American Cannabis Breeding In The Early 20th Century

[Sam_Skunkman]

I hate to pop all the bubbles in this thread but does anyone really believe that people were growing potent cannabis in the Americas pre WW1? And that these strains are still around? Dream on. Most of America does not even have the right climate to grow drug Cannabis seeds from Asia or Afghanistan, remember there were no lights so the crop had to mature before local frost. Also no clones to keep special plants so the odds were that any plant grown could of been pollinated by wild hemp, a sure way to lower the THC to dichweed quality. I am not saying it is impossible, but pretty close. Why if this was going on wasn't any of them busted? Why didn't Harry Anslinger report it to the news? The only busts you read about then were in empty lots in the citys, not serious growing or breeding just attempts to make some money from Cannabis. I for one do not believe that anyone was growing any serious amounts in the UK either, hell the weather is worse there then the USA. Kerala seeds can not be grown outdoors in the UK come on....
The only Cannabis breedin I know of in America was for hemp. There were several varieties developed from Italian, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, varieties. That is a fact. See:
http://www.internationalhempassociation.org/jiha/jiha5215.html
http://www.gametec.com/hemp/fiberwars/index.html
http://www.gametec.com/hemp/archives.html
http://www.gametec.com/hemp/Hemp.in.Wis.html

-SamS

 

[daggazee]

Sam, I don't doubt your wisdom in this matter but, come on, couldn't you have let us wallow in our fantasies a while longer?

As a Brit, I was beginning to feel rather proud that we could have been partially responsible for introducing drug strains to the New World centuries ago.

Ah well, I guess truth is better than fiction - even if, as in this case, it's not so interesting

Peace..

 

[PazVerdeRadical]

what i wonder is what happens when hemp and high thc plants are allowed to cross pollinate
for some generations in the wild; which particular expression would become predominant?

 

[Sam_Skunkman]

I have smoked lots of Swiss Rope-A-Dope that was around before the Swiss wised up and imported seeds and clones that were the real thing. It was terrible, and the local growers would smoke it and try and say they were getting high. But it was CRAP of the worst sort. It was a cross of drug varieties with the local hemp which there was lots of as it was legal. It was early and could be grown outdoors. But why bother?
-SamS

 

[zamalito]

I can't say before WWI but definitely before WWII. While most of the US cannot grow drug cannabis portions of Texas, the gulf coast and the southwest most definitely can and these areas were also where Mexican immigrants had also settled. William Burroughs is known to have moved around Texas and Louisiana in the 1940's growing cannabis from mexican seed. There's also the Hokkaido plants which are known to have a drug content above what is necesary to produce a decent high. Hokkaido's climate is quite similar to that of portions of southern appalachia. While I don't know the history of the Hokkaido plants. I always assumed them to be descended from east Asian fiber and seed plants which could've also been brought to the united states in between 1740-1930. I don't know if anyone was caught cultivating cannabis before WWII or even how difficult it was to get away with. During this time there was so much feral cannabis. It seems obvious Anslinger didn't make any effort to distinguish between feral hemp and drug cannabis. There was so much feral hemp that I doubt that anyone would've been harshly punished for cultivation. I've been trying to find out who exactly the first person charged with cultivating the drug was to no avail.

I've spent a lot of time in the south and southern appalachia and I've known older men and women who claim to have been growing before 1965. There's certainly been more impressive feats of plant breeding done without lights and clones than acclimating 3-4% thc cannabis to portions of the southern us.

 

[Sam_Skunkman]

The first person charged with cultivation in the USA under federal law, post 1937, or under state laws 1910-1937?

http://www.norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=6684

I saw a photo of his grave but I can't find it.
-SamS

 

[order 66]

good reading, thanks

 

[SativaScience]

Damn, ole boy got 4 years hard labor at Leavenworth for 2 joints.

 

[zamalito]

I'm interested in both actually in particular the southwest, gulf coast and southeast. Excuse my ignorance but I am not aware if anyone was even arrested for production before 1937. I'm vaguely familiar with the caldwell case but as far as I'm he was not associated with any cultivation.

 

[bythetracks]

I read some article online which claimed there was a fad for hashish smoking in NYC in the late 18th Century and also mentioned that the plants were being grown on Staten Island and New Jersey. It probably cited some ancient newspaper article that would be hard to veryify. I will try to find and post that.

