of the offender, his progress, his adjustment, and his sincerity. His release under supervision occurs whenever the United States Board of Parole is of the opinion that he no longer is a threat to society, and can assume his expected role in society. Inherent in the idea of the law would be the primary principle of treatment of the addict and the prevention of contagion to others. Under the new law, an addict granted parole may be retaken easily for further institutional treatment if indicated, and may be reparoled if the circumstances warrant it. As a corrolary to the idea of maintaining more rigid control over addicts is the need for more medical and psychiatric facilities open to the addicts, for in-patient as well as out-patient treatment. The United States Public Health Service already maintains facilities in many of the large cities, and perhaps through some form of subsidy the United States Government could assist States and cities to establish treatment and examination centers where, at least, monthly checkups would be provided. Drs. Chapman and Pfeffer, both United States Public Health Service experts, have strongly recommended mandatory treatment of all addicts (11).

This program should point toward abstention and character building, and should in no sense be construed as the so-called clinic plan which is again being advocated by some who believe that free access to drugs through publicly operated clinics would drive the commercial drug peddlers out of business by removing the demand for bootleg narcotics. This plan was tried in New York City between 1919 and 1921 and was abandoned as a dismal failure. The committee on narcotic drugs of the American Medical Association wrote in their 1921 report: "We have given the 'clinic' a careful, thorough, as well as lengthy trial, and we honestly believe it is unwise to maintain it any longer" (1).

Though drugs were sold at clinics for as little as 2 cents a shot, the problems arising from addiction did not cease. The addicts soon built up a tolerance for the amount of drugs in the clinic shots, and resorted to trickery to secure a larger portion. To be near their source of supply, addicts infested the areas surrounding the clinics, and these concentrations of maladjusted individuals soon resulted in a rash of petty crimes. When the addicts could not satisfy their cravings with the clinic shots, they turned to illicit sources again.

At the present time the world has an example of the ineffectiveness of the "free access" principle in Formosa, where opium smoking is licensed and clinics are maintained by the Government. Dr. T. Sung ming Tu, Health Commissioner of Formosa, reported that 70.83 percent of all crimes were committed by drug users and only 29.17 percent committed by nonusers. Asked why narcotics contributed to criminality Dr. T'Sung ming Tu said: "It is because drug addiction causes relentless destruction of character and releases criminal tendencies" (1). Philosophically and historically American institutions and laws have striven to build up rather than tear down. One of the reasons our country is strong is that, while there is understanding and sympathy, there has been no endorsement of weakness, especially when it threatens the well-being of other citizens. While it is not possible to legislate morality into people, the legislation of addiction by the adoption of the "clinic plan" would remove the bars to self-indulgence and place the seal of official approval on a demoralizing, devitalizing, and debasing habit. It is inconceivable that any government could encourage a practice which has been recognized for years as a form of perpetual self-destruction. A United States Bureau of Narcotics publication, The Living Death, states: "On the average, persons who are narcotic addicts live 20 to 25 years less than they would if they were not addicts. Opium addicts die of tuberculosis at the rate of 4 to 1 compared to nonaddicts; more than 2 to 1 of pneumonia; more than 5 to 1 of premature old age; 4 to 1 of bronchitis; 3 to 1 of brain hemorrhage; 3 to 1 of cancer and other malignant tumor; and more than 2 to 1 of a wide variety of other diseases. This indeed is clear evidence of the vast and dreadful power of habit forming drugs, repeatedly used, to weaken a person's natural resistance to diseases that result in death" (33).

Dr. S. Dover Hubbard, acting director, bureau of public health education, department of health, New York City, said in 1920:

"Habits usually only affect the individual, but in drug addiction indulgence seems to react on the community. The effect on the community is evidenced by debauching its citizenry, by increase of crime and antisocial vices. The extent also spreads like a pestilential disease. In our opinion drug addiction is not a mysterious disease *** In our opinion drug addiction is simply a degrading, debasing habit and it is not necessary to consider it in any other light than as an antisocial one” (1).

In the same vein Berliner has written:

"Some persons have advocated the legislation of addiction as a means of cutting the racketeering and the illegal activities which flourish on the enormous profits derived from the drug traffic. Their intent is better than their reasoning. Drug addiction is among the most contagious of disorders. Some addicts attempt, with a missionary zeal, to convert nonusers, and there are many of us who do not become drug users only because we are not exposed to them. Some addicts seek out potential victims for the purpose of supporting their own habits by peddling. Would not an about-face in our existing legislation add to the number of sufferers?" (3).

