export opium is about 1,500 tons a year, and the production of opium for domestic consumption in India, Persia, and Turkey amounts to somewhere between 700 and 1,000 tons a year in addition thereto.

Mr. SABATH. The witness seems to have such tremendous information. With what department of the Government is he connected that he has been able to give so much study to it?

The CHAIRMAN. Unfortunately, Mr. Sabath, you were not here when we began. The doctor has been practicing medicine for upward of 30 years. He

is a New York physician-attending physician at Bellevue Hosiptal since 1894— and has made a study of addiction to these drugs.

Mr. LINTHICUM. Where are the figures you have there derived from?
The CHAIRMAN. Do you mean from each country?

Mr. LINTHICUM. You have mentioned about the number of tons manufactured for export, etc. When will those figures be available to the committee? The CHAIRMAN. As soon as the record is printed.

Mr. LINTHICUM. That will be, perhaps, sometime. When could we see them here?

The CHAIRMAN. As soon as the meeting is over. They are all in the record. Now, Doctor, the Governments of Persia, Turkey, and India derive large revenue from the opium traffic, do they not?

Doctor LAMBERT. Yes; they all tax it.

The CHAIRMAN. I notice this statement in your letter. Ratio of revenue from opium to total revenue: The relation of opium revenue in India to the gross revenue of India, according to Dixon, was as follows

Doctor LAMBERT (interposing). Dixon is the author of "The Truth About Indian Opium," an official publication of the British Government?

Doctor LAMBERT. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. In the year 1910-11 the revenue from license fell, and excise opium plus sales for export equaled 8,216,540 pounds sterling. The gross revenue of the Indian government from all sources was 80,682,000 pounds sterling, the revenue from opium representing about 10 per cent of the total revenue of the Government.

Doctor LAMBERT. In 1910 it was about 10 per cent.

The CHAIRMAN. In 1918 and 1919 the total opium revenue was reduced to 4,042,054 pounds sterling, and the gross revenue was reduced.

Doctor LAMBERT. Was increased to 123,257,744 pounds sterling.

Mr. MOORE of Virginia. Are those official figures of the British Government? Doctor LAMBERT. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. Per cent of profit. I assume that is taken from the same official document. The relative cost to the net revenue was as follows:

Doctor LAMBERT. That is from a different document, but official.

The CHAIRMAN. What document is that?

Doctor LAMBERT. It is from the statistics of British India, 1907-1921.
The CHAIRMAN. Is that a publication of the Indian government?
Doctor LAMBERT. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. You state the relative costs and net revenue of Indian as follows: 1916-17, cost 712,394 pounds sterling; net revenue, 2,244,027 pounds sterling; 1917-18, costs, 1,108,782 pounds sterling; net revenue, 1,966,545 pounds sterling.

Mr. COOPER. About $10,000,000.

Mr. CONNALLY. I do not want to interrupt the orderly course of procedure. What is the relevancy and necessity for all these figures of revenue that the British Government obtains from this? It is assumed that they obtain some

revenue, and will it do any good to bring it out and make more vivid the fact that the British Government is getting a revenue, since the object of that resolution is to take it up with the British Government and induce hem to do something? It is not of much value to advertise that they are making money, perhaps, out of it.

The CHAIRMAN. I think that the actual facts in regard to this matter should be put on the record.

Mr. CONNALLY. I am prepared to assume that everything stated here in the resolution is true. We all know that there is more opium produced than ought to be and that somebody is getting money out of it, but I really can not see the necessity or relevancy of showing the revenue or how much money the British Government gets out of it. It can not make them feel any more kindly about it.

Mr. MOORES. It is almost an unfriendly act to give it publicity.

Mr. CONNALLY. In trying to get Great Britain to do something the first thing you do is to slap her in the face.

Mr. TEMPLE. That is a British Government publication. We are not giving it publicity.

Mr. COOPER. Just what I was about to say.

Mr. CONNALLY. It is rehashing it.

Mr, COOPER. I will interject in the record this, that not only, as Doctor Temple stated, has the British Government made public these facts, but there is another consideration. The great mass of the English people, the great mass of the American people, I doubt not the great mass of India, or the Chinese people, have no thought of the revenue that is derived from the sale of these habitforming drugs, simply for the purpose of making money, and the greatest corrective of governmental wrong is public opinion. The great mass of the English people if they knew these facts would call the Government strictly to account that would permit those things, and the only way you can arouse public opinion in this country is by making these facts public, and I think the committee ought to do it in this country, along the lines suggested in the resolution, to show that money is at the bottom of these things no matter how many human lives are wrecked.

Mr. SABATH. Doctor Lambert has testified that the British Government advances money to the farmers?

