a. THE FORENSIC-TAXONOMIC DISPUTE. Only during the past 
seven or eight years has the importance of the monotypic vs. 
polytypic status of Cannabis demanded popular attention. The 
reason has its roots in legal arguments, especially in the United 
States. These arguments hinge on the question of whether 
forensic material of Cannabis can be identified as coming from 
C. sativa L., when the possibility of the existence of other species 
is real, if not actual (Anderson 1974; Emboden 1974; Schultes et 
al. 1974). In most states and in several countries, the law defines 
marihuana as a product only of C. sativa. If more than one 
species exists, legal authorities must prove by identification that 
suspect material contains C. sativa and is not actually any of the 
other species (Fullerton and Kurzman 1974). 
Since the usual methods for establishing the identity of a 
marihuana sample include (a) microscopy, (b) a colour test, such 
as the Duquenois-Levine test and (c) some type of chromato- 
graphic evidence, i.e. thin-layer chromatography, gas-liquid- 
chromatography, etc., one must have a knowledge of the results 
that would be obtained with these analyses using authenticated 
specimens of all acknowledged species of Cannabis; otherwise, 
the presence of C. sativa cannot be legally proved. It should also 
be borne in mind that when, as is usually the case with most 
legally confiscated samples of Cannabis, most if not all diag- 
nostic specific characters of the original plant are altered or 
destroyed, identification to species becomes difficult or impos- 
sible. Then gross morphological features of the source plant, i.e. 
growth habit, which are frequently critical for proper identifica- 
tion of the sample are, of course, not discernable. Finally, the 
structure of the wood offers numerous reliable characters to 
differentiate species, but wood is rarely if ever present in forensic 
material of Cannabis. (Anderson 1974). 
Virtually no state or federal law takes into account that a mere 
botanical description or identification of Cannabis sativa (or 
any other species of Cannabis) carries with it the ability of the 
plant to produce hallucinogenic, euphoric or other effects in 
humans using it for such purposes. Consequently, a situation 
could conceivably come about in which a person may receive 
legal punishment for possessing material “identified” as C. 
sativa, when the substance is incapable of a drug abuse potential 
128 
