• Welcome Guest

    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
    Fun 💃 Threads Overdosed? Click
    D R U G   C U L T U R E

Super Trick Quiz Question On Cannabis Decrim History IN The USA

jspun

Bluelighter
Joined
Jun 11, 2008
Messages
1,749
Location
San Diego
In light of the changing attitudes towards cannabis worldwide particularly in the United States with respect to the medical marijuana movement of the last few years I have a trivial pursuit style quiz question that some might find interesting from a historical perspective. Once upon a time, cannabis was a plant that grew wild. As civilizations developed, some took advantage of various sttributes of the plant, whether its ability to make textiles, psychoactive properties. used in spiritual ceremonies, ect...Some societies as the years passed decided to forbid its use. The 20th century saw a huge increase in the inactment of laws by various countries and international agreements to limit and or control the production, sale, and use of cannabis and its derivatives. The answer to this question I found interesting as a historical/ geopolitics of drugs enthusiasts. This question has many parts. The question deals with change in legal status of cannabis after it had been illegal in a place for a period of time. Lets see how you budding Homer's of hemp do.

1.) Where was the first place under USA jurisdiction[/COLOR] to relegalize/ decriminalize cannabis (with the full understanding to be used for the deliberate purpose of smoking and become intoxicated.) This is as opposed to "hemp for victory" type policies.

2.) In what year did this occur

3.) What components of the political machinery led to the change in legal status.

4.) What form did decriminalization take.

5.) What were the background arguments- what promted these changes

6.) Did this have any positive effect on the attitude towards cannabis prohibition of any neighborhing areas.

7.)Did this predate decrim policies in Europe, if so by how long.

8.) To what extent was the decision to relax the laws based on scientific testimony, on political principles, on other factors.

9.) Just for shits and giggles, name one strain this region is known for.

10.) Another bonus question- what place has probably the most draconian drug policies in the USA. Hint: it was the tragic victim of a recent disaster that caused FEMA to mobilizer what good that did.


Hope this doesn't annoy people, and its almost like a survey. The anwer I believe might be incorrect. I can think of places before the answer I have in mind that had scenes and decrim (or crim) might have been implemented sooner. I Think El Paso was the first place in the continental US that MJ was criminalized. I'll add questions as i think of them. I have the article but it is too old for DiTM. Awsome article! and a good example of sensible approaches to drug policies, where political propaganda doesn't overrule the truth. Discuss change in status in states from felonies to midemenors if not just answer to this country. I'll give it a few days. Believe me, this is an interesting story- I'll then post the paper.

Please don't post to cannabis culture or any other forum. Give it a chance and you'll see what it has to do with drug culture in general andhow it pertains to the formulation of good drug policy.

Please guys, partcipate in my little excercize. Pweeze!!!!!!!!!!!
 
Anybody want to take a stab at this. Keep in mind its a trick question. Actually most of the ten are prety tough- I would be suprised if anybody got the main question right. Anyone want to try answering any of these questions? Anyone?:p:p:p
 
ahh geez, of course I come across this awesome thread AFTER I smoke some dank...:p

I'll make an effort anyway. =D wellll, I am pretty sure the last question's answer is my own Florida--it's pretty stringent there but the weed is damn good!
The first question--err, the only place I can think of is Mendo county in CA, in 2000.
I assume it happened because people finally got tired of having to go underground?
 
The Rouge_the last question about stringent laws will trip you out. There are even places that are more repressive as far as cannabis laws in the US than Florida. One thing I'll say about FL is that some of the strongest, best quality dank I ever got in my life was a strain called kryp or krypie, It was a short way of saying kryptonite bud, back in the early 90s. I smoked a joint that my friend Kirk had brought back from Coco Beach (he was a surfer in the sebastian inslet crew). Anyway, this stuff was crystalized, smelled like mint and a little like pine, maybe reminiscent of a mojito, and it was seriously like a flourescent green color. That shit lived up to its name, a pinner joint shared between 4 hard core heads (2 N Californians, my friend Kirk, and a southern CA. That shit lived up to its nickname. Paralyzed me- had me starring at a computer screen for hours. The southerner (CA) was wrecked-tolerance to kind bud-they were a bunch of panzies at the time. It was grown in South FL (in the everglades outdoors it was rumored). This was in my UCSD days. Anyway, there is an even worse place than FL cannabis laws wise. In the 80s and 90s the State of Montana had a law instituting life for cultivation. It was actually applied to a farmer that was literally losing the farm due to an unfortunate set of circumstances- guy had never done an illegal drug in his life. But neither state has the answer I was looking for to question #10, but the drug laws there are still probably harsh. Neversoune, somewhere in Alaska was your pick-not a bad one at all. By the way, the strongest strain of weed was grown in Alaska I ever had in my life. Thank you! Keep the answers comming- I promise, the answers will surprise you. I could be wrond but I have an good historical article and am looking for an excuse to release it. Will if I get enough participation. Its for fun, try answering some, all, ect...With question #10 I meant draconiam penalties for all drugs, not just cannabis specifically, although their level of tolerance (the place I'm thinking of) isn't what it used to be- good pot used to come and were plentiful from my place that is my answer to # 10.
 
