— 434 — 



1704, 24. September. Brief an Liniie: Tliat my present letter may not 

 seem eiitirely unprofitable, T send you a figure with some flowers of the 

 Peruvian bark; [Smith a. 0. S. 513 setzt 1821 liinzu, dass Abbildung und 

 Proben in der Linne'schen Sammlung nocli vorlianden seien); I a7u not cer- 

 tain wlietlier tlie celelirated M. de la (Jondainine has given any figure along 

 with his description, iior wliether you have had any opportunity of exaniining 

 a dried specimen, as I find no mark indicative of tliis in tlie generic de- 

 scription of ("incliona in your Stockholm edition of 1754. Der Name f'hin- 

 cliona oflicinalis erscheint zuerst in Liiiiiani.'^, Species plantarum T. (llolmiae 

 1753) S. 172 mit dem Zusatz: habitat in Loxa Peruviae. Mütis bezieht sich 

 in obigem Briefe auf: Cliartes Marie de la Condamine, L'arbre du Quinaquina, 

 abgedruckt mit zwei Tafeln in Histoire de rAeademie Royale de sciences; 

 anne 1739 (l'aris 1740) S. 226 — 244. Die spanische Uebersetzung dieser 

 Schrift bildete den Text eines Manuscriptes, welches Nicolas Osorio, Estudio 

 sobre las ciuinas de los Estados Unidos de Colombia (Bogota 1874) S. 35 

 falsch beurtheilt hat. 



1707, 3. October. Brief an Linne: Your last long expected letter informs 

 me of the receipt of the ("inchona. Vergl. Linne, Systema naturae per regna 

 tria naturae II. (Holmiae 1767) S. 164, No. 227: Cinchona officinalis mit 

 Beschreibung, welche schliesst: Misit dominus Mfitis. Auf diese AVorte war 

 Mütis später besonders stolz. 



1770, 15. Mai. Brief an Linne: As far as I am able to judge, I conceive 

 this valuable plant to grow in the province of Quito upon mountains, whose 

 height scarcely seems eredible to Europeans. The Cincliona officinalis is 

 asserted by Mr. Santistevan to grow also in the second degree of N. L. 

 near Popayan; I have often heard this gentleman declare that he had there 

 gathered the Cinchona in flower; he gave me some of the leaves, which are 

 twice as large as those of the Officinalis. 



Sniitl) a. 0. S. 516 S. Diesem Brief liegt die Beschreibung der Chin- 

 chona gironensis bei, wozu Smif/i (a. 0. S. 521 — 523) bemerkt: Specimens of 

 this plant do not occur among the Communications of Mütis to Linnaeus, 

 by the fruit, a berry of 5 cells, it appears to be no Cinchona. 



J770, 14. August: Gutachten an den Vicekönig über zwei Proben von 

 Kinarinde; in gleichzeitiger Abschrift auf der Bogotäer Bibliothek zweimal 

 vorhanden; gedruckt in Rui: i/ Pavon , Suplemento ä la Quinologia (Madrid 

 1801) S. 27 ff. Mütis sagt: Por haber dirijido todas mis escursiones bota- 

 nicas fuera de los 5 grados de Ij. B., no pudo conseguir la quina liasta que 

 el aüo de 72, viajando en compania de Pedro Ugarte, logre liollarla en el 

 monte de Tena y el ano siguiente en el de Honda; teniendo entonces el honor 

 de presentarla al Bxcelentisimo Seüor Don Manuel Guirior. 



1777, 8. Februar. Brief an Linne nebst drei Anlagen, von denen die 

 erste, ein Verzeichniss von eingesandten Pflanzen, besagt: No. 89. In my 

 list this specimen is Cinchona Bogotensis, the same with the peruvian er 

 officinalis, observed by me about the town of Bogota ever since the year 1772. 

 r have had a most beautiful drawing made of it. Smifh (a. 0. S. 530) setzt 

 liinzu: Mütis's specimen, with flowers and fruit, scarcely seems the same 

 with the true officinal plant, brought by Mr. de la Condamine. 