Mr. COCKRAN. These facts in the record are facts of the whole transaction we are discussing and I do not think that any government would hold it is an unfriendly act if it is the proper subject of representations at all.

The CHAIRMAN. Especially when the facts were prepared and sent out by the Government and that everybody knows that revenue is derived from the traffic. Mr. CONNALLY. Why emphasize it if everybody knows that. When the question of the regulation of liquor was up before the eighteenth amendment, I do not think we would have relished Great Britain holding hearings to show how much revenue all the States of the Union got out of liquor.

Mr. COCKRAN. I should not object to it.

The CHAIRMAN. I have just one more figure. In 1918-19 the cost was 1,307,885 pounds sterling and the net revenue 1,977,625 pounds sterling.

Mr. LINTHICUM. I noted there that the revenues have grown very much smaller, and I read in one of the periodicals I have received that a large part of it was now manufactured illicitly and sold so and paid no revenue. Is there anything in that?

Doctor LAMBERT. I think it has diminished because they have not sent any directly to China. China has ceased to take the amount that they formerly

did. India used to export 16,000 chests, now about 10,000 chests, and that difference is the difference in the China trade.

Mr. LINTHICUM. You do not think that the illicit sale and manufacture have reduced the revenue?

Doctor LAMBERT. I doubt that.

The CHAIRMAN. While we are on that question, opium is still sold publicly in the British possessions in China, Hongkong and other British possessions, is it not?

Doctor LAMBERT. I think it is still sold and controlled under the British Government there.

Mr. BROWNE. I would like to ask whether the report of the special committee that made an investigation of this whole subject of narcotics, the sale, etc., contains conclusions that are correct, in your opinion?

Doctor LAMBERT. Yes; I think their deductions are correct.

Mr. BROWNE. They made quite a thorough examination up to 1919 on this whole subject.

Doctor LAMBERT. That is an excellent report.

Mr. SABATH. There was evidence given some time ago by Special Attorney General Crim on opium and morphine and these other drugs.

The CHAIRMAN. We intend to call him as a witness later.

Doctor TEMPLE. The report referred to was that of a committee appointed by the Secretary of the Treasury.

Mr. BROWNE. Henry T. Rainey, a Member of Congress, was chairman of it. Mr. FISH. What organization or medical society do you represent here? The CHAIRMAN. I might explain again that the doctor has been practicing medicine since 1892, is a graduate of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of New York, has been attending physician at Bellevue Hospital since 1894, and has made a special study of the amount of addiction to habit-forming drugs.

Mr. FISH. That is not quite answering my opinion. Are you here as an individual or are the views you present here supported by any medical organization?

Doctor LAMBERT. I am here as an individual. You will find some opium reports in the report of the narcotics committee of the American Medical Association in the last three years, as reported to the house of delegates. I am here as an individual and do not represent anybody.

The CHAIRMAN. At my request.

Mr. FISH. You do not represent any medical organization and do not know whether your views represent any medical organization.

Doctor LAMBERT. Yes; I know my views are held by a good many, by a majority of the profession.

Mr. FISH. They have been indorsed by some medical organization?
Doctor LAMBERT. I am expressing my personal opinion.

Mr. FISH. Do you know of any medical organization that has indorsed your views?

Doctor LAMBERT. In the main the American Medical Association has.
Mr. FISH. That is what I wanted to know.

The CHAIRMAN. In that connection I have here a copy of the address made by Doctor Lambert before the American Medical Association on this question. Doctor LAMBERT. That was only published in that journal.

The CHAIRMAN. When was the address made?

Doctor LAMBERT. I did not make an address, but wrote the article and published it last May.

The CHAIRMAN. I believe you stated that under the Jones-Miller law importation is limited to the raw materials, gum opium, and coca leaves, and that no opium is admitted containing less than 8 per cent of morphine. Doctor LAMBERT. Less than 9 per cent.

Mr. TEMPLE. Does that apply to opium produced in India?

Doctor LAMBERT. The average morphine content of Indian opium is 8 per cent-some high, some low, as high as 10 per cent and as low as 3 per cent. The average is 8 per cent.

Mr. LINTHICUM. As I understand it, it is not opium that is manufactured under the British Government regulations and taxed by the British Government that is our great fight.

The CHAIRMAN. I think it is.

Mr. LINTHICUM. It is the illicit manufacture and importation of these drugs that is doing harm to this country, bringing tons of it to Hoboken, not that which has been taxed; and therefore the revenue has been reduced because of that illicit manufacture, importation, and sale. If the doctor can tell us anything like that, I should like to know, because I do not understand that what is manufactured under British regulations and paying taxes is what does great harm, but it is this illicit stuff.