Last edited:
First place in the US were it was criminalized, I believe was El Paso, Texas in 1916, (maybe they were criminalized somewhere else under US jurisdiction like the Phillipeans even before?) I will have to reserach to confirm the El Paso factoid but I know its definitely not been decriminalized there. Hint for question number #1, the answer is not Alaska but that states judicial system made a rulling that decriminalized cannabis. Its still decriminalized or recriminalized in 1990 depending on who you talk to. By the way this went into effect the year before the Dutch decriminalized "soft drugs"- that happened in 1976. Anybody want to take a stab at this- the story is trully remarkable.%)
 
DC enacted the 1st law against cannabis in 1906.

Quote:
In 1973 Oregon decriminalized cannabis[45] and Colorado, Alaska, Ohio, and California followed suit in 1975. By 1978, Mississippi, North Carolina[46], New York, and Nebraska had some form of cannabis decriminalization.[citation needed] In 2001, Nevada reduced cannabis possession from a felony offense to a misdemeanor, but only for adults age 21 and older, with other restrictions.[47]

Starting in the 1970s, multiple states, counties, and cities decriminalized cannabis for non-medical purposes. While many states, counties, and cities have partially decriminalized cannabis, on November 3, 2004, Oakland passed Proposition Z, and became the first place to fully decriminalize cannabis to allow the licensing, taxing, and regulation of cannabis sales if California law is amended to allow so. (see Places that have decriminalized cannabis in the United States for further information).

But this is not what I'm talking about. There is actually a place in the world that was part of the US were it was illegal to smoke weed for a period time were the local citizens regained the legal right to smoke cannabis or use it any other way they wished and were it was no longer illegal to cultivate cannabis in this slice of US soil. In other words, cannabis became fully legal again, Anybody want to take a stab at the answer?
 
Last edited:
The big hint to question 1 was that cannabis smoking was relegalized (question 1) before there was a federal law banning it and that there was a sizable caucasian American smoking subculture, maybe one of the largest per capita in the United States of white American bud smokers way back then. Maybe if no answers/guesses I'll let it die a natural death.

Nerve and rouge were brave enough to take stabs. This predated (what I am thinking of) the complete decriminalization in Alaska in 1975 by about half a decade. Whitch predate the tolerance of soft grugs in Amsterdam by 1 year.
 
I'm interested in the answer to this, please do post it. Aside from that, my guess would be Colorado, maybe either Boulder or Aspen?
 
I'm glad you find this interesting Rhisper. Colorado was a good try but this was a tough one. So here's the answers. I don't have time to post the article but I will in a few days.

1.) Where was the first place under USA jurisdiction to relegalize/ decriminalize cannabis (with the full understanding to be used for the deliberate purpose of smoking and become intoxicated.) This is as opposed to "hemp for victory" type policies.[/COLOR] The Panama Canal Zone

2.) In what year did this occur Marijuana prohibition in the Canal Zone was enacted January 20, 1923. The prohibition of canabis was rescinded January 29, 1926 almost 3 years to the day after being enacted.

3.) What components of the political machinery led to the change in legal status.
The Governor of the Canal Zone Commisioned a study and formed a commitee made up of officials like the chief of police and military physicians. More specifically, the pannel consisted of:
A committee was appointed by the Governor on April 1, 1925, to investigate the use of mariajuana, and to make recommendations as to steps that should be taken for prevention of its use, including, if considered necessary, recommendations for special legislation. This committee consisted of the Chief Health Officer of the Panama Canal, the District Attorney, the Chief of the Division of Civil Affairs, and the Chief of the Division of Police and Fire; also, the Department Judge Advocate, the Chief of the Board of Health Laboratory, the Superintendent of Corozal Hospital for the Insane, and a representative from the Medical Corps, U. S. Navy , acting in an advisory capacity.

Their findings:
There is no evidence that mariahuana as grown here is a "habit-forming" drug in the sense in which the term is applied to alcohol, opium, cocaine, etc., or that it has any appreciably deleterious influence on the individuals using it.

The Committee recommended "that no steps be taken by the Canal Zone authorities to prevent the sale or use of mariahuana, and that no special legislation be asked for."


4.) What form did decriminalization take. Although individuals were allowed to use and cultivate cannabis within the Canal Zone (a strip on 5 miles of each side of the Panama canal administered by the US until given back to Panama by Carter by treaty), several military comanders generally kept the prohibition in place for soldiers under their comand, but again, the large number of US civilian residents of the Canal and Employees of the Panama Canal Company as well as Panamanian nationals residing inside the Zone were free to smoke. In fact, the Chiva-Chiva trail in the Canal Zone was noted for the large number of farmers that would tend small plots for themselves and sell excess buds to American residents of the Zone, both civilian and military. But outside the zone, in neighboring Republic of Panama territory, cannabis was illegal.
5.) What were the background arguments- what promted these changes
I'll get into this more when I post the article

6.) Did this have any positive effect on the attitude towards cannabis prohibition of any neighborhing areas.
The consequence of this was that, In December, 1928, the law forbidding the possession and use of mariajuana in the Republic of Panama was repealed. The first and only time I can think of that US drug policy has had a positive influence on the drug policy of another nation.
7.)Did this predate decrim policies in Europe, if so by how long.
Yes- by 50 years. The Dutch decriminalized soft drugs in 1976- but still cannabis remains in theory illegal there while in the Canal Zone cannabis was made de facto legal. (It helped that all This predated the MJ tax act (1937)

8.) To what extent was the decision to relax the laws based on scientific testimony, on political principles, on other factors. the studies were carried out in military hospitals in the Canal Zone utilizing cannabis that had been grown on the US governments experimental botany station in the Zone for the experiment- again get into this when I post the article

