— 23i — 



transport was generally speaking east in Sze-chuen (this is very doubtful), 

 south in Yun-nan, west in Burma. I présume, therefore, that the typical 

 Chinese plant has suffered less blending than the other varieties, and 

 has remained comparatively ,,true-bred" (even in récent times no India 

 seed has been imported into China, whereas the reverse process took 

 place at the very outset of tea growing in India)') the Shan types in 

 Burma and Siam must hâve been hybridized most of ail, and the Assam 

 indigenous has undergone a rather considérable influence from without. 

 On the other hand, it seems that the A'ianipur, Cachar and Lushai tea, 

 which differ to such an amazing degree from the eastern varieties, and v^'ere 

 quite incultivated when they were discovered, hâve been preserved from this 

 inigrating taint^), and hâve kept their type pure as long as European tea- 

 planting rage allowed them to do so. Where and whether there is any pure 

 „indigenous" stock in India — 1 cannot tell, and it would seem that nobody can. 



And if it was very difficult in former years to obtain a gênerai impression 

 of the original aspect of the Central-Asiatic végétation by investigation 

 in loco, the increasing raiiway traffic is more and more disguising this image. 

 As a matter of fact, railways exist or hâve been projected 3) as far as 

 Sadiya, the extrême point of Upper Assam; from Nan-king to Cheng-tu-fu, 

 the capital of Sze-chuen; from Ha-noi, the capital of Tong-king, along 

 the Red River up to Yun-nan-fu and the upper Yang-tse; from Rangoon 

 along the Irawaddy to Mogaung, to Bhamo and Momein, to Namkhan and 

 Ta-li-fu, from Mogaung through the Hookhong-valley to Dibrugarh and 

 Sadiya, — thus, railways up to the very centre of the régions that are of the 

 greatest value to phytogeography, and which are thereby irretrievably .,spoilt". 



It is now that we ought to reach a définitive conclusion regarding 

 the origin of the tea plant; and this conclusion should in my opinion 

 read thus, that there exist at least two morphological groups of tea plants, 

 one of which is indigenous to China, the other to India, while there is 

 not the smallest évidence supporting the idea of any direct genetical or 

 genealogical affinity Connecting them. Perhaps, rs we shall gather from 

 chapter V, even four groups may be distinguished (to wit, 1. Manipur, 

 Cachar, etc., 2. Assam? Burma and Siam, 3. Tong-king ? Yun-nan and Sze- 

 chuen, 4. Eastern China); and, though migration and conséquent hybridization 

 through human wanderings are very probable, those groups seem to hâve 

 held out in spite of that, rather than to hâve been evolved by means of 

 the displacements, which tended to level ail existing différences. How, 

 indeed, thèse différences originated, we hâve not an inkling of it, nor are 

 we likely ever to find it out. 



') Referring to the proposed reorganization of tea industry in China, 1 do not think it 

 will be long ère experiments wili be executed in China with Indian types. 



^) Nevertheless, it is worth remembering that even Manipur has suffered much from 

 Burmese invasions! See J. G. Scott 1906. 



î) See the works cited of Morse, Nisbet and Scott. 



