that are not so sharp or which may be even somewhat 
obtuse. It is true that this character does not appear to 
be so striking in Lamarck’s type specimen as it seems to 
be in the very ample herbarium material now at hand. 
The venation of the leaflets of Cannabis indica likewise 
appears, as a general trend, to be much coarser than in 
C. sativa. In Cannabis ruderalis, the perceptible ten- 
dency seems to suggest leaflets which are very broad in 
relation to their length and which are much smaller (.e., 
much shorter) than in either of the other two species. 
Since there is such extreme variation in leaf characters- 
at least, such apparent variation in view of the prelimi- 
nary nature of our studies—we have preterred not to in- 
sert leaf characters into our key. The species can easily 
be distinguished, we feel, without recourse to characters 
which at present are not thoroughly investigated. 
Furthermore, there may be—and we strongly suspect 
that there are—significant chemical differences, not only 
in the cannabinolic content but in other constituents, 
such as the essential oils, flavenoids and possibly several 
other classes of secondary compounds. Lamarck sug- 
gested as early as 1788 that the content of the intoxi- 
cating principal was higher in Cannabis indica than in C, 
sativa. In the intervening 200 years, during which the 
epithet zadica has been used, there has usually been the 
inference that it is a more strongly intoxicating form of 
Cannabis. Unfortunately, however, almost no chemical 
studies have been made in association with taxonomic 
studies nor on the basis of voucher specimens. Through- 
out the modern Russian literature there exists the infer- 
ence, if not the outright claim, that the cannabinolic 
content of Cannabis indica is higher than that of C. 
sativa and C. ruderalis.. Pertinent to species differentia- 
tion on a chemical basis may be the unexpected, recent 
discovery, made independently by several workers (6, 
[ 358 ] 