9.) Just for shits and giggles, name one strain this region is known for.Panama Red=D

10.) Another bonus question- what place has probably the most draconian drug policies in the USA. Hint: it was the tragic victim of a recent disaster that caused FEMA to mobilizer what good that did. (actually was the victim of tsunami this summer)[/COLOR
The American Samoa, you do not want to get caught with any controlled substance in the territory (any amount)- I have heard of jail terms of years being handed out for simple possession to make examples of people. Ice is the big concern over there, though. If you want to smoke meth or anything else, you would be better off to travel the 50 km to the neighboring independent Western Samoa were they call the drug P- there, penalties are nominally more lenient if I am not mistaken.]8o
 
Last edited:
Its funny you say that, the first incidence of cannabis smoking that was brought to the attention of military authorities and the civilian administrators of the Canal Zone was a regiment of soldiers in the US Army from Peurto Rico (which had been aquired several years earlier as spoils of the spanish american war). Probably soldiers in a regiment that was in an outfit like the modern day equivalent of the National Guard that were stationed in the CZ.

As far as can be ascertained mariajuana was not used for smoking by the personnel engaged in the construction of the Panama Canal, and police records do not show any cases of mariajuana intoxication during that time. In fact, the first information reaching police headquarters that mariajuana was being used here was about 1916 when the Chief of Police was informed that soldiers of the Porto Rican Regiment were smoking a "weed" which caused unusual symptoms. On investigation the officers of the regiment stated that they knew nothing of this and expressed surprise when the subject was brought up. The next reference to mariajuana was on May 26, 1922, when the Provost Marshal, Quarry Heights, Canal Zone, inquired of the Chief of Board of Health .Laboratory, Ancon, concerning the nature of mariajuana. Several months later the Chief of Police also made an inquiry concerning this drug and desired to know whether it was a narcotic drug within the meaning of the Narcotic Drug Act. From the correspondence it is evident that smoking mariajuana had become prevalent among soldiers on duty in the Zone and that there were cases of delinquency attributed to its use.

http://druglibrary.org/schaffer/Library/studies/panama/panama1.htm

This is the article. Don't have time, have long day of work tommorow but I'll go in, copy the text, and discuss/ underline salient features/ interesting stuff.

But anyway, there was probably an established cannabis scene by that time in existance in Puerto Rico, that had been around for some time and the soldiers brought the pass time with them (or new what it was when they encountered it locally). As to MJ's legal status in the territory at that time (1916-1930s) I don't know).

Great Guess though!!!
 
haha, I can't believe i was so close in a way! How did you find this article? I might give it a read sometime. I bet that puerto rico's drug laws mirrored the united states for that time period as they were part of our nation at the time, although I have no clue at how puerto rico is or was governed
 
haha, I can't believe i was so close in a way! How did you find this article? I might give it a read sometime. I bet that puerto rico's drug laws mirrored the united states for that time period as they were part of our nation at the time, although I have no clue at how puerto rico is or was governed

Read the second paragraph and skip to the last 3 if you don't feel like reading tons. But this might answer some of your questions. I know its overkill- sorry:o

It was the Marijuana Tax Act of 1937 that started the process of prohibiting cannabis on a national level. I would imagine that cocaine and opiate prohibition was in place due to the Harrison Narcotics Law. To what extent it appled to PR I don't know. Also, many states were criminalizing cannabis for years before MJ Tax Act and PR could have been 1 of them. I think there Governor was still being chosen by the US government in the first half of the century. Puerto Rico is still part of the United States. It is officially designated as a "commonwealth" which is a type of territorial staus. Outside the States, possessions of the United States are given different statuses, for instance they are either organized or incorporated. So a territory might be an organized unincorporated part of the US. I don't know the whole legal implications/ distinctions but for instance, this has to do with the degree that the Constitution of the US applies. So in the American Samoa, it is part of the US but the Constitution does not fully apply. Titles of nobility are honored (chiefs) and land ownership laws are different. A US citizen from the mailand needs premission to settle there or own property. The people are US nationals and they send a non- voting representative to congress. Same with other US territories such as Puerto Rico, the US Virgin Islands, Guam, The Northern Marianas, the District of Columbia. There are also outlying possessions such as Palmyra, Midway, Johnston Atol, Wake in the Pacific, and Navassa in the Carribean that are little American rocks or coral atols aquired either through the guano act, but many of these places are unoccupied, most having outlived there strategic or commercial usefulness.

So anyway, Puerto Rico is a US Commonwealth. Its residents are US citizens and may travel and settle in the mainland US at will. The issue of Statehood or independence was voted on. They choose by a narrow margin to keep their commonwealth status. I don't think they pay federal income taxes, they enjoy free trade with the US, use the US dollar, have a governor and legislature, but can't vote for president (although they can nominate in the Dem or Republican primaries), and have a non-voting member in the House of Representatives. I believe that you don't have to go through customs when travelling from the mailnad US and can live there without a Visa if you are an American from the Mainland. The official language is Spanish but English is widely spoken. US Mail delivers their and it has its own Zip codes. Its almost like a dual nation for lack of a better term. Puerto Ricans can and do serve in the US military and the US is responsible for its defense and diplomatic affairs. I know this is probably more info than you were looking for but the last thing is that PR, Guam, Cuba, and the Phillipeans (yes we once governed the Phillipeans) were ceceded to the US as concessions for the Spanish losing the Spanish-American war. Cuba got its independence right away but we negotiated the rights for a military base on the Island (Guantanamo Bay) which we still administer as we all know from the news. The Philipeans got its independence in 1945 after WWII and Japanese independence. They were actually probably too big a pain in the ass to govern. PR and Guam are still US soil.

