88 CINCHONA BARKS. 
Cacota and La Montuosa, near Pamplona, then, since 1782, from 
Real del Sapo and Mariquita, at the foot of the Quindia, and, 
finally, since 1784, at the head of an “Expedicion botanica del 
Nuevo Reino de Granada,” in Santa Fé. 
In the meantime (1776) Don Sebastian José Lopez Ruiz’ pre- 
sented to the viceroy in Santa Fé a Cinchona, which, according to 
Triana, was Cinchona lanctfolia, or Tunita, in the language of 
that country. This species (p. 18) grows only in the eastern dis- 
trict of the Cordilleras of Bogota. Mutis himself, before his re- 
moval to the capital, explored only the western chain of mountains 
at the upper part of the Magdalena River, near Mariquita, Tena, 
and Honda, where, according to the experience of Triana, no true 
Cinchona grows. The pretended Cinchona found by Mutis in this 
district, in the year 1771, is rather simply one of the species of 
Cascarilla comprehended by him under the name of C. oblongifolia, 
probably Cascarilla magnifolia (compare p. 48). The Cinchona 
collected by Mutis, in 1766, in the province of Pamplona, north- 
ward from Santa Fé, is also, according to Triana, only Cosmzbuena 
obtustfolia Ruiz et Pavon, and by no means a true febrifuge tree. 
All of the true Cinchonas which are contained in the ‘ Quino- 
logia de Bogota,” of Mutis, under the names of C. lancifolia and 
C. cordifolia, were discovered by Santisteban, Lopez Ruiz, or his 
nephew, Sinforoso Mutis, and the pupils of the former; nota single 
one by Celestino Mutis himself. 
Triana produces valid reasons for this statement, so that the 
contention for priority, which at that time was carried on with 
much animosity between Mutis on the one hand and Ruiz and 
Pavon on the other, together with the adherents of both parties, is 
herewith brought to a close. In consequence of Mutis having 
transferred the name of Red Cinchona, Ouina, or Cascarilla colo- 
rada, or roja to the worthless bark of the trees which he named 
Cinchona oblongifolia, containing no quinine, whereas it properly 
belongs only to the bark of C. succirubra, rich in alkaloid, a com- — 
plication ensued, which was first removed by the discovery of qui- 
nine, in the year 1820. 
After the Cinchona barks, since about the year 1640, had only 
been exported from Peru and Ecuador of the present day, through 
the activity which Mutis and his pupils developed in the north- 
western part of the South American Continent, the attention of 
botanists and merchants was directed to the Cinchona trees of this 
_* This otherwise insignificant man appeared beni: pean of Mutis in the publica- 
tion: Defensa y demonstracion del verdadero descubridor de las Quinas del reino de 
Santa Fé. Madrid, 1802 (Colmeiro p.69). Compare further, Triana, Etudes, p. 45. 
