Mr. IANNUZZI. I am still willing to cooperate with the committee. Senator DANIEL. When you say you are not his keeper, can you in some way help us find Mr. Scalici so that he can appear before the committee?

Mr. IANNUZZI. I will assure you of this: I will make every effort to locate him; that I will do to you and promise that.

I will call, I do not know where his

Senator DANIEL. You have not seen him since the day he went to the hospital?

Mr. IANNUZZI. I was to the hospital and saw him in the hospital. Senator DANIEL. That was in June of this year?

Mr. IANNUZZI. That is right. Let's see, we met here on a Friday, and the Friday I came here-I saw him Monday in the hospital, and that is the last I saw him. He never communicated with me, he never called me up, never spoke to me.

Senator DANIEL. Let me read further into the record what the chairman said to you at that time:

You understand that he will remain under subpena and that we will notify you as to when he should return to the committee.

Mr. IANNUZZI. I do not recall that, sir. But if you are reading it from the record

Senator DANIEL. Yes.

Mr. IANNUZZI. Was that from the record, the stenographer's record? Senator DANIEL. I have taken that from the record.

Mr. IANNUZZI. I do not recall that you said that he was to remain under subpena. It is no criterion with me whether he was under subpena or not. I know nothing about what you were going to ask him. I was just here to appear for him on the date, to make the application for adjournment.

I will tell you now, Mr. Chairman, that if I can find him or if I can locate him, I shall be glad to communicate with you or your attorney.

There is nothing else I can do.

Senator DANIEL. Let us know as soon as possible; we would like to have him in the morning at 10 o'clock.

Mr. IANNUZZI. As a matter of fact, I am expecting to leave the country on the 6th of October, so I will do everything possible between now and the 6th, you have my assurance that I will do it.

Senator DANIEL. Between now and tomorrow morning at 10 o'clock, please, sir. We would like to have him here at 10 o'clock.

Mr. LANNUZZI. You tell me where to call. I called his home. Senator DANIEL. I declare, as his attorney you left me with the impression that would be an easy matter for you to locate him and have him here when we notified you, and that is the impression that you left with this chairman.

Mr. IANNUZZI. I am sorry, sir that you feel that I have left you with that impression. I have never taken the responsibility, and I have practiced criminal law for many years, I have never taken the responsibility for any person, and I have never been reprimanded by any judge at any time for giving any assurance or making any assurance that I would have a man in court. I can speak for myself, but I cannot speak for the other man.

Senator DANIEL. I am just telling you the impression that you left with the chairman of the committee.

Mr. IANNUZZI. I am sorry if you did get that impression. Senator DANIEL. And we would appreciate it if you would try to locate him.

Mr. IANNUZZI. That you will have; I will try to locate him. I cannot do anything else. You tell me what you want me to do.

Senator DANIEL. How long had you been his attorney previously? Mr. IANNUZZI. This is the first occasion. I have known this man only from people who have recommended him to me. I never had any dealings with him before. I have not even been paid a fee, if you want to know that. But that is no criterion whether I was paid or not. I owe it to you gentlemen to be here.

Senator DANIEL. Yes.

Mr. IANNUZZI. And we appreciate it.

Senator DANIEL. You do your best and we will see if we can help

you.

Mr. IANNUZZI. Thank you, sir.

Senator DANIEL. Thank you, sir.

Mr. Anslinger, if you will stand, do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give to this subcommittee of the Judiciary Committee of the United States Senate will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God !

Mr. ANSLINGER. I do.

TESTIMONY OF HON. HARRY J. ANSLINGER, COMMISSIONER, UNITED STATES BUREAU OF NARCOTICS

Senator DANIEL. Commissioner Anslinger, you have appeared before this committee before on other matters, and if you will identify yourself again for the record, you may then proceed.

Mr. ANSLINGER. Yes. I am Harry J. Anslinger, United States Commissioner of Narcotics, and United States representative on the United Nations Narcotics Commission.

Senator DANIEL. How long have you been Commissioner of Narcotics?