We also administered "trust territories' like the Marshall Islands after WWII that the US was given a mandate to develop, mostly former Japanese territories. One, The Northern Marianas decided to apply for US commonwealth status. The rest are independent but we still subsidize alot. On Kwajalein, the worlds largest atoll- nicknamed the worlds largest catchers mit is were dummy nuke wareheads are aimed at and SDI components are tested. They have a community of the Atol were only Americans live and the government goes to great stides to make it as idylic American as possible- A kind of more American than America.

This brings us to the Panama Canal Zone. In 1903, the US helped Panama gain its independence from Columbia. In return they gave the US the rights to build a canal. Along with the deal, the US was to receive a strip of land 5 miles out from the midline of the canal to control in "perpetuety". For all practical purposes, after the canal was built you had a narrow ten mile wide strip from the pacific to the atlantic of America right in the middle of Panama. Panama was, and still is a third world country. Within this "zone" you had all the comforts of home, American structures, clean, symetrical streets, the place was sprayed regularly with DDT so you didn't have swarms of Mosquitos. You had an American Governor, US postal addresses, American products in the government owned stores. Well built American structures. For kids growing up it was very "leave it to beaver" like. There were several military instalations, a smithsonian tropical research station, libraries, schools with American style curiculum. In addition to military personel, about 3,000 civilian US citizens lived and worked in the Zone before the handover started in 79'. Whole generations lived there were the grand or great grandparents moved to the CZ and children and childrens children lived there. From what I heard, it was surreal. You would be in Panama city in third world central America and cross a street and be in clean, symetrical America. Kind of like crossing the border to TJ but more dramatic. The local authorities tried hard to keep it more American than America to prevent homesickness. To keep order, they had American cops, American laws, American institutions, and even a federal circuit court for the Canal Zone. There were alot of sad and pissed off people when the Canal was handed over. The zone kind of went to shit in some spots. A few of the original inhabitants lived in the Zone too but weren't allowed to buy at the American stores or go to the American socialclubs,ect...

Why I found this article- I have a morbid facination with drugs and drug culture, have from a young age. history, geography, and geopolitics are also interests of mine-especially when they pertain to drugs. When 12-13 year old were memorizing baseball stats, collecting comic books, I was engrossed in learning about drugs that get you high.

Anyway, I use this article as a model of government policy on an inoccous substance like cannabis before brainwashing and propaganda of self-interests groups have fucked up policy based on principle, facts, and common sense. This article is a model of rational drug policy.
 
Last edited:
Cannabis in The Panama Canal Zone- A Study in Rational Drug Policy

MARIAJUANA SMOKING IN PANAMA

Taken from: The Military Surgeon Volume 73 - July-December 1933


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



IN JUNE, 1931, at the request of the Commanding General, Panama Canal Department, a committee was designated to reinvestigate the effect of the smoking of mariajuana on military personnel, with a view to securing additional evidence that might possibly be used as a basis for the formulation of regulations forbidding the cultivation, possession, or sale of mariajuana in the Canal Zone. The Governor designated three members to serve on the committee (Health Department officials) ; the Army two members (officers of the Medical Corps) ; and the Commandant, 15th Naval District, one member (medical officer of the Navy).

The committee concluded that the principal and most practicable method of securing reliable information would be to hospitalize a considerable number of soldiers who were known to be users of mariajuana, permit them to use it, then withdraw it and have the patients observed and studied throughout the period of hospitalization by a psychiatrist of high professional standing. The mariajuana used was grown at the ;)Thirty-four soldiers were observed.

It was deemed advisable as a matter of interest and for purposes of record to incorporate in the report a resume of the general information available relative to the cultivation, preparation, uses, and effects on human beings of mariajuana (Cannabis sativa L.) in various parts of the world, including its use as a stimulant and intoxicant on the Isthmus.

Mariajuana, mariahuana, marihuana, marijuana, Indian hemp, .Cannabis sativa L., Cannabis indica, and Cannabis americana are synonymous, and in this report the term mariajuana will be understood to apply to all the above terms.

It appears that mariajuana is not a correct term in the Spanish language but that it is a provincialism common to Panama and derived from the word "maraguango" The latter mentioned term is a general one and is interpreted to mean smoking, drinking, or snuffing of any substance that produces the loss of clear mentality, hallucinations, delusions, or disturbed sleep. The plant mariajuana, grown locally, is synonymous with Cannabis sativa L. or Cannabis indica and Indian hemp. Hemp is cultivated all over the world, its culture probably originating in China from whence it spread. It is cultivated for three purposes; for the fibre, out of which rope, twine, cloth, and hats are made; for the seed, from which a rapidly drying oil is obtained that is used in the arts and as a commercial substitute for linseed oil; and for the narcotic principle contained in the resin of the dried flowering tops of the pistillate plant. The seed is also sold as a constituent of commercial bird seed. It is not known when the plant was introduced into Mexico and the southwestern part of the United States, but probably along with the early Spanish settlers. It was introduced into Chile in the sixteenth century. The early cultivation of hemp in the United States was of the small European variety but this has been replaced since 1857 by the larger Chinese hemp. Practically all the seed for the present day American hemp culture is grown in the Kentucky River valley. Hemp is found growing wild in the' , slough', district of the Illinois River valley, especially in Tazewell County, where the gathering of the flowering tops is a local industry. The harvest is sold to the pharmaceutical trade. There is no evidence that the smoking of hemp or other abuse respecting this plant is practiced or known to those engaged in this occupation. Formerly, the majority, if not all, of the imports of Cannabis sativa into the United States was from India where hemp was largely cultivated for its narcotic principle. The menace of habit formation which its culture made possible led to the imposition of such drastic restrictions to its cultivation that the supply of Cannabis indica required by the United States had to be sought elsewhere. To meet requirements for pharmaceutical use in the United States the cultivation of Cannabis sativa became an industry in the United States, principally in the valleys of the Kentucky and the Illinois rivers.

