.
Marijuana for medicinal use. All persons who produce, manufacture, import, or
deal in marihuana, or its byproducts for medical use, as well as practitioners,
would be compelled by the bill to pay occupational taxes. All transfers to
manufacturing chemists, druggists, and practitioners, would be subject to the
transfer tax and order form requirement but, such persons all being entitled to
registry, the transfer tax would amount to only one dollar per ounce. The final
dispensation by a practitioner to a patient in the course of his professional
practice or by druggists to the patients of such practitioners in pursuance of a
written prescription would, however, be exempted from the transfer tax and order
form provisions. Incidentally, it appears that the marihuana drug is not
indispensable to the medical profession.
V.
Bird seed. Since marihuana bird seed contains the drug and is capable of being
used by human beings for smoking purposes, and since, if negligently disposed
of, it propagates new marihuana very rapidly, all occupational and transfer
taxes imposed by
the
bill are applicable with respect to bird seed containing marihuana. Since the
ultimate purchaser of the bird seed could not register under the bill, a
transfer to him would be subject to the prohibitive $100 tax. thus the effect of
the bill is to prevent the use of marihuana seed in bird seed.
MR.
CULLEN: Who is your next witness, Mr. Hester?
MR.
HESTER: Mr. Chairman, I would like the committee now to hear Dr. Munch, a
pharmacologist, from Temple University, Philadelphia.
MR.
CULLEN: Will you give the reporter your full name and the position you occupy?
STATEMENT
OF DR. JAMES C. MUNCH,
PHARMACOLOGIST,
TEMPLE UNIVERSITY,
PHILADELPHA,
PA.
DR.
MUNCH: Mr. Chairman, my name is Dr. James C. Munch; I am a pharmacologist at
Temple University, Philadelphia.
MR.
MCCORMACK: Will you tell us about your education and professional background?
DR.
MUNCH: I am a doctor of philosophy. I have majored in toxicology (the action of
poisons) and in pharmacology (the action of drugs on animals and on man.)
I
was for ten years connected with the Food and Drug Administration, during part
of which time I was in charge of the pharmacology laboratory there. I am still a
consulting pharmacologist for the Bureau of Biological Survey of the United
States Department of Agriculture. I am also professor of physiology and
pharmacology in the School of Pharmacology, Temple University, Philadelphia. I
was the director of pharmacological research for Sharp and Dohme; at present I
am in charge of tests and standards, John Wyeth & Bros., Philadelphia Pa.
MR.
MCCORMACK: You are a graduate of what college?
DR.
MUNCH: Of George Washington University.
MR.
MCCORMACK: When?
DR.
MUNCH: In 1924.
MR.
MCCORMACK: Are you connected with the Government in any way?
DR.
MUNCH: I am consulting pharmacologist for the Bureau of Biological Survey in the
Department of Agriculture. I have also been interested in the work of the
Narcotics Bureau, particularly in the detection of the doping of racehorses, and
in subjects of
that
type.
MR.
MCCORMACK: That is a rather interesting study by itself.
DR.
MUNCH: I find it so.
MR.
CULLEN: You may proceed with your statement.
Dr.
MUNCH: In connection with my studies of Cannabis, or marihuana, I have followed
its effects on animals and also, so far as possible, its effects upon humans. I
find that the doses which are capable of producing effects may be very nearly
poisonous
doses;
that is to say, small doses have little effect.
The
effect is directed first at the hind brain, or the cerebellum, leading to a
disturbance of the equilibrium, so that a man will go temporarily into a state
resembling alcoholism. Larger doses tend to depress the heart.
Continuous
use will tend to cause the degeneration of one part of the brain, that part that
is useful for higher or physic reasoning, of the memory. Functions of that type
are localized in the cerebral cortex of the brain. Those are the disturbing and
harmful
effects
that follow continued exposure to marihuana.
I
have found the active material lodged in male plants as well as female plants.
There
are no chemical methods of standardization of this variable drug.