Under present Federal law any such "clinic plan" would be illegal, and could not be put into operation until the Harrison Act had been revised or appealed. A Supreme Court decision states:

4

"An order purporting to be a prescription issued to an addict or habitual user of narcotics, not in the course of professional treatment, but for the purpose of providing the user with narcotics sufficient to make him comfortable by maintaining his customary use, is not a prescription within the meaning and intent of the act, and the person filling the order as well as the person issuing it may be charged with violation of the law."

Dr. Victor Vogel has expressed his opinion, in reviewing a book which advocated the "clinic plan" by saying, "Proposal for unrestricted prescription of narcotics for addicts is naive in the extreme, and dangerous to the public health of the nation" (38).

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

1. Since drug addiction is a community problem, closely identified with delinquency, and arising from the same social conditions which spawn delinquency, it is felt that the fundamental attack on addiction must be through planned community action involving adequate education, strengthening of community services to delinquency prone individuals, elimination of crime breeding areas, and adequate treatment facilities. Dr. Hubert S. Howe, author of a pamphlet, Narcotics and Youth, sees the problem not as a psychological one but as one of ignorance of addictions, disastrous effects, and the availability of drugs.

2. Since easy access to drugs fosters addiction, adequate enforcement of exist ing prohibitory laws is essential. This may be brought about through improved international control, increased enforcement personnel, and aggressive prosecution of violators. The certainty of apprehension, prosecution, and severe punishment would go a long way toward removing the present attractiveness of illicit narcotic traffic.

3. Research into the whole problem of addiction is essential. Because our current treatment methods are largely ineffective, we must devote a great deal more time and effort to studying causes of addiction, treatment methods, and plans for eliminating the conditions which foster it.

4. The idea of quarantining contagious disease carriers is not new. Since addicts have lost the power of self-control, and are dangerous to the health and welfare of the community while addicted, they place themselves in the same category as any other disease sufferer who requires medical care and may be a source of infection to others. A program must be developed which will result in early detection, registration, hospitalization, and vocational and educational training as needed, posthospital counseling, periodic examinations, and mandatory return to the hospital upon relapse. Many of these postrelease services would be a part of the supervision and provided by "probation for cure." Outpatient facilities for psychiatric care could be made available through the many United States Public Health stations and hospitals already in existence, and possibly through Veterans' Administration facilities. A law providing sentencing and parole features similar to the Federal Youth Corrections Act would provide the Federal courts with such power to deal with addict defendants who are considered redeemable. Criminals who are incidentally addicts should be sentenced as criminals. Hopeless addicts, particularly those with long criminal records. should be incarcerated for maximum terms as the most efficient means of community protection.

Webb and Goldbaum v. U. S. (1919), 249 U. S. 96.

The California Senate Interim Committee concluded in 1936 that addicts can be permanently cured only in the early stages of addiction, and that incurables should be segregated on State farms (4).

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Anslinger, Harry J., and Tompkins, William F. The Traffic in Narcotic, Funk and Wagnalls Co., New York, 1953.

2. Anslinger, H. J. Relationship between Addiction to Narcotic Drugs and Crime. United Nations Bulletin on Narcotics, volume 111, April 1951, pages 1-3.

3. Berlinger, Arthur K. The Drug Addict-Criminal or Victim. Focus, May 1954.

4. California Senate Interim Committee. A Report on Drug Addiction in California. Sacramento, Calif., State Printing Office, 1936, page 78.

5. Chapman, Kenneth W. Narcotic Addiction-Community Implications. Health News, volume 28, No. 8, August 1951, 10 pages.

6. Collins, Ruth E. Law and the Woman Narcotic. Proceedings of American Prison Association, 1937, pages 495-497.

7. Dai, Bingham Grenn. Addiction in Chicago Shanghai. The Commercial Press, 1937, 208 pages.

8. Deutsch, Albert. What We Can Do About Narcotics. Public Affairs Pamphlet No. 186, September 1952.

9. Fenichel, Otto. The Psycholanalytical Theory of Neurosis. W. W. Norton & Co., Inc., 1945.

10. Glueck, Sheldon, and Eleanor. Unraveling Juvenile Delinquency. The Commonwealth Fund, 1950.

11. Goldstein, Nathaniel L. Narcotics a Growing Problem-A Public Challenge, A Plan for Action. A report by the attorney general to the Legislature of the State of New York, 1952, 12 pages.