Mariajuana is designated as a "narcotic" in the laws of several states. It is one of several drugs included in the anti-narcotic laws of sixteen states.

In India the plant is grown to some extent .for the fibre but also, and in some parts exclusively, for its narcotic principle. There are three principal forms in which it is prepared but of these there are many modifications. The first is that known as charas; the second, ganga; and the third, bhang. Charas is the resinous exudate found in the bark, the leaves and on the pistillate or female flowers, and even on the fruits. Ganga is an agglomeration of the pistillate flowering , stems with the exuded resin. Bhang consists of the dried mature leaves and to some extent the fruit but not the twigs.

Charas, the resinous substance which exudes naturally from the bark, leaves and pistillate flowers, is smoked for its stimulating, intoxicant, and narcotic effects.

Ganga is prepared from the pistillate flowering heads which must not be allowed to form fruit if the best quality of ganga is desired. The resin is pressed out and the mass of agglomerated flowers and resin is pressed into the desired shapes. Ganga, also is used for smoking for its stimulating, intoxicant, and narcotic effects.

Bhang consists of the dried leaves and to some extent the dried fruits of the plant. The resin is not extracted from this product; it is used directly in the preparation of the products which furnish the effect. One of these products is "hashish," an intoxicating beverage. Another is a sweetmeat known in India as "majun" or "majum." Bhang is made chiefly from the wild plants which grow abundantly as an escape from cultivation. Bhang is reported to be much weaker than ganga or charas and is supposed to be less injurious. The cultivation of mariajuana as a source of the active principle is a highly specialized one in India, and the plants are given special attention.

The plants are sexually distinct. The male plants yield little or no resin and are not allowed to remain in the field after their male characters have become apparent. It is endeavored to rid the field of all male (staminate) plants, which, if allowed to remain, fecundate the flowers of the female (pistillate) plants, causing the formation of fruits, in which process the pistillate plants .themselves rapidly deteriorate as sources of the desired active principle.

Mariajuana as grown among the Chiva.-Chiva Trail farmers in the Canal Zone.--In this locality (Pacific side of the Canal) there is cultivation on a small scale. Apparently some farmers grow only a few plants to supply their own wants, while others evidently have more than can be used by themselves and their families. The surplus is sold to soldiers. The plant is used to make tea; four or five, or more dried leaves are placed in a cup and steeped in boiling water. There is among the colored people great faith in the efficacy of this drink as a mild stimulant which gives a feeling of well being, and also as a preventive of malaria. The smoking of dried leaves and flower heads in the form of cigarettes seems also to be not uncommon.

Little attention is paid by the natives to removing the staminate (male) plants before pollen inaction and their leaves are often mixed with the leaves and flower clusters of the pistillate (female) plants, although it is generally understood that the former are much less potent. For these reasons it will be seen that mariajuana purchased locally is probably of quite variable character and tests of its physiological and mental effects in any experiment may be expected to vary likewise. For this reason the committee felt that the product to be used in its experiments should be specially selected material furnished by the Director of the Canal Zone Experiment Gardens.%)=D

No charas or ganga has been found among the military personnel in the Canal Zone, nor has either been found among the civilian personnel.

Uses in medicine--and action. --Mariajuana {Cannabis indica or C. sativa) is described in the Epitome of U. S. Pharmacopoeia, and National Formulary as a "narcotic poison, producing a mild delirium. Used in sedative mixtures, but of doubtful value. Also employed to color corn remedies."

In the 20th edition of the United States Dispensatory there is the following description:

Aside from the local irritant effect the action of cannabis seems to be limited almost exclusively to the higher nerve centers. In man this is first manifested by a peculiar delirium which is accompanied by exaltation of the imaginative function and later by a remarkable loss of the sense of time. The delirium is often accompanied with motor weakness and diminished reflexes and generally followed by drowsiness. Cannabis is used in medicine to relieve pain, to encourage sleep, and to soothe restlessness.

The drug is used very little in the practice of medicine. It is considered unstable and unreliable and as there are other drugs which can be used to relieve pain and produce sleep the prescribing of this drug for these purposes is falling into disuse.