In
1910, 1920, and 1930 the United States Pharmacopoeia revision committee, the
committee that is charges with drafting standards for drugs, considered those
methods of standardization in great detail.
In
1910, the method of standardization by producing an effect upon dogs was
introduced as the official method of standardization in an attempt to get a more
uniform drug to use in medicine.
First,
small doses of the matieral to be standardized are given the dogs and then
larger doses until we find the dose that produce an effect. I have found in
studying the action on dogs that only abut 1 dog in 300 is very sensitive to the
text. The effects on dogs are extremely variable, although they vary little in
their susceptibility. the same thing is true for other animals and for humans.
MR.
REED: Will you explain to the committee whether this drug affects the nerves, or
does it go directly into the blood stream?
DR.
MUNCH: It does not matter whether it is absorbed by smoking or swallowing; it
goes into the blood stream; it is carried to the brain by the blood and produces
its effects in the brain.
Animals
which show a particular susceptibility, that is, which show a response to a
given dose, when they begin to show it will acquire a tolerance. We have to give
larger doses as the animals are used over a period of 6 months or a year. This
means that the animal is becoming habituated, and finally the animal must be
discarded because it is no longer serviceable.
MR.
MCCORMACK: We are more concerned with human beings than with animals. Of course,
I realize that those experiments are necessary and valuable, because so far as
the effect is concerned, they have a significance also. but we would like to
have whatever evidence you have as to the conditions existing in the country, as
to what the effect is upon human beings.
Not
that we are not concerned about the animals, but the important matter before us
concerns the use of this drug by human beings.
DR.
MUNCH: I was making the point to show that in 1910 and in 1920 the Pharmacopoeia
accepted cannabis as one drug for use in human medicine, and that that is the
method of standardization, because there was no other method by which this could
be
standardized.
When
we considered the material for the Pharmacopoeia in 1930 we found that this
method of standardization was not useful. We found that the International
Committee on Standardization of Drugs of the League of Nations had not admitted
cannabis because it is not used throughout the world.
Therefore,
that method of standardization was discarded, and so at this time the product
which may be used is used without being standardized. But the use of it is
definitely decreasing, as is shown by production statistics and surveys of
prescription ingredients.
MR.
REED: You say the use is receding?
DR.
MUNCH: It is disappearing; that is, its use in human medicine is decreasing.
MR.
REED: You do not wish to infer that it is decreasing in use as a narcotic, do
you?
DR.
MUNCH: Not at all. I am discussing the medicinal use.
MR.
VINSON: For what was it used?
DR.
MUNCH: I can only give you the literature. No physician with whom I am
immediately acquainted uses it at this time.
In
the early days it was used in cases of sleeplessness and to make your last
moments on earth less painful when you were dying from tetanus or rabies. There
may be other uses, but I have not found them.
MR.
VINSON: Is it ever used now for those purposes? I take it there are several
substitutes.
DR.
MUNCH: Yes; there are. So far as human beings are concerned, we have different
types of treatment, such as the Pasteur treatment.
MR.
VINSON: But you had the Pasteur treatment when you had marihuana, did you not?
DR.
MUNCH: Not in human medicine.
DR.
MUNCH: No, sir.
MR.
VINSON: How long have you had it?
DR.
MUNCH: Cannabis or marihuana was introduced into human medicine by
O’Shaughnessey in 1838.
MR.
VINSON: When did Pasteur come on the scene?
DR.
MUNCH: The Pasteur treatment was developed about 1875.
MR.
VINSON: Then you had the Pasteur treatment between the period of 1875 until
1920?
DR.
MUNCH: Yes, sir.
MR.
VINSON: Did they use marihuana in that period for rabies?
DR.
MUNCH: Its use had been decreasing during that period.
MR.
VINSON: As I understood you, the use of marihuana was to ease the last hours of
a person in distress from excruciating pain.
DR.
MUNCH: Yes, sir.
MR.
