1 See U. S. Treaty Series, No. 863; U. S. Dept. of State, Conference Series, No. 10, Conference on the Limitation of the Manufacture of Narcotic Drugs, Geneva, May 27-July 13,1931, Report of the Delegation of the United States to the Secretary of State, Washington, 1932; League of Nations, Treaty Series, Vol. 139, p. 303 ff.; League of Nations, Records of the Conference for the Limitation of the Manufacture of Narcotic Drugs, Geneva, May 27 to July 13, 1931, 2 vols., L. of N. Pub., Opium and Other Dangerous Drugs, 1931, XI, 10. The writer has dealt with earlier phases of the problem in “The Opium Question,” this Journal, Vol. 18 (1924), pp. 281-295; “The American Withdrawal from the Opium Conference,” ibid., Vol. 19 (1925), pp. 348-355; “The Opium Conference,” ibid., pp. 559-569.

2 For summary of American legislation on the subject before 1924, see this Journal, Vol. 18 (1924), p. 285. More recent legislation includes the Revenue Act of June 2, 1924 (43 Stat. 328), reenacting the Act of Dec. 17, 1914, providing for registration and taxation of persons dealing in narcotics; the Act of June 7, 1924 (43 Stat. 657), prohibiting the importation of opium for the manufacture of heroin; the Act of Feb. 26,1926 (44 Stat. 99), strengthening the internal revenue laws in respect to the seizure of illegitimate narcotics in the United States; the Act of Jan. 19, 1929 (45 Stat. 1085-1089), defining “narcotic” and “addict” and establishing narcotic farms for the treatment of “narcotic addicts“; the Act of June 14,1930 (46 Stat. 585-587), establishing the Bureau of Narcotics in the Department of the Treasury under a Commissioner of Narcotics in substitution for the Federal Narcotics Control Board, authorizing the Commissioner to offer rewards for information on violation of the narcotics laws, authorizing the Surgeon-General of the Public Health Service to study abuses of narcotics and to determine and report to the Secretary of the Treasury the quantities of crude opium and coca leaves and their salts necessary to supply normal and emergency medicinal and scientific requirements of the United States; authorizing the Secretary of the Treasury to cooperate with the Secretary of State in discharging the international obligations of the United States concerning narcotic drugs and with the States in suppressing the abuse of narcotic drugs in the United States; the Tariff Act of June 17,1930 (46 Stat. 748), increasing the liability and penalties of vessels entering the United States with prepared opium in their cargo. See also Hearings before the Committee of Ways and Means, H. of R., on H. R. 7079, a bill prohibiting the importation of crude opium for the purpose of manufacturing heroin, April 3, 1924; Remarks of Walter F. Lineberger of Calif., H. of R., Cong. Rec, Feb. 18, Dec. 16 and 21, 1925, on the work of the International Narcotics Educational Association; C. E. Terry, Report to the Committee on Drug Addiction on the Use of Narcotics in several American communities, N. Y., 1927. This report points out that estimates of the number of drug addicts in different communities of the United States vary too much to permit of generalizing. Such generalizations run from under 100,000 to over 1,000,000 drug addicts in the United States (pp. 64-65; and Report, 1931, pp. 19, 24). See also Arthur Woods, Dangerous Drugs (New Haven, 1931), pp. 39-40. The per capita consumption of drugs appears to vary enormously in different parts of the world. Estimates for morphine vary from .09 Kg. per million inhabitants per year in the Dutch East Indies, to 8.42 Kg. per million per year in Great Britain, 13.74 Kg. in Japan, 16.89 Kg. in the United States, 16.99 Kg. in France, 17.01 Kg. in Norway, 18.09 Kg. in Germany, and 91.67 Kg. in Kwantung. (See League of Nations Pub., Opium, etc., 1932, XI, 3, p. 104 ff., and Reports of the Permanent Central Opium Board, Sessions 5 to 13, 1931-1932, League of Nations Official Journal, Vol. 12, pp. 289 ff., 2190 ff.; Vol. 13, p. 1761 ff.)