Mariajuana in the United States.-Recent legislation enacted by the Seventieth Congress, approved January 19, 1929, authorizes the establishment of two United States Narcotic Farms for the confinement and treatment of persons addicted to the use of habit forming narcotic drugs. The act specifically defines the term "habit-forming narcotic drug" and includes in the section which defines these drugs Indian hemp and its various derivatives but it does not appear in the other Federal anti-narcotic laws. The drug is included in the anti-narcotic laws of sixteen states.
In a "Memorandum on 'dagga' smoking and its evils" , published by the Department of Public Health, Union of South Africa, 1924, there is found the following report by the Rand Probation Officer :

There is a considerable amount of dagga (mariahuana) smoking amongst European males of the poor white and delinquent type, but I have never met an instance of the habit amongst intelligent or educated Europeans. All the European smokers I have met have acquired the habit during adolescence, though most have dropped it again in early manhood. It is sometimes acquired in boyhood from association with natives while herding stock or in similar occupations in the country.

The type of youth from whom the dagga smoker is recruited is generally of a low standard of intelligence, and the deteriorating effects of the drug react upon this nidus to confirm the habit early and to drag the smoker to the lowest depths.

The memorandum further states that :

The attraction of the drug is greatest for those living dull and monotonous lives, as in barracks, compounds, prisons, reformatories, hostels, etc:, and also for the degenerate or mentally unstable; the latter are especially prone to become addicts once they have experienced the drug.

In certain quarters of the town and in certain schools, "gangs" of lads between the ages of 10 and 16 years daily smoke three or more cigarettes containing dagga. The evil effects of the drug quickly show themselves in these immature youths by their emotional instability while under the influence of the drug and the dull, lack-lustre look that stamps their faces when the effects have passed off.

As far as can be ascertained mariajuana was not used for smoking by the personnel engaged in the construction of the Panama Canal, and police records do not show any cases of mariajuana intoxication during that time. In fact, the first information reaching police headquarters that mariajuana was being used here was about 1916 when the Chief of Police was informed that soldiers of the Porto Rican Regiment were smoking a "weed" which caused unusual symptoms. On investigation the officers of the regiment stated that they knew nothing of this and expressed surprise when the subject was brought up. The next reference to mariajuana was on May 26, 1922, when the Provost Marshal, Quarry Heights, Canal Zone, inquired of the Chief of Board of Health .Laboratory, Ancon, concerning the nature of mariajuana. Several months later the Chief of Police also made an inquiry concerning this drug and desired to know whether it was a narcotic drug within the meaning of the Narcotic Drug Act. From the correspondence it is evident that smoking mariajuana had become prevalent among soldiers on duty in the Zone and that there were cases of delinquency attributed to its use.

The first step on record to curb the use of mariajuana by the military authorities was in Circular No.5, Headquarters Panama Canal Department, dated January 20, 1923, which prohibited the possession of mariajuana.

There is no further reference to mariajuana until March 31, 1925, when the Department Commander wrote to the Governor suggesting that a conference of legal, medical, and police officers of the Panama Canal and also of the military authorities be arranged to consider the matter of mariajuana traffic.

A committee was appointed by the Governor on April 1, 1925, to investigate the use of mariajuana, and to make recommendations as to steps that should be taken for prevention of its use, including, if considered necessary, recommendations for special legislation. This committee consisted of the Chief Health Officer of the Panama Canal, the District Attorney, the Chief of the Division of Civil Affairs, and the Chief of the Division of Police and Fire; also, the Department Judge Advocate, the Chief of the Board of Health Laboratory, the Superintendent of Corozal Hospital for the Insane, and a representative from the Medical Corps, U. S. Navy , acting in an advisory capacity.

After an investigation extending from April to December, 1925, the Committee reached the following conclusion:

:)There is no evidence that mariahuana as grown here is a "habit-forming" drug in the sense in which the term is applied to alcohol, opium, cocaine, etc., or that it has any appreciably deleterious influence on the individuals using it.

The Committee recommended "that no steps be taken by the Canal Zone authorities to prevent the sale or use of mariahuana, and that no special legislation be asked for
."
:)

The committee, in making its investigation, held hearings which were attended by the Post Commanders of Fort Clayton and Fort Davis. These officers were invited to give their opinions on the subject and to cite instances where mariajuana was the direct cause of military delinquency among soldiers. Members of the committee also visited Fort Davis and the Corozal Hospital for the Insane where they observed soldiers smoking mariajuana, and in addition members of the committee observed four physicians and two members of the Canal Zone Police Department who smoked the drug in their presence. =D;)Persons who smoked the drug at the request of the committee rendered written reports on the effect. Numerous written and oral statements of opinion were submitted for consideration. Military records of delinquency among the military personnel were also available and the committee found that in only a very small percentage of individuals brought to trial before General Courts Martial, in which there was a record of violence or insubordination, was it possible to attribute the delinquency to mariajuana.

The circular which forbade the possession of mariajuana was rescinded on January 29, 1926. In December, 1928, the law forbidding the possession and use of mariajuana in the Republic of Panama was repealed.%)%)%)%)%)%)%)%)

The findings of the Board, however, were not concurred in by most Army officers who exercised command directly over troops. :(The opinion among them was that mariajuana was a habit-forming drug and tended to undermine the morale of a. military organization when it was used to any extent by the personnel.:! There is correspondence on me in the Panama Canal expressing such an opinion and also expressing surprise at the findings of the committee.

On June 23,1928, the Department Commander directed that a further study be made of mariajuana. This study was to continue for one year. The circular letter directing the study reads in part as follows:

Par. 4. In pursuance of this study all cases -of suspected mariahuana intoxication and all cases of suspected mariahuana addiction will be sent to the Surgeon for investigation. The Surgeon will keep -a record of all cases sent, whether or not the use of mariahuana is established. Accurate clinical records of positive cases will be kept. Violations of discipline incident to the use- of the drug will be noted and that coincident with the use of alcohol or narcotics. Surgeons will submit monthly reports of all data upon the subject to the Department Surgeon.