The CHAIRMAN. Let me answer your question in this way: Under the British regulations a man can go to Calcutta and purchase at public auction any amount of opium he desires. That opium, it is true, contains less morphine than the Persian or Turkish opium, but it only costs a little more to extract it. That extraction is done in certain European countries, not necessary to mention, and morphine and codeine are produced, and the morphine and codeine are brought illicitly into the United States. If the traffic were perfectly legitimate, then the Indian opium could not compete with the Persian and Turkish opium, because the Persian and Turkish opiums are richer in morphine than Indian opium. Do you desire, Doctor, to answer that question?

Doctor LAMBERT. Yes. The questions in the East are different from our questions. The question of opium manufactured in India is the question of the production of the world's supply of raw opium, is also a question of the opium that they retain; this last is a question of those that eat opium, the natives using it as a household remedy and smoking it. If they do it too much, it is injurious and it brings a stigma the same as here, considered as a vice. Our question here is, since we are prohibited from smoking opium, and smoking opium as a vice is a minor incident in this country compared to the highpowered injury of the alkaloids, such as heroin and morphine, is the question of control of the concentrated alkaloids extracted from the crude opium. So it is the manufactured product, the alkaloid, that is the question in this country, and it comes right down, as far as that is concerned, to the public health and police problems in this country. Your initial international problem is the production of the raw substance from which the high-powered alkaloids are made and the control of that.

Mr. LINTHICUM. As I understand, it comes from the poppy and cocaine from the coca leaf?

Doctor LAMBERT. Yes.

Mr. LINTHICUM. Does heroin come from a combination of the two?

Doctor LAMBERT. No; heroin is made by the action upon morphine of certain chemicals.

Mr. LINTHICUM. That is the part that is doing the harm? The manufactured product?

Doctor LAMBERT. Yes.

Mr. LINTHICUM. Where are these factories?

Doctor LAMBERT. In this country, Germany, and scattered over the world. Japan manufactures the alkaloids; Great Britain, Germany, the United States. The CHAIRMAN. And Switzerland.

Doctor LAMBERT. Yes.

Mr. LINTHICUM. Would it not be a good plan to get rid of these factories in this country?

Doctor LAMBERT. No; because they produce an absolutely necessary product, morphine and codeine. But if you will get rid of the heroin it will be a blessing. Mr. LINTHICUM. That is what I thought.

Mr. CONNALLY. Do any of these plants grow wild, natively?
Doctor LAMBERT. The poppy plant?

Mr. CONNALLY. Yes.

Doctor LAMBERT. They grow in many cases wild.

Mr. MOORES. They grow here.

Doctor LAMBERT. It is a common flower garden plant here. But opium and morphine are not made from the pods in the United States, not commercially. Mr. CONNALLY. I had in mind the idea of what means you had to suppress it if it grew without cultivation.

Doctor LAMBERT. They can not make it here profitably.

The CHAIRMAN. Not in paying quantities.

Mr. CONNALLY. Whether in paying quantities or not, I would like that question brought out.

Doctor LAMBERT. You can not raise it and make it pay. It can be done as an experiment in many countries and has been done in that way in the United States, but it does ot pay, labor costs too much, and there is a peculiar and particular method of obtaining it. It is not done. As a scientific experiment it has been done, but it is not done commercially.

Mr. CONNALLY. That answers the question.

Mr. MOORE of Virginia. You stated at the outset the locality where the very richest opium has been raised.

Doctor LAMBERT. The richest opium, it is said, the richest sample ever raised was at Amiens, France, 22.8 per cent morphine. But the ordinary Persian and Turkish opium contains 17, 15, and 12 per cent, and that is sufficiently good and raised so cheaply that it is not worth while to raise it elsewhere.

Mr. MOORE of Virginia. It seems to me that the President of the United States now has the power that this resolution requests him to exercise, but, leaving that aside, you have made a large study of this general subject. Have you gone far enough to be able to suggest what domestic legislation we should enact here in addition to narcotic laws that are already on our statute books that would tend to accomplish the purpose you have in view?

Doctor LAMBERT. Yes. I feel very strongly on it. The Harrison law is an excellent law. If you can put a law on the statute books that will prevent making or selling heroin, you will do more than any other one thing to stop the vice and the evil contained in the narcotic problem.

Mr. MOORE of Virginia. Is there anything else that you have in mind that might be done?

Doctor LAMBERT. Give the Government the amount of money necessary to enforce the Harrison law.

Mr. MOORE of Virginia. You think those two enactments would tend very largely in the direction in which we ought to travel?

Doctor LAMBERT. There is another thing. There are certain figures in the hands of the Treasury Department that show the amount of opium used in the