Mr. ANSLINGER. Twenty-five years, and an equal number of years as representative at the League of Nations and the United Nations. Mr. Chairman and honorable Senators, the proposal of the proponents is, in fact, a proposal for the United States Government to sell poison at reduced prices to its citizens.

Now, that is narcotics are labeled as poisons all over the world, by treaty.

Our traditional policy since 1912 has been to oppose legalized sale of narcotics.

Now, in 1912-that was the first Narcotic Convention. There have been nine altogether, and there we fought against the insertion of the word "legitimate" which covered the so-called opium clinics of the great powers in the Far East.

Now, Great Britain had opium, legalized sale of opium, in Hong Kong, in Malaya, Borneo, Sarawak, and many other places; France in Indochina; Portugal in Macao; The Netherlands in Dutch East Indies; and Japan in Formosa, and it was legalized for sale in Thailand.

Those clinics have all been closed except the ones in Thailand, and just a few weeks ago the Prime Minister of Thailand announced that

those opium dens operated by the government would close January 1957.

In the last opium protocol which was agreed to at the United Nations in 1953, ratified by the Senate in 1954, the word "legitimate" does not appear.

All of the countries agreed that only this potocol would now only recognize the medical needs, and certainly it did not contemplate the legalized sale of narcotics to addicts.

But there are 2 transitory reservations in the protocol, 1 by India, which has had legalized sale of opium for eating, and opium for smoking for many years.

The All-Indian Congress has agreed-and this is in the reservation that the eating of opium in India will cease in 1958, that is, legalized sale across the counter.

They call it a quasi-medical use, but it was in the old treaties regarded, in two of the treaties regarded, as a legitimate use.

Also the eating of the cocoa leaf by the Indians in five LatinAmerican countries will cease. The program to eliminate that has already begun.

Take the clinic in Hong Kong. In the last year of its operation it had 800 addicts applying for their legalized dosage as against 80,000, according to the Hong Kong police, who got their narcotics on the illicit market.

The same was true in some of the other places, well, particularly Macao.

Today, in Vietnam the police of Saigon estimate that under this protocol you could register an opium smoker up to September 1953. After that no more smokers were to be registered, registered opium smokers were to be registered, throughout the world, and those old opium smokers would cease to exist-no more registration after September 1953; and India and Pakistan both had these transitory reservations which agreed that the eating would cease, and there would be no more smokers registered.

When Senator Mansfield was recently in Saigon, he inquired about this, and I just saw the report of the police, and they said, I think it is, 14,000 smokers had registered under the protocol, and 40,000 were still obtaining their narcotics from the illicit market; and that is the history all through.

Here in New York State-Senator Butler made a point yesterday about 7,000 appearing at the clinics. Yes-30,000 did not appear. Those clinics were closed by the action of the medical authorities, the recommendation of the medical authorities, and by the State legislature.

In 1 year of operation-now, mind you, the proponents say, "Well, we didn't have time enough."

Well, that is nonsense. They were in existence for 5 years. In 1 year of operation we seized in the illicit market 75,000 ounces of narcotic drugs. Today we will only seize about 6,000 ounces, without clinics.

Now, in New York State there were 17 clinics operating. Assuming that the clinics were legalized in the State of New York, you would only actually have clinics in two places, because drug addiction has been cleared out in all the other cities where we had these clinics.

One of the proponents referred to the clinic in Shreveport, La. Well, Senator, that was the worst situation in the country, and was closed by action, by the recommendation, of the medical authorities, by the citizens complaining that all the thieves in that area were getting their narcotics.

The chief of police of Shreveport said, "Well, this is very simple for me. When I have a burglary in the town, I just go down to the clinic at 4 o'clock when they get their customary supply."

Most of those addicts were selling to other addicts who would not appear at the clinic.

Senator DANIEL. Just a moment, Commissioner Anslinger, you say this was the chief of police at Shreveport?

Mr. ANSLINGER. Yes, sir.

Senator DANIEL. Did he say these were addicts on free drugs who were committing crimes?

Mr. ANSLINGER. Were committing crimes. There were thieves from all over that area, and the record will show that many criminals came in from Texas to get their supply at the Shreveport clinic.

Senator DANIEL. To get their supply of dope?

