From:  http://www.pantless.com/~pdxnorml/AMA_opposes_1937.html
[American Medical Association Opposes the Marijuana Tax Act of 1937 --
The protest delivered by the AMA to the U.S. Senate Committee on
Finance, July 12, 1937. Only two questions were asked on the House
floor:  "What is this bill about?"  The answer given by the Speaker
of the House, Sam Rayburn, was, "I don't know - it's about something
called marijuana - I think it's a narcotic or something." And, "What
is the AMA's position?"  The answer given by one of the subcommittee
members (who later became a Supreme Court Justice) was, "They're
behind us 100 percent."]
American Medical Association
Bureau of Legal Medicine and Legislation
Chicago, July 10, 1937
Hon. Pat Harrison
Chairman, Committee on Finance, United States Senate
Washington D.C.
SIR: I have been instructed by the board of trustees of the American
Medical Association to protest on behalf of the association against
the enactment in it present form of so much of H.R. 6906 as relates
to the medicinal use of cannabis and its preparations and derivatives.
The act is entitled "An Act to impose an occupational excise tax upon
certain dealers in marihuana, to impose a transfer tax upon certain
dealings in marihuana, and to safeguard the revenue therefrom by
registry and recording." 
Cannabis and its preparations and derivatives are covered in the bill
by the term "marihuana" as that term is defined in section 1, paragraph
(b). There is no evidence, however, that the medicinal use of these 
drugs has caused or is causing cannabis addiction. As remedial agents,
they are used to an inconsiderable extent, and the obvious purpose and
effect of this bill is to impose so many restrictions on their use as
to prevent such use altogether. 
Since the medicinal use of cannabis has not caused and is not causing
addiction, the prevention of the use of the drug for medicinal purposes
can accomplish no good end whatsoever. How far it may serve to deprive
the public of the benefits of a drug that on further research may prove
to be of substantial value, it is impossible to foresee. 
The American Medical Association has no objection to any reasonable
regulation of the medicinal use of cannabis and its preparations and
derivatives. It does protest, however, against being called upon to
pay a special tax, to use special order forms in order to procure the
drug, to keep special records concerning its professional use and to
make special returns to the Treasury Department officials, as a
condition precedent to the use of cannabis in the practice of medicine
in the several States, all separate and apart from the taxes, order
forms, records, and reports required under the Harrison Narcotics Act
with reference to opium and coca leaves and their preparations and
derivatives. 
If the medicinal use of cannabis calls for Federal legal regulation
further than the legal regulation that now exists, the drug can
without difficulty be covered under the provisions of the Harrison
Narcotics Act by a suitable amendment. By such a procedure the
professional use of cannabis may readily be controlled as effectively
as are the professional uses of opium and coca leaves, with less
interference with professional practice and less cost and 
labor on the part of the Treasury Department. 
It has been suggested that the inclusion of cannabis into the
Harrison Narcotics Act would jeopardize the constitutionality of
that act, but that suggestion has been supported by no specific
statements of its legal basis or citations of legal authorities. 
Wm. C. Woodward, 
Legislative Counsel 
[Whereupon at 11:37 AM Monday, July 12, 1937, the subcommittee
adjourned.]
--- 
---------------