November i, 1883.] 



THE TROPICAL AGRICULTURIST. 



303 



(liatinct species, cannot jjossibly deprive Mi-. Howard 

 of tli.at glory any more than of that which his vast 

 erudition and most careful, extensive and fruitful 

 researches entitle him to. But we suspect the lead- 

 ing authorities in the botanical world will endorse 

 Dr. Trimeu's action in recognizing tlie extraorduiarily 

 rich yellow bark as a distinct species. There is, nob 

 only the very thick, rich bark, on which Mr. Howard 

 himself dwells, but other distinctions -which seem 

 specific : such as the leaves always having the broadest 

 part, at or about the middle, flowers small, droopijig 

 or divaricate, flower buds not at all, or very slightly 

 widened at the end and never abruptly enlarged there, 

 tiie corolla somewhat inflated in the middle. The bronzed 

 or olive-orange tint of the unexpanded leaves, bud 

 and you^fchoots, was also indicated by Mr. Ti-inien 

 as characteristic of Ledgeiiana. As to seed coming 

 true to type, Ledgeriana is no more free from a sjiort- 

 ing tendency than are the calisayas to which it is 

 allied. If Mr. Howard is right, however. Dr. _ Trimen's 

 plates and descriptions must now be considered as 

 " entirely superseded by Mr. Moens' own description 

 and definition of the Cinchona Ledyeriana Moens 

 in "De Kina C'ultur in Azie." But,? if we mistake 

 not Mr. Moens, as distinctly as Dr. I'rimcn, has 

 claimed for Ledgeriana tlie position of a distinct 

 species, instead of a mere variety of the yellow bark. 

 We have received Mr Moens' book while we are writing 

 and we see that quite as mucli as Dr. Trlmen he 

 separates "Cinchona Ledgeriana, Moens,-" from "Cin- 

 chona Calisaya, Wedd," and all the other calisayas. 

 It is quite true, as Mr. Howard has pointed out, 

 that he shews, besides the liighest form, two others, 

 A and B, but he shews them as varieties of Ledgeriana, 

 not of calisaya. It will be seen that ciilisai/a is 

 derived from colli, red. the colour of the bark (which 

 is more red than yellow) but especially of the leaves 

 of this species. If Mr. Ledger saw pink and white 

 blossoms on tlie same tree, it seems clear tliat the 

 mere colour of the blossom cannot he decisive as to 

 the quality of Ledgerianas. As a matter of fact, 

 one of Mr. Moens' best trees has pink blossoms. 

 According to Mr Ledger, however, the bright scarlet 

 colour of the leaves is of as much imj^rtance as 

 the specially dark green of the surface. ^Vc cannot 

 quite 'understand whether Mr. Ledger meant to in- 

 dicate that the leaves are bright scarlet on the under 

 surface while dark green above, in tlieir normal state, 

 or merely, (wliat seems more probable) that the 

 usually dark green leaves assume a bright scarlet 

 colour, when the trees are in blossom or when from 

 a"e. drought or other cause the leaves begin to 

 ■H-ither We may say that the leaves oiall calisayas 

 in Ceylon, assume a brilliant scarlet colour in witlier- 

 ing. So that we should r.ather trust to peculiarities 

 of^blossom and fruit whicli are very marked: the 

 blossom always looking to the ground and the fruit 

 vessels being very niiniite. In looking at tlie plates, 

 (phototyped from nature,) in Mr. Moens' book, the 

 shortness in proportion to breadth of the seed vessels 

 of the best forms of Ledgeriana (Mr. Moens' Nos. -22 

 and 24.) is most conspicuous. Mr. Howard says he has 

 not yet, in bark from British hidia, met -«'ith a 

 specimen of the true rojo, but we know it to be a 

 fact that the firs; hark sent from the Ivilgiri planta- 

 tions, which although from tre< s or rather bushes, 

 grown from Ledger's seed, Mr. Howard could not 

 rccoi'nize as Ledgeriana, sold for I'is Sd per lb. It 

 was%eed from such bushes which gave us in Ceylon 

 the undoubted Ledgerianas of Yarrow. St. Andrews, 

 Mattakellie and other places in the island. Mr. Ledger 

 did not recognize Mr. Howard's inicantha calimyoklet, 

 at which we are not surprised, for we have never 

 seen it mentioned until in this controversy Mr. 