VINSON: I feel certain there are many substitutes that could have been used
before and can be used now for the purpose
for
which marihuana, to some extent, was used.
DR.
MUNCH: Yes; That is true. Most of the modern drugs for the annulment of pain
have been developed since about 1880 or 1890.
MR.
CULLEN: Is it used in dentistry?
DR.
MUNCH: It is one component of a prescription which has been used from time to
time in dentistry in assuaging pain, but there again we have better drugs. At
the time -------
MR.
CULLEN: (interposing) So it is not used very much today in dentistry?
DR.
MUNCH: That is my understanding. With the development of drugs like novocaine,
its use in dentistry has been decreasing.
Its
other use is in corn salves and corn plasters. Everyone knows that they must be
green and negative. Marihuana contains a green component called chlorophyll. We
have made experiments on men as well as upon animals in which we have applied
the material directly through the skin, either normal skin containing a corn,
and we find that it has no value in preventing pain.
Cannabis
or marihuana it self will not decrease the pain of a corn. Salicylic acid causes
the destruction of the corn tissue.
Cannabis
is used because it has a green color, but other green dyes will be just as
effective as marihuana for this purpose.
On
last Saturday a paper was presented before the Pharmacological Society in
Memphis, Tenn. by Dr. Walton, who has been making a special study of cannabis at
this time. He said the cannabis grown in the neighborhood of New Orleans for
pharmaceutical purposes was similar in chemical ingredients to that which has
been bought in India and elsewhere.
MR.
MCCORMACK: I take it that the effect is different upon different persons.
DR.
MUNCH: Yes. sir.
MR.
MCCORMACK: There is no question but what this is a drug, is there?
DR.
MUNCH: None at all.
MR.
MCCORMACK: Is it a harmful drug?
DR.
MUNCH: Any drug that produces the degeneration of the brain is harmful. Yes; it
is.
MR.
MCCORMACK: I agree with you on that, but I want to ask you these questions and
have your answers for the record, because they will assist us in passing upon
this legislation.
DR.
MUNCH: I have said it is a harmful drug.
MR.
MCCORMACK: In some cases does it not bring about extreme inertia?
DR.
MUNCH: Yes, it does.
MR.
MCCORMACK: And in other cases it causes violent irritability?
DR.
MUNCH: Yes, sir.
MR.
MCCORMACK: And those results lead to a disintegration of personality, do they
not?
DR.
MUNCH: Yes, sir.
MR.
MCCORMACK: That is really the net result of the use of that drug, no matter what
other effects there may be; its continued use means the disintegration of the
personality fo the person who uses it?
DR.
MUNCH: Yes, that is true.
MR.
MCCORMACK: Can you give us any idea as to the period of continued use that
occurs before this disintegration takes place?
DR.
MUNCH: I can only speak from my knowledge of animals. In some animals we see the
effect after about 3 months, while in others it requires more than a year, when
they are given the same dose.
MR.
MCCORMACK: Are there not some animals on which it reacted, as I understand it,
in a manner similar to its reaction on human beings? Is that right?
DR.
MUNCH: Yes, sir.
MR.
MCCORMACK: Have you experimented upon any animals whose reaction to this drug
would be similar to that of human beings?
DR.
MUNCH: The reason we use dogs is because the reaction for the dogs to this drug
closely resembles the reaction of human beings.
MR.
MCCORMACK: And the continued use of it, as you have observed the reaction on
dogs, has results in the disintegration of personality?
DR.
MUNCH: Yes, so far as I can tell, not being a dog psychologist, the effects will
develop in from 3 months to a year.
MR.
MCCORMACK: The recognition of the effects of the use of this drug is not only of
comparatively recent origin is it not?
DR.
MUNCH: Yes, comparatively recent.
MR.
MCCORMACK: I suppose one reason was that it was not used very much.
DR.
MUNCH: Yes, that is right.
MR.
MCCORMACK: I understand this drug came in from, or was originally grown in
Mexico and Latin American countries.
DR.