Also, where were the plants being grown that were used to make all the patent medicines that contained cannabis? Were they importing all of it from Turkey/The Balkans/India/North Africa or was there large scale domestic production?

As for all the pre WWII cannabis busts being in vacant lots in the cities, what are the odds that someone growing a drug cannabis crop in the rural south in 1920 would have been busted or that we would have heard about it? They weren't searching with helicopters, most people didn't know what it was and enforcement of laws was very sparse and selective in that time and place.

I guess the question is, can anyone produce any evidence of longterm production of drug cannabis in the US that started before the 1960's, as opposed to onetime or short lived crops from imported seed OR that any drug cannabis being grown in the USA from the 60's on is/was at least in part derived from genetics that were introduced in the US prior to the 1960's?

People have often claimed on the internet to know of people in the southern appalachians who brought back seed from SE asia during the Viet Nam war and acclimatized it for domestic commercial drug crops before the introduction of indica genetics or indoor growing. It that is true, there is no reason why it couldn't have been done earlier with seeds from mexico/panama/cuba or where ever else soldiers were stationed in the early 20th century. Of course, there's no evidence for that.

By all accounts, untill the 1960's, cannabis use was confined to mexican(and some other) immigrants, people in big cities and marginal subcultures. If anyone was growing marijuana long term in the rural south prior to the 1960's, it must not have been very widespread or it would not have been considered so exotic.

I also recall someone on one of the internet forums(don't remember if it was OG, IC or what) claiming that their grandmother or someone had grown marijuana in the 1930's or 40's in the rural south. In general, posters from TN and KY have made a big deal about growers in their area using old genetics not from dutch seed companies.

 

[Sam_Skunkman]

Your right about Caldwell not being for cultivation, I just though it was interesting..
-SamS

 

[bythetracks]

Found this on one of the links Sam posted, don't know if it's authentic:

http://www.gametec.com/hemp/stockbergerltr.html

The following is a letter found by John Lupien and contained in his volumnious archives of hemp-related materials from Washington DC.

July 7, 1913.

Mr. F. 0. Bennett, Route 1, Box 95, Georgiana, Alabama

Dear Sir:

This office is in receipt of your note of July first, requesting information in regard to the culture of Cannabis indica [underlined in original].

The name Cannabis americana has been applied to hemp grown in this country for the production of the active principle used in medicine. Of course, the seed of this hemp was obtained originally from India or other Oriental regions, the Indian hemp being known as Cannabis indica. Botanically both American and Indian hemp are known as C. sativa. As a matter of fact the United States Pharmacopoeia recognizes the drug as official only when "grown in the East Indies," but American-grown Cannabis possessing the desired physiological properties finds a place in the drug market, its value being determined by test of active principle content.

I would suggest that in planting hemp it would be well to wait until the season is fairly well settled. Drill the seeds into rows five or six feet apart, bearing in mind the fact that one-half of them will be males which p. 2. will have to be pulled out if it is desired to make the drug out of the product. It is desirable that the female plants remaining shall not be more than three feet apart when the stand is ready to develop. Seed every two or three inches will probably be more than abundant, allowing for usual germination. If the. seeds are planted an inch in the ground I think it will be deep enough, especially if the ground is well mellowed below. The richer the soil the better. The male plants will be recognized by a paler green color, by a less dense foliage, and as they begin to open, by the presence of stamens. The development of stamens should be stopped, it being necessary to prevent the formation of seed.

In general, medicinally active hemp of acceptable quality is produced only in regions having long hot summers. Hemp grown in the northern States is usually not acceptable. Hemp seed can probably be obtained from J.M. Thorburn & Co., 33 Barclay Street, New York City. Cannabis indica tops are quoted in the Oil, Paint and Drug Reporter for July 7, 1913, at from $1.40 to $1.55 per pound.

