WAS HARRY ANSLINGER* A LIAR?
A subject ignored by most historians, yet (due to the nature of this book) of great concern to us, revolves around two basic questions:
(2)- Did he know the truth all along? That is Before, During and After his role in the hysteria campaign?
(* Yeah, we know, the guy on the left is acutely Benito Mussolini . . . but what’s the difference?)
HIS OWN WORDS:
-- FROM THE GOLDEN THROAT OF HARRY ANSLINGER
It’s very easy to quote someone’s words out of context, making them sound like they said “Y” when all along (when their words were taken in context) they were actually saying “X”. Thus, to avoid that argument, I’ve tried to quote Anslinger in full context as much as possible. Granted, it does make for boring (overly worded) reading, but it also shuts the door on debate. Anslinger said this on this date, etc. So in his own words:
HIS WORDS, REGARDING MARIHUANA AND VIOLENT ACTS:
In March of 1933, Harry Anslinger wrote the following:
“ There is probably no more absurd fallacy extant than the notion that murders are committed and robberies and holdups carried out by men stimulated by narcotic drugs to make them incapable of fear. This may occasionally happen, but the immediate effect of a narcotic drug is usually to soothe the abnormal impulses, and the ultimate effect is to create a state of idleness and dependency which naturally enhances the desire to live at the expense of others by anti-social means. The police record of the average addict almost invariably shows convictions for burglary, housebreaking, sneakthieving, petty larceny and other minor offenses. It is not because of the present influence of the drug that the addict commits crime, but because, in addition to the destruction of the moral sensibilities brought about by its abuse, the insatiable burning desire for the narcotic makes him ready and willing to violate the law to obtain the necessary money with which to purchase it.” ---- “Peddling of Narcotic Drugs” Essentially, Anslinger is stating that narcotics (marijuana included by implication) DOES NOT make its users go out and commit violent crimes. This in-effect means that Anslinger is rejecting all notions of bestial crimes being committed while under the influence of marijuana, etc. However, note the date “1933”; it is important to us for two reasons:
“Many prosecuting attorneys in the South and Southwest have been confronted with the defense that, at the time of the commission of the Criminal act, the defendant was irresponsible, because of being under the influence of Marihuana to such a degree he was unable to appreciate the difference between right and wrong, and was therefore legally insane. A great deal of difficulty has been experienced in rebutting this defense with the testimony of psychiatrists, for, while some of these experts are conversant with the nature and effect of this drug, it has been the experience of the author that many of them are without any information on the subject. This is probably due to the fact that this drug has come into wide use in certain parts of the South only within the last ten years.” --- American Journal of Police Science 1931Thus the logic/context behind Anslinger’s words, were in-effect what the Muslims term, ‘Words of Convenience.’ To be used when they suited a purpose and then disregarded when no longer needed. Which in our case would be a year or so later. Example: In a document dated Nov. 1934, sent to the ‘League of Nations’ Anslinger states the following: 
". . While the recording; by the Federal Government of specific cases of violence as the result of the abuse of cannabis is of comparatively recent date, the records of the Bureau of Narcotics make reference to four cases of a particularly frightful nature:
A point to keep pondering as we look at some of this other statements.
HIS WORDS REGARDING PUBLIC FEAR:
According the ‘Bureau of Narcotics’ own year-end report/journal: 
“A great deal of public interest has been aroused by newspaper articles appearing from time to time on the evils of the abuse of marihuana, or Indian hemp, and more attention has been focused upon specific cases reported of the abuse of the drug than would otherwise have been the case. This publicity tends to magnify the extent of the evil and lends color to an inference that there is an alarming spread of the improper use of the drug, whereas the actual increase in such use may not have been inordinately large.“ ---Traffic in Opium and Other Dangerous Drugs 1931Now to be fair to Anslinger, the wording goes on to state:
“However, there can be no doubt of the definite existence of the evil in greater or less degree in certain localities, and the Federal Narcotic Bureau has been soliciting the enactment of suitable laws in all of the States to control the growth, sale, and use of the drug.” ---Traffic in Opium and Other Dangerous Drugs 1931So it appears (by his own words before 1934) that he thought of Cannabis/Hemp as being nothing more than a public nuisance, but little more. Yet by a few years thereafter he is quoted as saying: 
Marihuana, he would drop dead of fright”
So again, there seems to be a disconnect between what Anslinger said BEFORE and then AFTER his involvement with the hysteria campaign. Almost as if words of convenience were being spoken as needed and disregarded as no longer needed.
HIS WORDS REGARDING MARIHUANA AND ADDICTION: 
Today (at least here in Oklahoma) there are two major issues surrounding any discussion of Cannabis and/or Industrial Hemp growth etc.
TREASURY DEPARTMENT APPROPRIATION BILL, 1937 (occurring - Dec. 14, 1935) SUPPLY OF ILLICIT NARCOTICS p446/447Then again he said essentially the same thing during the Marihuana Tax Act hearings of 1937 
MR. DINGELL: I am just wondering whether the marihuana addict graduates into a heroin, an opium, or a cocaine user.So it appears that Anslinger (the drug czar at the time) did not think that Cannabis was either addictive or served as a ‘Starter Drug’. His arguments being that Marijuana of-and-by itself had to be outlawed because its use led to violent acts on the part of its users. -- Yet (later on) in other congressional hearings, old tow-face Harry went on to state the exact opposite. For example, during the Congressional hearings that created the Boggs Act (a get tough on crime Bill), Anslinger stated: 
[Referencing a question asked about barbiturates or sleeping pills]
“Mr. Anslinger. The danger is this; Over 50 percent of those young addicts started on marihuana smoking. They started there and graduated to heroin; they took the needle when the thrill of marihuana was gone. You do not find those young people taking barbiturates (sleeping pills) and graduating to heroin.And then again (as a second example) in 1959 testifying before Congress at an appropriations hearing  he once again repeated himself, stating:
“(Marihuana) is a habit-forming drug, but not an addiction-forming drug, although it is a steppingstone to an addiction-forming drug, but (referencing violent crimes) it is a very dangerous drug and is so regarded all over the world” --- Treasury-Post Office Department Appropriations for 1960, p133.Or the total opposite of what he had said earlier.