MUNCH: "Marihuana" is the name for Cannabis in the Mexican
Pharmacopoeia. It was originally grown in Asia.
MR.
MCCORMACK: That was way back in the oriental days. The word "assassin"
is derived from an oriental word or name by which the drug was called; is that
not true?
DR.
MUNCH: Yes, sir.
MR.
MCCORMACK: So it goes way back to those years when hashish was just a species of
the same class which is identified by the English translation of an oriental
word; that is, the word "assassin"; is that right?
DR.
MUNCH: That is my understanding.
MR.
MCCORMACK: Is there any knowledge or information as to the growth of the use of
marihuana cigarettes, or any other form of the drug by human being for drug
purposes, in recent years?
DR.
MUNCH: Mr. Young was formerly connected with the Bureau of Plant Industry for
the Untied States Department of Agriculture. He left the Bureau several years
ago and started a plantation in the neighborhood of Florence, S.C. for the
growth of marihuana for medicinal purposes. It is my understanding that because
of the lack of commercial demand he has discontinued that project after two
years. I am not certain but I think he stopped that in 1928 or 1929 because of
the lack of demand.
If
I may amplify that a little bit, let me say this: In 1932 and 1933 an ingredient
survey was made, a study of the components of 122,000 prescriptions. It was
found that cannabis was prescribed only four or five times per 10,000.
MR.
MCCORMACK: Can you give us any information about the growth in recent years of
the use of it as a drug in connection with the purposes that this bill was
introduced to meet?
DR.
MUNCH: You mean the illicit use rather than the medicinal use?
MR.
MCCORMACK: Exactly.
DR.
MUNCH: The knowledge that I have in that connection is based on contacts with
police officers as they collected material, even in Philadelphia. They tell me
that until ten years ago they had no knowledge of it, but that now it is growing
wild in a number of different places.
I
was in Colorado about three years ago, going there as a witness in a prosecution
brought under the Colorado act in connection with the use of marihuana. The
police officers there told me its use developed there only within the last three
or four years, starting about 1932 or 1933.
MR.
MCCORMACK: Has there been a rapid increase in the use of marihuana for illicit
purposes - and I use the word illicit to describe the situation we have in mind?
DR.
MUNCH: It is my understanding that there has been.
MR.
MCCORMACK: There is no question about that, is there?
DR.
MUNCH: No, sir, there is not.
MR.
CULLEN: We thank you for the statement you have given to the committee. Who is
your next witness, Mr. Hester?
MR.
HESTER: I would like the committee now to hear Mr. Wollner, a consulting chemist
in the office of the Secretary of the Treasury, who will speak on the chemical
phase of this question.
MR.
CULLEN: Will you give your full name and the position you occupy to the
reporter?
STATEMENT
OF HERBERT J. WOLLNER,
CONSULTING
CHEMIST,
OFFICE
OF THE SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY
MR.
WOLLNER: Mr. Chairman, my name is Herbert J. Wollner; I am consulting chemist in
the office of the Secretary of the Treasury.
MR.
CULLEN: You may proceed.
MR.
WOLLNER: The active principle in marihuana appears to be associated with an
element which is located or found in the flowering tops and on the under side of
the leaves of the plant. Until relatively recently the lack of refined chemical
tests has built up the traditional conception that it was only found in the
co-called female plant. But that is untrue. We have discovered that it is
present both in the male and female plant.
To
illuminate the matter I have brought with me some slides, if you care to look at
them through the lenses, which I will be glad to submit for your examination.
(The
slides referred to were examined by the members of the committee.)
Those
are the flowering tops, and the plant is covered with a tremendous number of
very fine hairs. You will notice that at the base of these hairs are little
pockets, like apertures, where little sacks of resin are located. The resin
contains an ingredient which the chemical technologist reefers to as cannabinone
or cannabinol, alternatively. It is the invariant experience that this material
contains the active principle which does the job.
MR.
VINSON: How do they get this into commercial use? I am talking about the
flowering plant. Do they have to take it in its natural state?
