The word "narcotics" has usually connoted more than simply opium and its derivatives. In law and in custom "narcotics" has included the coca leaf and its active ingredient cocaine, and the cannabis plant, the source of marihuana and the powerful resin hashish. In this study several other drugs enter the history of narcotic controls. Chloral hydrate, a drug still used to induce sleep, was consid-ered at the turn of the century to have serious potential for exces-sive use and as a result often found its way into antinarcotic laws.

Alcohol, of course, cannot be easily separated, either in its effects or as a target for legal control, from the antinarcotic campaign which paralleled the drive for national liquor prohibition.

Crude opium is the dried juice of the opium poppy and contains many alkaloids with varying properties. About ten per cent of crude opium is extractable as morphine, the chief active ingredient. A simple chemical process discovered in the last quarter of the nineteenth century converts morphine into diacetylmorphine, more commonly known as heroin. Another alkaloid found in crude opium, codeine, is less addictive than morphine and is relatively accessible in cough medicines and analgesic preparations. Crude opium can also be prepared for smoking by dehydration and concentration.

The active alkaloid in the coca leaf is cocaine. Cocaine produces euphoria and hyperactivity and is similar in many respects to the amphetamines. Other drugs of current interest in addition to the amphetamines, barbiturates, LSD, etc., are not considered in detail in this history, although attitudes associated with older drug issues appear to have been transferred with little change to these more recent preparations.

While preparing this book, I have been constantly aware of how divisive and politically loaded the subject of drug abuse is—and has been for the past century. Nothing has reminded me more of the drug controversy than working with divided and troubled families in which each member insists that "fairness" consists in taking his side and condemning the others. Although this history will not provide an answer to the problem of drug use, perhaps it will lessen some of the distortions which interfere with public debate.

This research into narcotic controls began in 1968 while I was a member of the Public Health Service in Washington, D.C. In order to gather more information on long-standing issues in narcotics, Dr. Stanley F. YoIles, then Director of the National Institute of Mental Health, requested an inquiry, particularly into the narcotic clinics which flourished in the United States in the early 192os. Without any great difficulty a number of documents relating to American drug laws and attitudes toward drug users were located in such nearby institutions as the National Archives and the Library of Congress. It was soon apparent that these primary sources had been largely neglected in published accounts of American narcotic control. While studying the records I began to question both conflicting historical explanations with which proponents of the "medical" and "police" approaches justified their policies. These "histories" appeared to be more in the nature of political party platforms than accurate descriptions of the process of narcotic control in the United States.

Working within the Public Health Service while conducting such an investigation had distinct advantages, but also some understand-able drawbacks. For example, it was not possible for me to examine the records of rival federal agencies. Therefore when I returned to New Haven in 1969, the study was only begun and would have ended there except for the support and opportunity for research offered at the Yale Child Study Center. Dr. Albert J. Solnit, the center's director, and the late Dr. Seymour L. Lustman, professor of pediatrics and psychiatry, encouraged the completion of this history and .provided an environment in which a controversial issue could be freely pursued.

In resuming the study, access was sought to the early records of the federal narcotics agencies. Such a request to the Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs received approval. The Bureau's director, John E. Ingersoll, and his then executive assistant, John Warner, made the clinic files and other relevant records available for unrestricted examination. I was impressed by the interest of both health and law enforcement officials in a thorough study of the origins of narcotic control.

Later I had the opportunity to discuss vvith Alfred R. Lindesmith of the University of Indiana his career as an investigator of narcotic policies, and he kindly provided me with a number of useful historical documents. I interviewed former narcotics commissioner Harry J. Anslinger and examined his papers which he had deposited in the Pennsylvania Historical Collections of Pennsylvania State University. Among others who generously gave of their time to assist this research are Dr. Walter Bromberg, Dr. Willis P. Butler, H. Emmett Corrick, Dr. Morris Fishbein, Robert P. Fischelis, George Griffenhagen, Malachi L. Harney, Dr. Victor G. Heiser, Jean Jones, Dr. Samuel Lambert, Jr., Helen Taft Manning, Dr. Peter Olch, Glenn Sonnedecker, Dr. Wilson T. Sowder, and Jeffrey Stewart.

I am especially grateful to James Harvey Young of Emory Uni-versity, who gave the manuscript a dose and constructive reading. The medical and scientific aspects of the manuscript received careful examination by Dr. Daniel X. Freedman of the University of Chicago. Various parts of the manuscript were reviewed by col-leagues whose aid is deeply appreciated: Alan Trachtenberg, Jona-than Spence, Dr. Albert J. Solnit, G. Gaddis Smith, Howard R. Lamar, Dr. James P. Comer, and Alexander Bickel.

The investigation benefited from the able and industrious efforts of my research assistant in Washington, Michael Adler. In New Haven I have been fortunate to have the aid of Barbara Granger, whose enthusiasm and perseverance never faltered. I also wish to thank two hard-working bursary students, Thomas Casserly and Joan E. Williams. Repeated typings were borne cheerfully by Carol Schlesinger, Barbara Granger, Mary Koines, and Grace Michele.

I am indebted for assistance from the staffs of the following in-stitutions: Archives of the American Medical Association, Library of the American Pharmaceutical Association, Library of the American Psychiatric Association, Library of the Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs, Georgia State Library, Louisiana State Board of Health, Library of Congress, National Archives, National Library of Medicine, Library of The National Institute of Mental Health, New York Academy of Medicine, New York State Archives, Medical Society of the County of New York, Municipal Archives and the Sec-retary of the Department of Health of the City of New York, Pennsylvania Historical Collections of the Pennsylvania State University, College of Physicians of Philadelphia, The Proprietary Association, Library of the University of Washington, Washington State Historical Society, Wellcome Institute of the History of Medicine, and the Yale Medical, Medical Historical, and Sterling Memorial Libraries.

At the Yale Press I have been most fortunate to have had the encouragement and editorial guidance of Jane Isay. I also wish to thank Robert Zangrando, now of Akron University, who urged me to undertake this book, and Anne Wilde for her valuable assistance.

To my wife Jeanne I owe the greatest debt for patiently enduring the book's preparation, critically reading each page, and maintain-ing our childrens' optimism that the task would eventually be concluded.

D.F.M.
New Haven, Connecticut

January 1973