ANSLINGER’S SILENCE SPEAKS LOUDLY:
So far we’ve seen that by all outward appearances (using his own words), it appears that Harry Anslinger either changed his mind a lot, or just plain wasn’t the most honest man on earth. Yet there is one factor that proves without a shadow of a doubt the true nature of Anslinger’s character – That being NOT what he said, but in effect, WHAT HE DIDN’T SAY. Perhaps the following incident (occurring during the Congressional Hearings that passed the original Marihuana Tax Act into law) provides the best example of the man. During those hearings he introduced the following written statements: 
(referencing the infamous Eureka Axe Murderer) “. . .As a representative case, note the tragic predicament of this Californian. "A man under the influence of marihuana actually decapitated his best friend; and then, coming out of the effects of the drug, was as horrified as anyone over what he had done" . . .“And while true, Anslinger did not personally write down those statements, he personally DID however, introduce them as evidence during the hearings. Statements that he knew for a fact were false; -- There simply WAS NO Eureka Axe Murderer. The whole thing had been totally fabricated by a California narc and Anslinger was well aware of it.
SO HERE WE have a good case of not so much what Anslinger said, but instead of what he didn’t say. A situation which (assuming Anslinger was under oath at the time) could have landed him in jail, specifically as the oath he would have taken reads in part: “To Tell the Truth, The whole Truth, and Nothing but the Whole Truth,” something which Mr. Anslinger obviously did not do. And while probably the most infamous such case, it was certainly NOT the only such case.* Thus it could be said that, at least in a court of law, Harry Anslinger was, well, a liar.
* The main part of this book details several other such cases
TAKING CONTEXT INTO ACCOUNT:
So far I believe we can safely state that Harry Anslinger was far from the worlds must truthful individual. Yet there is more; it turns out that we can learn a lot about Anslinger by looking at his background, BEFORE he became Commissioner of Narcotics.
It would appear that Harry Anslinger (unlike many of his co-workers) had, by both training and experience, enough of an agricultural background to understand the subject matter. In other words, there is no way he could not have known the truth. Yet as history has shown, with the sole exception of WW2’s ‘Hemp For Victory’ period, he deliberately went out of his way to totally stop its production. Next, while Anslinger himself had no medical training, the following would have been obvious to him.
- Anslinger as per his article “Peddling of Narcotic Drugs” (PennState U ;Anslinger collection Box 8, File 4) or https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2410&context=jclcpage
- The American Journal of Police Science - Vol. 2 --1931 p252 “Marihuana as a Developer of Criminals” – By Eugene Stanley District Attorney, Parish of Orleans, La.
- Memorandum forwarded by the representative of the United States of America. LEAGUE OF NATIONS O.C. 1542(c) Addendum – Nov. 10th 1934, “Advisory Committee on Traffic in Opium and other Dangerous Drugs (Situation As Regards Indian Hemp)
- The Traffic in Opium and Other Dangerous Drugs For the year ending Dec. 31, 1931
- Quotation is found in various places, here I am quoting the “Washington Herald” April 12, 1937 - Article quoting H. Anslinger saying - “If the hideous monster Frankenstein came face to face with the monster Marihuana, he would drop dead of fright”
- http://druglibrary.org/schaffer/hemp/taxact/anslng1.htm The Marihuana Tax Act of 1937 – Statement of H.J. Anslinger
- U.S. Congress, House of Representatives, Committee on Ways and Means Hearings on H.R. 3490, 82nd Congress, 1st Session, 1951, p.206.
- Treasury-Post Office Department Appropriations for 1960, p133. - Jan 27, 1959 Treasury-Post Office Departments Appropriations for 1960: Treasury Department, the Tax Court of the United States. Hearings Before the Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations, House of Representatives, Eighty-sixth Congress, First Session: https://www.law.cornell.edu/topn/treasury-post_office_appropriation_act_1960 [NOTE: Museum has not been able to obtain an actual copy for viewing]
- Marihuana Tax Act of 1937 - Additional Statement of H.J. Anslinger, COMMISSIONER OF NARCOTICS MARIHUANA - A More Alarming Menace to Society Than All Other Habit-Forming Drugs - (By Dr. Frank R. Gomila, commissioner of public safety, and Miss Madeline C. Gomila, assistant city chemist)
- Information taken from the book, “Federal Drug Control” by Jonathon Erlen and Joseph Spillan and reads as follows: “From Sep. 16, 1913, to August 3, 1915, Anslinger attended Pennsylvania State College, now the Pennsylvania State University receiving a certificate of completion for a two-year program in the School of Agriculture.”
- Visit www.AntiqueCannabisBook.com for proof
- Federal Drug Control by Erlen and Spillan p131
- “The Book of the Seth”, (a fictional book)
WANT TO KNOW MORE:
Due to space / download time considerations, only selected materials are displayed. If you would like to obtain more information, feel free to contact the museum. All our material is available (at cost) on CD-Rom format.