MR.
WOLLNER: There are a variety of ways. In the early days, when they used hashish,
they would jounce the flowering tops up and down in bags and then the resin
would collect on the surface of the cloth and was scraped off and mixed with
sweets and eaten. At the present time in reefers and muggles there is no
separation. They smoke the stuff in toto, the leaves, the flowering tops, and
everything.
MR.
VINSON: They use the whole thing?
MR.
WOLLNER: Yes. In the laboratory we extract this resin and then identify it.
MR.
MCCORMACK: After that it is dried quicker?
MR.
WOLLNER: Yes, It goes through a process which is similar to the process through
which tobacco goes. They are similar in that respect.
MR.
REED: As to this ingredient at the root of this hair-like substance, is that in
the nature of oil?
MR.
WOLLNER: Yes and no. This active substance will be extractable from the resin.
It is on the border line between resin and oil. If you raise the temperature
slightly, it becomes fluid.
The
identification problems have been worked out very clearly from the botanical and
from the purely laboratory approach, and that is in such shape right now that
the transmission of that information to police officers throughout the country
would be
perfectly
possible.
MR.
CROWTHER: Is that the oil that the manufacturers used to produce in considerable
quantities?
MR.
WOLLNER: That is a different oil. That oil derives its source from the seed of
the marihuana plant. The seed of the plant contains a drying oil which is in a
general way similar to that of linseed. Those seeds contain a small amount of
that resin, apparently on their outer surface according to quite a number of
investigators depending upon the age of that seed.
The
oil in the seed or the seed itself only contains the active principle,
apparently, where derived from an immature plant. However, certain investigators
have found active principles in smaller amounts even in mature seeds.
MR.
VINSON: It has been testified that the common manner of use is through
cigarettes. Is anyone manufacturing those cigarettes for sale, or do you just
roll them?
MR.
WOLLNER: As I understand it from our law-enforcement officers, both procedures
are in common usage.
It
is also sold in the form of loose tobacco, either mixed or straight.
MR.
VINSON: Do you know of any concern that is manufacturing cigarettes with the
marihuana content?
MR.
WOLLNER: I would not know of such a concern in the course of my own experience.
MR.
VINSON: The addicts can roll their own?
MR.
BUCK: Does the oil from the seed contain any of this deleterious matter?
MR.
WOLLNER: That would in a large measure depend upon the condition of the seed and
the condition of manufacture, but I would say in any event the oil would not
contain a large amount of this resin.
It
may be that that quantity active principle which is in the oil was derived
through contact with other parts of the plant.
MR.
BUCK: Would it contain enough to have any harmful effect on anyone, if taken
internally?
MR.
WOLLNER: I would say no; it would not contain such an amount.
MR.
FULLER: As I understand it, you say the oil does not contain much, if any, of
the drug?
MR.
WOLLNER: It does contain some of the drug, but not much. It would appear,
offhand, to be rather difficult to separate, but processes might possibly be
developed for that purpose.
MR.
FULLER: It would not be useful for the purpose for which they are using
marihuana.
MR.
WOLLNER: No.
MR. FULLER: So, so far as the oil from the seed is
concerned, it is harmless, as far as human use is concerned.
MR.
WOLLNER: That is right.
MR.
CULLEN: We thank you for your statement.
Mr.
Hester, who is your next witness?
MR.
HESTER: Mr. Chairman, we have one other witness, Dr. Dewey, who was formerly
chief of the fiber investigation of the Bureau of Plant Industry in the
Department of Agriculture. He is a botanist, and while he is now in retirement,
officials of the Department of Agriculture have referred us to him as the
foremost expert on the botanical aspect of this plant.
MR.
CULLEN: Is he now connected with the Department of Agriculture?
MR.
HESTER: No, he is not, he is now in retirement.
MR.
CULLEN: We will be glad to hear Dr. Dewey. Will you give your full name to the
reporter?
| 
Custom Search