3 U. S. Treaty Series, Nos. 718, 739; E. D. Dickinson, this Journal, Vol. 20 (1926), p. 344 ff.

4 Dept. of State, Press Release, Feb. 15, 1929. Similar executive agreements were made in 1930 and 1931 with Austria, Cuba, Egypt, Mexico, Poland, Portugal, Rumania, Switzerland, Yugoslavia. See U. S. Dept. of State, Treaty Information, Dec, 1932, Supp. to Bulletin No. 39 (List of Treaties and Other International Acts of the United States of America in force December 31, 1932), pp. 80-83.

5 U. S. Treaty Series, No. 863.

6 See list of parties in Advisory Committee on Traffic in Opium, Report on 16th Session, May, 1933, L. of N., Opium, 1933, XI, 1, p. 26; and in U. S. Treaty Series, No. 863, p. 58, and Treaty Information, Nos. 51, 53, 55. The non-parties include (May, 1934) Abyssinia, Afghanistan, Albania, South Africa, Argentina, Austria, Bolivia, Ecuador, Denmark, Finland, Greece, Honduras, Iceland, Japan, Latvia, Liberia, Liechtenstein, Luxemburg, New Zealand, Norway, Panama, Paraguay, Saudi Arabia, U. S. S. R., Yugoslavia. Belgium and Great Britain reserved with respect to their colonies, protectorates and mandated areas. France and Portugal reserved the obligations respecting statistics from such areas. Of these non-parties, Japan and U. S. S. R. are narcotic manufacturing countries, and Afghanistan, Bolivia, Japan, Yugoslavia and U. S. S. R. are opium or coca producing countries. See note 19, infra.

7 Dept. of State, Press Releases, July 15, 1933.

8 Ibid., Sept. 23, 1933.

9 Certain methods of smuggling are set forth from data published by the League of Nations Advisory Committee in Arthur Woods, op. cit., p. 61 ff.

10 Records of the Assembly, 8th Ordinary Session, League of Nations Official Journal, Sp. Supp., No. 54, pp. 117, 413; Woods, op. dt., p. 106. The L. of N. Advisory Committee on Traffic in Opium and Other Dangerous Drugs publishes every year a list of illicit transactions and seizures reported by the governments. That for 1930 contained 170 closely printed pages. (L. of N. Pub., Opium, 1930, XI, 9.)

11 See this Journal, Vol. 19 (1925), pp. 348-355. For list of producing countries, see note 19, infra.

12 For text of Geneva Opium Convention, 1925, see Hudson, International Legislation, p. 1580, and of Bangkok Opium Convention, 1931, see L. of N. Pub., Opium, 1932, XI, 1. For discussion explaining reasons for lack of results in the Bangkok Conference and the adequacy of the monopoly policy, see L. of N., Advisory Committee on Traffic in Opium, Minutes of 15th Session, April, 1932 (L. of N. Pub., Opium, 1932, XI, 2), p. 10. See also E. T. Williams, this Journal, Vol. 27 (1933), p. 220, who writes: “ I t decided that it was impracticable to attempt to prevent opium smoking as long as the illicit traffic in the drug continued on the then enormous scale. The real reason for the failure of the conference was the desire of interested nations to retain the revenues derived from the vice.”

13 Woods, op. tit., p. 61.

14 Subsequent agreements have been made attempting less comprehensive world plans for the production of wheat, silver and rubber.

15 L. of N. Pub., Disarmament, 1933, IX, 4.

16 The estimates for 1934 dealt with 15 drugs, but of these only morphine, heroin, codeine, dionine, and cocaine were quantitatively important. It appears that 5 tons of cocaine are required for the world, and 40 tons of morphine. Of the latter, 8% tons are needed in that form, and the remainder is to be converted into 26 tons of codeine, 2﹜4 tons of dionine, l﹜4 tons of heroin, and one ton of other drugs. See League of Nations, Estimated World Requirements of Dangerous Drugs in 1934 (Geneva, 1933), p. 3, and L. of N. Monthly Summary, Dec, 1933, Vol. 13, p. 286.

