90. In the course of our investigations it came to the notice of the Committee that cases of addiction were said to result from the consumption in large quantities of preparations containing morphine and heroin of a percentage lower than that which would bring them within the scope of the Acts. We deemed it advisable to inquire more fully into this question, and our Terms of Referee were accordingly extended as follows :-

" To consider and advisse whether it is expedient that any or all preparations which contain morphine or heroin of a percentage lower than that specified in the Dangerous Drugs Acts should be brought within the provisions of the Acts and Regulations and is so under what conditions"

Since this reference was received the Committee were informed that at the Geneva Conference in February, 1925, under the auspices of the League of Nations, this country assented to an International agreement to abolish the limit of 0.1 per cent in respect of heroin and to bring within the scope of the Dangerous Drugs legislation all preparations of heroin without distinction of percentage. This has been effected by the Dangerous Drugs Act, 1925.

We have, therefore, thought it unnecessary to consider preparations of heroin under this part of our reference.

91. With reference to preparations of morphine we have taken evidence not only from many of the medical witnesses who have appeared before us, but also from representatives of wholesale and retail chemists, from the Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain and from the Society of Apothecaries.

92. This evidence points in our view emphatically to the conclusion that there is very little, if any, abuse of preparations of this kind other than chlorodyne. Our further observations in this Section relate, therefore, to this substance.

93. "Chlorodyne," as is well known, is the trade name originally given to a preparation introduced by Dr. J. Collis Browne. Since the proprietary rights expired, several preparations are now sold under the name. Most of these contain morphine in various strengths, and the morphine content of particular preparations appears to vary from time to time. Most of them now contain morphine in a strength under 0.2 per cent, and, therefore, are exempt from the restrictions of the Dangerous Drugs Acts, although in most cases they approach very closely to the limit. Thus they can be, and are, sold freely in chemists' and other shops.

94. The evidence appears to show that the quantity of these preparations sold to the public since the passing of the Dangerous Drugs Acts has not increased and is, in fact, tending to decrease.

95. Certain medial witnesses considered that there was some possibility of abuse of chlorodyne, and some stated that they had met with cases of drug addiction which, in their opinion, were due to the consumption of one or other of the preparations of chlorodyne.

96. A number of the medical witnesses on the other hand took the view that chlorodyne was a valuable domestic remedy, and widely used in cases of minor complaints, and that, while there might be related instances of abuse, it did not, except perhaps in rare instances, result in the formation of a drug habit.

97. It was further suggested by some witnesses that, as the amount of morphine contained in the preparation is so small, the amount of  chlorodyne which it would be necessary to consume in order to satisfy craving for drugs would be large, and that it would be an expensive and indeed, an inconvenient method of gratifying addiction.

98. The fact, however, cannot be ignored that, though the cases are few, chlorodyne is used as a drug of addiction, possibly as a result of the ease with which it can be obtained and the difficulty of obtaining morphine. The tendency, moreover, so to use it may increase, as the difficulties of obtaining morphine in other forms increase through the administration of the Dangerous Drugs Acts.  We think, therefore, that there is a case for considering whether in some way the abuse of this particular substance can be checked, though not necessarily by the adoption of the measure specified in our supplementary reference.

99. it was represented to us that the Labelling of Poisons Order, which comes into force in January 1926, would require the morphine content of the preparation to be clearly stated on each bottle, with the result that the public and medical practitioners would be better informed than is at present possible as to the exact composition of the preparation which is being taken or prescribed. it was not, however clear to us that the operation of this Order would deter such persons as at present use chlorodyne for purposes of. addiction from continuing to use it.

100. It was urged by some witnesses that if any restrictions on the sale of chlorodyne are found neccesary they should take the form of requiring a definite standard of morphine content to be established and that the standard should be such as to bring the preparation automatically within the scope of the Dangerous Drugs Acts. This proposal would have the effect of rendering chlorodyne of that strength unobtainable by the public except on a doctor's prescription, and of preventing the sale of similar preparations of lower strength under the name of cholrodyne.   

101. An alternative that seems to us well worth consideration is that of fixing a standard of morphine content of preparations sold under the name of chlorodyne which should be well below the limit of the Dangerous Drugs Acts, say 0.1 per cent. This would make the risk of use of such preparations for addiction purposes negligible and would not interfere with the free sale of the substance as a domestic remedy. It would contain sufficient morphine for the purpose for which it can safely be so used. and where more morphine was necessary it would be obtained under medical advise.

102. Another way of achieving the same result would obviously be to fix the limit under the Dangerous Drugs Acts at 0.1  per cent. instead of 0.2 per cent, as at presentt. There is no evidence however, of the use for addiction purposes of any preparation, other than chlorodyne, in the zone of strength between 0.1 per cent and 0.2  per cent.
This may be because chlorodyne is so widely known and relatively pleasant to take.

103. Our conclusions on this part of our reference are
(i) That there is in our opinion no evidence to necessitate bringing all preparations of morphine within the scope of the Dangerous Drugs Acts, or lowering the standard of strength at present fixed by the Acts.
(ii) That there might be some advantage in securing in some way that no preparation should be sold under the name of chlorodyne which contains more than 0.1 per cent of morphine.