12. Harrison, Leonard V. A Report on the Problem of Narcotics in New York City. Community Service Society, 1951, 12 pages.

13. Kolb, Lawrence. Drug Addiction in its Relation to Crime. Mental Hygiene, volume IX, No. 1, pages 77-80, January 1925.

14. Kolb, Lawrence. The Narcotic Addict-His Treatment. Federal Probation, August 1939.

15. Lambert, Alexander, et al. Report of the Mayor's Committee on Drug Addiction to the Honorable R. O. Patterson, Jr., Commissioner of Correction, New York City.

16. Mayor's Committee on Drug Addiction. Interim Report of Study of Drug Addiction Among Teenagers New York City, July 1952, 46 pages.

17. Monaghan, George P. The Narcotic Evil. Spring 3100 (a magazine for policemen), Police Department, New York City, December 1951.

18. Moshette, Sidney, Wasserman, Herbert, and See, Edward. The Experiences of a Number of Public and Private Educational, Social and Health Enforcement Agencies in New York City With the Problem of Teen Age Narcotic Users and Addiction. Master's degree thesis, New York School of Social Work, 1952.

19. Newsweek-Platform. United States Narcotics Problem-Controversial and Unsolved. Weekly Publications, 1952.

20. Oursler, William, and Smith, Lawrence.

Doubleday, New York, 1954, 284 pages.

Narcotics-America's Peril.

21. Peru, P. W. The Concept of Psychopathic Personality. Personality and the Behavior Disorders, 926 pages.

22. Pescor, Michael J. Time Element in the Treatment of Drug Addiction. American Journal of Psychiatry 99 (1942), pages 435-438.

23. Pescor, Michael J. Prognosis in Drug Addiction. American Journal of Psychiatry 97. (1941).

24. Pescor, Michael J. Follow Up Study of Treated Narcotic Drug Addicts. Public Health Reports, Supplement No. 170 (1943), pages 1-18.

25. Pescor, Michael J. A Statistical Analysis of the Clinical Records of Hospitalized Drug Addicts. Public Health Reports Supplement No. 143 (1943),

30 pp.

26. Reichard, J. D. The Narcotic Addicts Before the Court. Federal Probation, 1939, pages 21-25.

27. Shelly, Joseph A. Probation for the Drug Addict.
28. Sollman, Torald. A Manual for Pharmacology,
Saunders Co., Philadelphia & London, 1949.
29. Tappan, Paul A. Probation-Chapter XX10.
McGraw Hill, 1951.

Focus, January 1952. seventh edition. W. B.

Contemporary Correction.

30. Tu Tsungming. Statistical Studies on the Mortality Rates and Causes of Death Among the Opium Addicts in Formosa. United Nations Bulletin on Narcotics, volume III, April 1951, pages 9-11.

31. United States Treasury Department, Bureau of Narcotics. Traffic in Opium and other Dangerous Drugs. Washington, United States Government Printing Office, 1939.

32. United States Treasury Department, Bureau of Narcotics. Traffic in Opium and other Dangerous Drugs. Washington, United States Government Printing Office, 1942.

33. United States Treasury Department, Bureau of Narcotics. Living DeathThe Truth About Drug Addiction.

34. Vogel, Victor H.

Treatment of Narcotic Addict by United States Public Health Service. Federal Probation, June 1948, volume XII, 12 pages. 35. Vogel, Victor H. Our Youth and Narcotics. Today's Health, American Medical Association, October 1951.

36. Vogel, Victor H., Isbell, Harris, and Chapman, Kenneth W. Present Status of Narcotic Addiction. Journal of the American Medical Association, volume 138, No. 14, December 4, 1948.

37. Vogel, Victor H., and Virginia E. Facts About Narcotics. Science Research Associates, Inc., 1951.

38. Vogel, Victor H. Book Review of Opiate Addiction. Written by Dr. Alfred R. Lindesmith, American Journal of Public Health, June 1948.

39. Welfare Council of New York City. The Menace of Narcotics to the City of New York-A Plan To Eradicate the Evil, 1951, 45 pages.

40. Zimmering, Paul, James Sofrin, Ranate Wortes, and S. Bernard. Heroin Addiction in Adolescent Boys. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 114 (1951), pages 19-34.

41. Studies in the Epidemiology of Drug Use. Research Center for Human Relations, New York University (unpublished).

42. Annual Report of the Director of the Administrative Office of the United States Courts, 1954.

X