17 Model Administrative Code to the International Opium Convention signed in Geneva, Feb. 19, 1925, prepared by the AdvisorVjCommittee at its 11th Session, April, 1928, L. of N. Pub. , Opium, 1932, XI, 8.

18 Analogies between the Problem of the Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and that of the Trade in and Manufacture of Arms, L. of N. Pub., Disarmament, 1933, IX, 4, p. 7.

19 Opium is grown in smaller quantities in U. S. S. R., Japan, Korea, Indo-China, Afghanistan, Bulgaria, Greece, and Hungary. Coca is grown in smaller quantities in Formosa and Japan. Indian hemp is grown principally in India, Afghanistan, and U. S. S. R. Narcotics are manufactured in France, Germany, Great Britain, India, Italy, Japan, Netherlands. Switzerland, Turkey, U. S,, and U. S. S. R. See Dr. O. Anselmino, A. B. C. of Narcotic Drugs, L. of N. Pub., Opium, 1931, IX, 1, p. 44, and estimate of quantities produced in each country, in Summary of Annual Reports of Governments on Traffic in Opium and other Dangerous Drugs for the year 1929-1930, L. of N. Pub., Opium, 1932, XI, 3, pp. 86, 95.

20 The 1912 Opium Convention (The Hague) appears to be in force for 58 states; the 1925 Opium Convention (Geneva) for seven states; the 1925 Narcotics Convention (Geneva) for 48 states; the 1931 Narcotics Convention (Geneva) for 46 states, and the 1931 Opium Convention (Bangkok), which does not come into force until 90 days after ratification by all seven signatories, has been ratified by four states. See L. of N. Advisory Committee on Opium, Report to the Council on the 16th Session, May, 1933 (L. of N. Pub., Opium, 1933, XI, 1), p. 25 ff.; ibid., p. 18, referring to Turkey's accession to the 1912, 1925 and 1931 conventions of The Hague and Geneva, and Report on the 17th Session, Oct., 1933, p. 5, referring to Portugal's ratification of the Bangkok Convention. U. S. Treaty Information, Supp. to Bulletin No. 39, Dec, 1932, states the ratifications on Dec. 31,1932, of the 1912 and 1931 conventions (pp. 79-80). Subsequent ratifications are noted in later issues of Treaty Information. Hudson, International Legislation, pp. 1580, 1589, states the ratifications in September, 1931, of the 1925 conventions, and Anselmino, op. cit., reports this information for all the conventions in 1931 (p. 36 ff.), as well as a list of the territories not then covered by any of the general conventions (p. 42). This list seems now (May, 1934) to include Abyssinia and Belgian Congo in Africa; Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Bhutan, Nepal, Koweit, Oman, Yemen in Asia; U. S. S. R. and Liechtenstein in Europe; Argentina and Paraguay in America.

21 See note 6 supra.

22 U. S. Treaty Information, Supp. to Bulletin No. 39, Dec, 1932, p. 27.

23 L. of N., C. L. 27,1934, XI; C. L. 30,1934, XI. The Advisory Committee, in the report of its 17th Session to the Council (Oct. 1933), referred to the reported government monopoly in “Manchukuo,” the lack of official information from this area and the “grave dangers involved by the establishment of clandestine drug factories in the Far East and in other countries where ample supplies of raw opium are available for the manufacture of drugs.” A spirited debate as to the effect of non-recognition of “Manchukuo” upon the obligations of parties to the opium conventions led up to this report. See L. of N. Advisory Committee on the Traffic in Opium, 17th Session, Report, p. 3; Minutes, pp. 13-21, 24-27 (L. of N. Pub., Opium, 1933, XI, 6). E. T. Williams, commenting on the influence of nations interested in opium revenue in frustrating the Bangkok Opium Conference of 1931, writes: “Japan maintains an opium monopoly in Formosa and presumably would not be unwilling to secure revenue from the production of opium in Jehol.” Chang Hs?eh-liang, while governor of northern Chinese territory, including Jehol, is said to have received $500,000 annually in revenue from opium. This Journal, Vol. 27 (1933), p. 220.