Par. 5. It should be understood that only concrete facts are desired. Opinions or hearsay evidence are not wanted. ...

On June 17, 1929, the Department Surgeon reported to the Chief of Staff that "the inquiry into the use of mariajuana by soldiers of the Department had been in effect a full year. The reports of the twelve months indicate that the use of the drug is not widespread and that its effects upon military efficiency and upon discipline are not great. There appears to be no reason for reviving the penalties formerly exacted for the possession and the use of the drug."

On January 3, 1930, the Department Commander called the attention of all Commanding Officers to the fact that the possession or use of mariajuana was not per se a military offense and that in any trials or other proceedings taken with a view of the separation of individuals from the military service, any proposed defense alleging that wrongful acts or incapacity was the result of the use of mariajuana was not a defense and was not to be so considered.
There is no further reference to the subject until December 1, 1930, when the present Department Commander caused an order to be issued to the effect that "the smoking of mariajuana impairs the efficiency of the soldier and is forbidden. Soldiers smoking mariahuana or using it in any way will be brought to trial for each and every offense.":(

There was still considerable traffic in the drug,:p and Company officers particularly complained of the deleterious effects on the men of their commands who used it. About six months after the publication of the order mentioned in the preceding paragraph (May 22,1931), the Department Commander write the Governor suggesting that the matter be reinvestigated with a view to securing additional evidence which might possibly be used as a basis for the formulation of regulations forbidding the cultivation, possession, or sale of mariajuana on the Canal Zone.

It had been reported that the use of mariajuana was particularly prevalent among soldiers at Fort Clayton and that it was easily obtained in various places along the Chiva-Chiva trail. According to reports it was also being smoked extensively by soldiers at Fort Davis.

On June 30, 1931, the committee first mentioned was designated to investigate the use and effects of mariajuana.

INVESTIGATION BY THE COMMITTEE

The committee at its preliminary meeting decided that its principal objective would be to hospitalize mariajuana smokers at Gorgas Hospital and have them observed by a psychiatrist, a member of the Board. It was considered that this afforded the best and most practicable method of obtaining first hand reliable information concerning the effects of the plant as used in this region. Permission was therefore obtained from the Department Commander to obtain mariajuana smokers from the enlisted personnel for hospitalization and study at Gorgas Hospital.

The committee also considered it desirable to obtain as much information as was practicable as to the extent of mariajuana smoking in military commands and the amount of delinquency caused by its use.

The study of the effects of mariajuana on the individual soldier included a complete neuropsychiatric examination, a clinical-study of the individual after smoking mariajuana, and a clinical study of signs and symptoms following its withdrawal.

The statistical data relating to the extent of mariajuana smoking in military commands and the delinquency that might be considered attributable to its use were secured from military sources by the Army members of the committee.

The problem of the Committee was therefore: 1. Determination of the extent to which mariajuana was being used by military personnel. 2. The physiological effects that result from the smoking of mariajuana. 3. Was military delinquency caused by mariajuana ?


Findings

1. Determination of the extent to which mariajuana is being used by military personnel. -- The following figures are estimates only and were obtained from Post Surgeons through Department Headquarters. They represent the percentage of the command that is presumed to be mariajuana habitues :

Per cent Per cent

Fort Amador 0.6
France Field, 2.0
Fort Clayton. 20.0
Fort Randolph. 3.0
Fort Davis 5.4
Fort Sherman 2.6
Post of Corozal 3.1
Quarry Heights 3.0

2. The physiological effects that result from the smoking of mariajuana.--During the period from December, 1931, to October, 1932, for ;In average of six days in each case, thirty-four soldiers, collected from four posts in the Panama Canal Department, were observed in Gorgas Hospital for the effects of smoking mariajuana. These men, all known to be or suspected of being mariajuana smokers, volunteered to enter the hospital, tell all they knew about the use of mariajuana among soldiers in Panama and submit to any tests desired.

A. General facts:

1. The length of service in Panama of these soldiers varied from two months to four and eight-twelfths years, the average being one year and six months.

2. The chronological age varied from nineteen to thirty-three years, the average being 23 years.

3. Mental status : None exhibited psychotic symptoms. Sixty-two per cent were constitutional psychopaths and 23 per cent were morons, a total of 85 per cent mentally abnormal.

4. The length of time mariajuana was used by them varied from two months to four years, average period being one year and two months.

5. The quantity of mariajuana smoked daily varied from one to twenty cigarettes, average being five cigarettes.

B. Common effects of mariajuana described by users:

1. Mild intoxication. (Smokers use different terms to describe their sensations, the most common being "brushed up," "high," "happy," "peppy," "rosy," "dopy," "satisfied.")

2. Increased appetite.

3. Induction of sleep an hour or two after smoking.

4. Only five, or 15 per cent, stated they missed mariajuana when deprived of it.

5. Twenty-four, or 71 per cent, stated they preferred tobacco to mariajuana.

6. These soldiers stated that mariajuana was cheap and easy to procure in Panama and that they used it for "a pleasant pastime," usually during hours off duty when they had nothing else to do to amuse themselves. They stated that practically all recruits tried mariajuana and those who like it usually continued its use. Their average estimate of the number of habitual mariajuana smokers in their respective organizations was approximately 10 per cent.
C. Common effects of mariajuana observed in users:

1. No deprivation symptoms were observed even in those who admitted smoking eight to ten cigarettes the day previous to admission to hospital.

