August i, 1884.J 



THE TROPICAL AGRICULTURIST, 



*39 



origin of these plants, which is naturally very closely 

 connected therewith, are due chiefly to the difficulty 

 of collecting material, in which all the parts necessary 

 for the description of the plant are present. Most 

 of these plants appear to blossom but once a year, the 

 blossoms are besides small and not readily recognizable, 

 the trees all attain to a respectable height, und to a 

 great extent have their crowns concealed by other 

 forest trees, which makes it all the more difficult to 

 determine whether they are not even then covered 

 with blossom ; at the time when the fruits ripen no 

 blossom is to be had, and besides this by far the 

 most are found growing in the interior of Borneo and 

 Sumatra, to which parts very few European naturalists 

 have hitherto penetrated. 



Almost all that is at present known of these inter- 

 esting plants is f -mnded upon what has been related 

 regarding them by natives — truly not always the 

 most trustworthy source of information. 



Regarding the chief points, all information so far 

 tends to show that it is needful to receive as truth 

 everything with the greatest reserve. 



I will take but one example : it is absolutely un- 

 known how much gutta can be obtained from a tree 

 by felling or tapping. 



According to Von Gaffron a well-grown tree should give 

 12 katties alter felling and 1 katti at tapping. Prof . De 

 Vriese however mentions a tree 39 feet high and 5 feet 

 in circumference which yielded on felling 2 10-lUth 

 katties, whilst a younger stem of 32 feet in height and 

 3 feet in circumference gave on incision lj katti ; now, 

 since according to general opinion the quantity of gutta 

 to be obtained increases with the age of the tree, the 

 quantity obtained by the last means should be at least 

 half, if not more, of that obtained after felling. Accord- 

 ing to Von Gaffron there is thus obtained l-12th, 

 according to Prof. Do Vriese at least half of the total 

 quantity to be got. 



According to the abovementioned report of the Fact- 

 ory of the Netherlands Tradiog Company and the 

 article oi Hr. Schlimmer there were formerly found 

 Djati Sambon trees which yielded 10 to 20 katties of 

 gutta each, whilst now for the same quantity 50 to 60 

 trees must be felled, that is 250 to 300 trees for a 

 pikul ; whilst on the other hand it is stated [TijdscKr. 

 Nat. vi'i-., Pt IV., p. 420) that the same quantity is 

 obtained from 100 trees. 



I take this simply as a specimen out of many, and 

 only to give an example of how little faith can be 

 put in reports. What, however, should interest the 

 native more, who makes his living by gathering gutta, 

 than the knowledge of the quantity of sap which a 

 tree of a certain circumference, say of the thickness 

 of a coconut tree, produces? 



If the information on this point is conflicting, how can 

 we build on the trustworthiness of other particulars? 



I shall dwell no longer on this subject, but hope 

 to be able to furnish more exact data regarding it 

 hereafter. The provisional examination at the herb- 

 arium has in the first place given me the assurance 

 that gutta-percha is a product of very dilf rent plants, 

 and further that most of these plants are entirely 

 new to science, and have never beeu described. 



The eonviotion, that for each future investigation 

 it is absolutely essential to know as far as pjssible 

 under what name the gutta-percha comes into the 

 market, has chiefly induced me to complete the li&t 

 of products drawn up by Hr. Ten Brummeler with 

 the data furnished to us and the specimens in our 

 herbarium. 



I consider the work of Hr. Ten Brummeler of im- 

 portance as a basis for all further investigations ; the 

 more complete the additions to it can be made, the 

 greater will be its value. 



Botanical investigation must determine later on what 

 Various names are given in the different places of 



growth to one and the same product, and vice versa 

 how far the same name is given to products of the 

 most varying origin. 



That both are actually the case, I hope to make 

 evident immediately. If that is once established, and 

 at the same time the botanical origin of the various 

 products known, a better estimate can be formed of 

 the commercial value of a certain specimen. 



The confusion in this matter is so great that no 

 single European merchant is in a position to give with 

 any certainty information regarding the good qualities 

 or the particulars of a single variety of gutta-percha 

 of commerce. The fault ascribed in Europe is chiefly to 

 adulteration and mixing with inferior qualities by 

 middlemon. This is undoubtedly one of tfie reasons, 

 but the chief one is certainly this, that the most vary- 

 ing products come into the market under the same 

 name. 



"The very first question," says Bcauvisage, "I asked 

 the merchants was, which were the best kinds of 

 gutta-percha. One of them referred me to the Macassars, 

 another to the Sumatras and some Borneos, another 

 to the Bandjirmassins, and another to the Singapores, 

 and above all to the batata of Guiana, each of them 

 attaching little value to the product which the others 

 appreciated most, or at any rate not mentioning it by 

 the same name." 



One is so readily led to adopt the commercial value 

 as a basis for judging of the quality ; certain part- 

 iculars, which I shall give below, will show clearly 

 that at present the commercial valu.: of the same pro- 

 duet at the different places of growth is very varying, 

 and that it is not possible to infer an inferior or better 

 quality from the value of one specimen. 



The examination of our collection of dried plants 

 has taught me that the following names have been 

 given to the product of one and the same tree* : — 



1. Balam pipis — Soepajang (Pad. hillcountry) ; 

 Balam tandjong — Palembang; 

 Balam tjabee — Palembang ; 

 Balam tandoek — Palembang ; 

 Njatoh — Borneo (Soekadana, W. Borneo, accord- 

 ing to T. and B.) ; 

 Koelan — Bauka ; 



Getah Seundek — Malacca (aceording'to Beauvisage); 

 Balam Keinbang — Moesi Oeloe. 

 These different names are given to the gutta-percha - 

 obtained from Keratophorus Leerii Hasskl. 



Balam pipis, No. 104 of the list of Hr. Ten Brummeler, 

 is undoubtedly the same as that mentioned above from the 

 same place of growth. 



Boenga tandjong from the Lima Poeloeh Kotta, No. 86 

 of the list referred to, is most probably the same as the 

 Balam tandjong and. Balam tandoek of Palembang men- 

 tioned here.f 



Hereunder ought also apparently to be counted Nos. 4, 

 8, 9. 10, 12, 15 and 16 under the name of Getah Koelan 

 of Bauka, at any rate some of them, for according to the 

 remark appended Getah Koelan is the product of two differ- 

 ent trues, viz., of one with white and another with brown 

 bark. However, I have no herbarium from the collection 

 of Hr. Ten Brummeler to decide with certainty on this 

 point, and for the same reason it cannot be settled whether 

 Getah Soendi, Nos. 35, 43, 44, and 45, !-oendik, No. 37, 

 Soutik, No. 56, and Soendai, No. 95, names which bear 

 a great similarity to Getah Seundek (according to French 

 pronunciation) of Malacca, is also the product of Kerato- 

 phorus Leerii. 



* I must explahi here that the following are only pro- 

 visional results. It is possible that later examination of 

 more complete material will show that 1 have here and 

 there fallen into error. 



f The Latin name, however, of No. 86, " Ceratophorud 

 kecrieka. iek," is clearly a clerical error for Ceratophortu Leerii 

 Hassk. (Uasskarl). 