Trusting this information may be of interest,

I am,

Yours very truly,
WW Stockberger
Physiologist in Charge of Drug Plant Investigations

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

Chapter 8 of Fiber Wars also has material relevent to the to origin of drug cannabis and cannabis derived medicines:

http://www.gametec.com/hemp/fiberwars/chp8fr.html

The inflexible identification of marijuana with hemp created a self-fulfilling prophecy. At the conference, Anslinger alleges that "traffickers" were raiding the midwest hemp fields thus confirming his claim that marijuana was being produced in the midwest. He mentions vigilant farmers driving away suspicious people. Anslinger's position at this conference that the midwest is the source of marijuana moving in illicit markets contrasts sharply with statements he made to the US Senate during the Tax Act hearing. As Bonnie and Whitebread127 tell us: "In 1937, when Anslinger urged federal regulation of cannabis commerce, he told the U.S. Senate that only one instance had ever been noted of such diversion, from a hemp crop in Texas."

-----

Anslinger: The farmers up in Minnesota in some of the sections have been subjected to various promotion schemes. Due to the existence of stacks of the old 1934 and 1935 crop of harvested hemp in Southern Minnesota, which is a menace to society in that it has been used by traffickers, we have arrested a gang who took a truck load of this Marihuana into New York....
Wright: The plan of handling in Minnesota was unauthorized. In other words, it was contrary to the usual procedure... That was never used for textile purposes. It was not suitable for textiles purposes.132

-----

The cornerstone of the FBN assault on domestic cannabis was Anslinger's contention that "Most of the pharmaceutical houses before the enactment of Federal Marihuana legislation obtained their Cannabis supply from the Middle West. There is relatively little importation of Cannabis for medical purposes." To which Wright responded, "I have been informed by Doctors that they did get a considerable amount of their prepared processed material from Mexico. I was wondering if there was any processing plant in Mexico."
Then, Anslinger: "I did not know they imported it for medical uses from Mexico." 134

This supposed lack of awareness on Anslinger's part that marijuana was coming out of Mexico and not from the midwest hemp fields seems disingenuous for a man in his position. We might expect him at least to have seen the letter a former US marshall from Louisiana had written to President Hoover in 1931:
I beg to call your attention same time asking your kindly cooperation and assistance to suppress the use of a dirty and dangerous weed commonly known as Marihuana or Muggles. The weed is a product from (Mexico)..."135

Bonnie and Whitebread point out the contradiction in Anslinger's position:
One provision of the [Import And Export] act reveals a curious lapse of memory between 1937 and 1956 regarding the origins of marihuana. Congress finally got around to amending the Import and Export Act, creating a new offense of smuggling marihuana, and mere possession was made sufficient evidence to convict the possessor of knowingly receiving or concealing imported marihuana. This presumption was based on two suppositions--that marihuana traffic depended upon importation from Mexico and that possessors were likly to be aware of that fact... Commissioner Anslinger estimated that 90 percent of all marihuana in the country had been smuggled from Mexico.136

This fact had perhaps just caught up with Anslinger, although Bonnie and Whitebread suggest it was no longer true by 1956 and was a conclusion drawn on biased data. And, they point out, "The Commissioner's conclusion was inconsistent with an essential premise of the Tax Act and with other materials presented to Congress, all of which emphasized the large degree of domestic cultivation of marihuana."137

When one of the attendees at the 1938 conference remarked that importation records were kept by pharmaceutical companies and that the origin of pharmaceutical cannabis could be checked, Anslinger quickly moved the discussion past the issue.

Under the assumption that the locally grown cannabis was pharmaceutically active, some pharmacies reportedly did for a time obtain material from Kentucky and from a Mr. Young who grew it in South Carolina from seeds he got from Dewey. But we are also informed that one of the reasons for the decline in medicinal use of cannabis was variability in its effectiveness and the increasing belief that its reputed therapeutic capabilities were bogus.

 

[Sam_Skunkman]

Park Davis used to grow Cannabis at I think its Dearborn Michigan for use in pre-1937 medicines. Maybe it was in DC where they built the pentagon? Hard to remember so far in the past.....
-SamS

 

[bongoman]

How significant is the oft-quoted excerpt from George Washington's diary re "pulling the males too late"? Is this really a pointer to cultivation of cannabis for drug, not fibre, purposes? Or could there be another reason why a fibre grower might still pull males?

 

[Sam_Skunkman]

Male Cannabis plants offer superior fibers, but I can't say that is why he did it. I can tell you one thing, hemp is no good for smoking, sinse or not.....
-SamS

 

[zamalito]

That's an amazing letter. I didn't notice it from Sam's link. Btt and Sam thank you both for posting it.