Mr. ANSLINGER. Yes, sir; and it was-the people of Shreveport demanded that those clinics be closed.

Senator DANIEL. I noticed at the time the Shreveport clinic was closed there were still several hundred getting drugs there, which would seem to me to be larger than the number of addicts that you estimate are in Shreveport today.

Mr. ANSLINGER. Oh, yes, sir. I think that there were-I have the record here, Senator.

I would like to submit for the record this pamphlet that we have prepared on the history of the clinics in the United States, if I could. would like to have that made a part of the record.

Senator DANIEL. That will be received and made a part of the record and be included in full in the appendix.

(The document entitled "Narcotic Clinics in the United States" will be found in the appendix at p. 1869.)

Mr. ANSLINGER. It is taken from the files, from the records, and it is a sorry, dismal mess that took place in those days and, as you have correctly stated, the medical association took a very positive position on this.

Senator DANIEL. That was my understanding, that the American Medical Association and the local medical groups in most instances wanted these clinics closed down because of their opinion that the clinics were failures.

Mr. ANSLINGER. That is right; that is all through this record. We have the statements of the responsible health officials in the various States showing that the situation got progressively worse; addiction spread and crime spread.

Now, as to the question of crime, in Formosa, the only place where they actually made a study, Dr. Tu of the University of Taipeh made this study, and he showed that criminality-of the crimes committed in Formosa at the time these monopolies or the legalized sale of drugs were in effect, 70 percent of the crimes were committed by opium smokers who got their narcotics at Government shops at very cheap prices a few cents a day; whereas only 30 percent of the crimes that were committed were committed by nonsmokers.

Now, these proponents just skirt this question of opium smoking. Well, the active principle in opium smoking is morphine, an opium alkaloid, and are we now to establish opium dens throughout the country?

We just about got rid of opium dens in the United States. We would have a hard time today coming up with one pipe, and we used to destroy thousands of pipes, opium pipes, every year. We would have a hard time bringing a pipe here for the committee to examine. Now, that has been done through, of course, relentless international effort and enforcement.

They say nothing about the opium smoker. Well, he is just as much of an addict as the man who takes heroin, and he is just as dangerous in every way.

Now, they also brush marihuana and cocaine aside. You know, cocaine was the big drug of addiction before the Harrison Act. Why, it was sold across the country. We imported some 2 million pounds of cocoa leaves for cocaine for 80 million, and today with 160 million people, we would import 2,000 pounds a week. You do not see cocaine addiction, but if you are going to make narcotics available to these addicts, why, you have got to consider the cocaine addict, although we have been able to get rid of cocaine addiction principally through international effort and the acts of the government in Peru in closing down illicit factories.

I do not know what they say, they just say nothing about marihuana or how that is to be handled; they just avoid that.

Now, I want to give you for the record-this is a resolution that was passed in July by the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations. This was unanimous, passed in July at Geneva, and it reads this is a resolution adopted unanimously by all countries, all countries represented on the Council, and I am quite sure that especially in view of Thailand's capitulation now that they would very likely agree to this resolution.

Notes the view expressed by the Commission on Narcotic Drugs that in the treatment of drug addiction methods of ambulatory treatment and open clinics are not advisable.

Senator DANIEL. That will be made a part of the record. (The document referred to folows:)

UNITED NATIONS COMMISSION ON NARCOTIC DRUGS, 10TH SESSION

RESOLUTIONS RECOMMENDED FOR ADOPTION BY THE COUNCIL

THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COUNCIL

E/CN.7/L.93/Add.2

(a) Recalling resolution 548 I (XVIII) and the recommendations contained therein;

(b) Noting that in their annual reports certain countries have provided statistics of addiction that are of great value;

(c) Recognizing that such statistics and the information regarding the extent and character of drug addiction which they involve are necessary for effective countermeasures against addiction;

(d) Noting that the work undertaken by the Social Commision in the field of prevention of crime is parallel in a number of respects with the work of the Commission on Narcotic Drugs;

1. Requests the Secretary General to continue to collect information and pursue his studies on aspects of drug addiction in consultation with the World