 Howard represented it as specially familiar to Hooker 



and Trimen. Can the latter tell ns what the plant is, 

 if it really exists in Ceylon. 



Since writing the above, we have seen in the 

 Phmtern' Gazette extracts from an article by Dr. 

 Paul, the Editor of the Pharmaceutical Ga-elte. -uliich 

 while acknowledging, in view of letters from Mr. 

 T. N. Christie, that Dr. Trimen's plant is recog- 

 nized as C. Ledejeriana in Ceylon, he states that 

 the specimens sent by Dr. Trunen to the Museum 

 of the Pharmaceutical Society " are considered by 

 some not to be typical ledgeriana, but more probably 

 hybrids of ofiBcinalis and calisaya." What does Mr. 

 Howard say to such hybrids, being so much better 

 than both parents as to give up to 14 per cent of 

 quinine ? 'I'he jilanters, in any case, would look more 

 at the results than at nice botanical distinctions. And 

 surely Dr. Paul iB too critical in doubting the claim 

 of one of Mr. Christie's plants to the title of C. 

 Ledgeriana, because, while giving 8-32 per cent of 

 quinine, it also gave 1-12 of cinchonidine. Our own 

 opinion is that the plant described by Dr! Trimen, 

 is identical with C. Ledgeriana, Moens, and that 

 whatever resemblance it may have in foliage to C. 

 micrantha, it is. in quality of bark and quantity of 

 pure quinine, as superior to any of the grey barks 

 as gold is to lead. If those who doubted Dr. Triuieii', 

 specimens judged rightly, then it follows that hybridi- 

 zation between calisai/a and officinalis in Ceylon has 

 given the colony and tlie world a bark equal to 

 that of the best yellow bark known ! The idea must 

 comfort' Mr. Kuntzc, who classed all the Indian cin- 

 chomis as hybrids. But we do not believe in the 

 hybrid theory of the origin of the Ceylon ledgeriana. 

 It is the real "Simon Pure." 



BKIEF NOTE ON CALISAYA LEDGERIANA. 



{To theEditor ofthe"PharmaccmaicalJournal"Sept. 1st.) 



SiE,— I think it will tend to the enlightemuent of your 

 readers if I state at once what is my contention in the 

 Calisaya controversy to whicli you have du-ected their at- 

 teutiou. It is simply this, that Mr. C. Ledger's " Led- 

 gcriamt " is a legitimate Cahaiiya, and not a new species. 

 Of much less importance are the observations I liave made 

 as to Dr. Trimen's plates and description of the plant 

 figui-ed in the Journal of JSotiiiii/. These are enth-ely super- 

 seded by Mr. Moens' ' own description and definition of 

 the Cinchona Lcdqmana, Moens' in a every valuable work 

 ' De Kina Cultuu'r in Azie,' which, through tlie courtesy 

 of this gentleman, I have just received ; and to which, 

 in the conclusion, I shall again refer. 



I have always understood that by an imwiitteu law of 

 botanical science the privilege of naming a plant belongs 

 to the botanist who first observes and properly describes 

 it ; always supposing that ho has regard to what hasprc- 

 viou.^lybeeu known about the subject. This rule, whirh 

 common sense appears to sanction, is in danger of being 

 disregarded in India. 



The name and history of Calisaya bark has engaged 

 much of my attention in the last few weeks ; as I have 

 availed myself of a visit of Mr. C. Ledger to this country 

 yya his way to AustraKa) to re-investigate the whole ques- 

 tion, which it was my pleasure to study many years ago 

 with mv lamented friend Dr. Weddell. 



The ' Histou-e ' (ff) of this distinguished naturalist 46 a 

 treasury of really scientific investigation. It is not, how- 

 ever, by any means exhaustive ; as in his first voyage he 

 did not observe the best kiud of his C. Ctilisuuu. In 

 his second journey {If) to the gold districts of Boli-via, he 

 obtained specimens from the Ynng.as and from Larecaja 

 of the hark of the finer sorts which are now ui question. 

 In his subsequent notes, ' Sur les Quinquuias', he further 

 cl6.sci'ib6s these (c\ 



Dr. Weddell did not invent the term Calisaya, lait 

 adopted it as the term 'generally in ufe'. He say.s tli:it 



(a) Paris, 1S49. 



(b) 1853. 



((■) iseo. 