I really have no clue but I know that when females flower the stems lignify making the fiber less usable. IME Males flower much earlier and seem to get the same increased brittleness from lignification when they flower. Maybe there's some other factor at play. I assume that males grown for fiber should be harvested before females but like I said growing industrial hemp is a topic I have no clue concerning.

 

[muddy waters]

washington was talking about pulling the males because he was letting some of his slaves get the ripe unseeded female flower tops in exchange for them busting their asses to harvest the hemp and not minding him banging the occasional slave woman.

ok that's my theory, not entirely accepted in the academic community. yet. or ever.

sam are you really saying that no hemp cultivars in the 18th and 19th century had enough THC for smoking? i was understanding that some hemp would be THC dominant (Bt?) and there are references to slaves smoking flowers from southern hemp crops--do you think they were smoking something other than hemp?

 

[Ganico]

Muddy, I believe they could have easily been african sativas. I mean hell, they brought over black eyes peas, okra, collard greens, watermelons,etc,etc,etc. All those are considered TRADITIONAL southern foods now.

So i don't see why they couldn't or wouldn't have had some african sativas. I'd think if not many, at least a few had to have brought some homeland cannabis seeds and grew them since they brought seeds of so many other things

Anyway, that's my theory.

 

[Sam_Skunkman]

muddy waters,
I am saying that hemp back in the 18th & 19th century without selection for THC will not have levels of THC you would want to smoke. THC must be selected for and maintained or it will quickly become very low THC even if originally high.
Slaves and stupid young white boys also smoked corn silks, do you think they got any effects? Want to buy a bridge I have for sale in Brooklyn?
BTW females fiber is lignified up at flowering or by fertilization.
Males used for hemp were harvested as soon as they could be sexed prior to pollen drop. The Japanese Emperors hemp clothing were made from males as the fiber was finer and considered superior. This was extremely expensive and cost several times the cost of male+female fibers. This was done in China, korea, Italy, and maybe elsewhere in East Europe. But always on a very limited level.
-SamS

 

[Guest]

Hi Sam thanks for the info, I have also read aboout male fibres being the superior and used for the most expensive garments. Interesting point you make about needing to select for THC or the crop soon becomes hemp. I can tell you that I have smoked wild, indigenout cannabis from the Czech Republic that was a very early ruderalis type, and that those plants are directly descended from crops planted by the Romans 1200 years ago at least, the Romans used varieties cultivated and used (for both fibre and drug) by the Scythians of the Black Sea/Iran region. Those plants survive in Moravia in the Czech Republic to this day in the wild, no human hand involved for many centuries, and although the potency is low, it does get you high, charas made from the flowering tops was reasonable, certainly as potent as some low grade hashish that can be found commercially in the modern world.

The British in the mid C19th certainly had very resinous, potent cannbis in seed form, the southern indian varieties grown for fibre were the same as can be found in Southern Indian today, the British grew those seeds all over the place, including England, my interest is in what would happen to say, a Keralan sativa from S India if grown out in England for a few generations, open pollination, fibre crop? Would they quickly become headache-inducing fibre bunk or would they retain a fair portion of their original resin production and potency as a drug? There is a farm where I live called Hemplands, from the research I've done, they grew Indian hemp for over a century there. ending in the 1920s.

I tend to think that in the 80th and 19th centuries there were plenty of folks getting high on cannabis, think of Hogarth's paintings of 'Gin Alley' and the British love of intoxication, in the 18th and early 19th centuries the British enjoyed their most adventurous, expansive period, all kinds of exotic intoxicaticants arrived on our shores as part of our huge global trade, Gin and Rum became very popular, as did opium, I am very sure that cannabis was also smoked in these times, probably in the form of hashish from the indian subcontinent, cocaine and opium are written about in these times, I fail to see any reason why cannabis wouldn't have been around too.

The thing is, did folks realise the link between fields of hemp grown for fibre and hashish? Remember that in the 1930s so few people in America realised the link between good ole hemp and marijuana that Anslinger could fool folks into criminalisation, hell, even members of the medical community didn't realise (until it was too late) that hemp and marijuana were one and the same plant.