2. With the exception of three, all after smoking showed symptoms of mild intoxication. They lost reserve, became animated, laughed without adequate cause, and talked foolishly. During this stage, which lasted for half an hour to an hour or so, neurological and mental tests were performed as well as previously. There was no tendency to combativeness or destructiveness.

3. All stated they were very hungry after smoking and the quantity of food consumed at their subsequent meal confirmed this statement.

4. Pulse rate was markedly increased from a few moments after smoking first cigarette to an hour or more. There was no appreciable variation in blood pressure before and after smoking. There were no other distinctive physiological changes observed, other than a tendency to sleep, in which some indulged for a short while an hour or two after smoking.

5. No ill effects from smoking mariajuana for several days in succession were observed even when the soldiers were given mariajuana ad libitum.

Resume of Observed Cases

1. The smoking of mariajuana is quite common among soldiers in Panama.

2. Morons and psychopaths are believed to constitute the large majority of habitual smokers.

3. Mariajuana as grown and used on the Isthmus of Panama is a mild stimulant and intoxicant. It is not a "habit forming" drug in the sense that the derivatives of opium and cocaine are such drugs, as there are no symptoms of deprivation following its withdrawal.

4. Physiological effects observed in addition to intoxication were a marked increase in pulse rate and in appetite and the induction of sleep.

5. No mental or physical deterioration effects of smoking mariajuana could be demonstrated, but with this statement should be considered the fact that the soldiers observed were all young men who had smoked mariajuana for an average of less than two years.

6. From a medical standpoint the habitual use of mariajuana, as of other stimulants and intoxicants, should be considered detrimental to health.

7. Nothing was learned during the investigation to change our impression that the use of mariajuana by civilians on the Canal Zone is so slight as to be negligible. :)

8. The evidence obtained suggests that organization commanders in estimating the efficiency and soldierly qualities of delinquents in their commands have unduly emphasized the effects of mariajuana, disregarding the fact that a large proportion of the delinquents are morons or psychopaths, which conditions of themselves would serve to account for delinquency.

The committee had access to the records of the office of the Judge .Advocate of the Panama Canal Department (military headquarters). It was found that during the two year period ending June 30, 1932, of the total military personnel brought to trial before courts martial in only a very small proportion (1.17 per cent) was the soldier charged with having mariajuana in his possession, smoking mariajuana, or on account of other infractions of military discipline combined with the possession or smoking of the plant.

Delinquencies due to mariajuana smoking which result in trial by military court are negligible in number when compared with delinquencies resulting from the use of alcoholic drinks which also may be classed as stimulants and intoxicants.

Of the 51 members of the military personnel (1.17 per cent) in which the use or possession of mariajuana constituted one of the charges, in only 4 instances (0.09 per cent) was a charge of violence or insubordination connected therewith. The specifications in these four cases were as follows :

lst case: Possession of mariajuana ; drunk and disorderly in Colon and without proper pass; striking a military policeman. 2nd case: Possession of mariajuana ; disrespect to a noncommissioned officer. 3rd case: Possession of marlajuana; disobedience of orders. 4th case: Possession of mariajuana ; breaking arrest.

The .Assistant Adjutant General, Panama Canal Department, in a memorandum to the recorder of the committee stated that "During the last two years ninety-four (94) enlisted men were discharged on account of habits and traits of character which made their retention in the service undesirable; and of the cases examined only three (3) were attributable to the use of mariajuana."

RECOMMENDATIONS

1.The present military regulations prohibiting the introduction, sale, possession, or use of mariajuana on military reservations should continue in force, as they are believed to restrict the use of mariajuana among soldiers. 8)

2. With the evidence obtained and considered by the committee no recommendations for further legislative action to prevent the sale or use of mariajuana in the Canal Zone, Panama, are deemed advisable under existing conditions.=D

Respectfully submitted,

J. F. Sn.ER, Colonel, M.C., U. S. Army, Chief Health Officer

W. L. SHEEP, Lieutenant Colonel, M.C., U. S. Army, Asst. to Superintendent, Gorgas Hospital

G. W. COOK, Lieutenant Colonel, M.C., U. S. Army, Asst. to Department Surgeon.

W. A. SMITH, Major, M.C., U. S. Army, Attending Surgeon, Quarry Heights, C.Z.

L. B. BATES, Chief, Board of Health Laboratory

G. F. CLARK, Commander, M.C.,U. S: Navy, District Medical Officer, 15th Naval District.

Balboa Heights-C.Z. October 21, 1932
 
Gotta Love this quote:

The committee, in making its investigation, held hearings which were attended by the Post Commanders of Fort Clayton and Fort Davis. These officers were invited to give their opinions on the subject and to cite instances where mariajuana was the direct cause of military delinquency among soldiers. Members of the committee also visited Fort Davis and the Corozal Hospital for the Insane where they observed soldiers smoking mariajuana, and in addition members of the committee observed four physicians and two members of the Canal Zone Police Department who smoked the drug in their presence.
=D=D=D%)%);)

In order to assess the abuse potential of the drug, they had 2 cops smoke dank in the commitees presence. They should try this approach today in revaluating ganja's legal status.
 
Top