MR. 3. E. nOWABD ON CINCHOKA IN THE EAST INDIES. 15 



DESCRIPTION OP PLATE I. 



Fig. 1. Flowering peduncle of a polygamous plant. 



Fig. 2. Bisexual flower of the same. 



Fig. 3. Ovary of a bisexual flower. 



Fig. 4. Ovary of a $ flower, from a female plant. 



Fig. 5. A (J flower, from a male plant, having the petals imbricating towards 



the right, but twisted towards the left. 



Fig. 6. Another ^ flower, from the same peduncle, having the petals imbri- 

 cating towards the left, but twisted towards the right. 



^ On the Cultivation of CincJion(ym. the East Indies. 



By John Eliot HowIkd, F.L.S. 



[Eead Feb. 21, 1867.] " 



The examination of a recent remittance of the barks of different 

 Cinchona grown in the Grovemment plantations at Ootacamund 

 has afforded several results of botanical interest, as well as those 

 feelings of satisfaction with which the progress of a great national 

 experiment conducive to the welfare of mankind must ever be re- 

 garded. The specimens of bark were removed from the trees in 

 September and October 1866 by Mr. M'lvor, under whose care 

 they were grown, I beg the Society's acceptance of a copy of 

 the report of a chemical examination of these, which I have made 

 to the Indian Grovernment, and which indicates a very cheering 

 progress in the cultivation. 



The important deduction which appears to be legitimately de- 

 rived from the above examination is the necessity of carefully dis- 

 tinguishing between the different forms of allied plants which it 

 is intended to cultivate. Whether these forms be looked upon 

 as species or varieties, it will be seen that it is of vital importance 

 to the success of the experiment that only those plants should be 

 multiplied which are capable of giving a good result in their yield 

 of alkaloid, and that those sorts should be rejected which are im- 

 susceptible of improvement. 



The Cinchona officinalis and its varieties offer the first confirma- 

 tion of the above. The Linnean term' was most correctly (in my 

 opinion) restored by Dr. Hooker to the species described and 

 figured by M. la Condamine, the bark of which also corresponds 

 with that examined by Linnaeus as received from the collection of 

 M. Seba, his friend. A specimen of the bark of this species is 

 now before the Society. It was received by myself in 1859, from 



