156 NEW PUBLICATIONS. 
and here reproduced in English for the benefit of those ignorant of 
that language. 
Mr. Howard, it is well known, has always given Mr. Karsten due 
credit for what he has done and the courtesy he has shown him :—“ I 
have,” says Mr. Howard, “ before expressed my conviction of the 
great value of his researches, and of the accuracy (as far as I can 
judge) of his descriptions. . . . I have now only to reiterate those re- 
marks, and to express my cordial satisfaction at the reprint of such in- 
teresting information in the English language. I must, however, con- 
fine my approbation to Dr. Karsten’s record of his own researches, 
which did zo£ extend to the barks of Bolivia and Peru." 
At the end of this volume, * A complete List" of the species ever 
referred to the genus Chinchona is given, filling four and a half pages. 
But we regret to add that, doubtless in consequence of the sudden 
departure of Mr. Markham for Abyssinia, the proofs of this list (and 
in a less degree those of the whole book) have been so slovenly read 
that it is full of misprints. We counted in it no less than seventy, on 
a superficial perusal. Nor can we accept it as a complete enumeration 
of all the species ever referred to Chinchona, the following names being 
absent, and many more might be found by carefully going through 
generally accessible publications, viz.:—C. Bonplandiana, Kl.; C. Ca- 
pensis, Burm.; C. discolor, Kl.; C. ezcelsa, Ham.; C. glabra, Ruiz ; 
C. Lambertiana, Bartl. ; C. Morado, Ruiz; C. nitida, Benth.; C. ob- 
tusifolia, Dietr. ; C. pallescens, Ruiz; C. paniculata, Dietr. ; C. pauci- 
flora, Tafalla, Hariong; C. rotundifolia, Pav. ; €. rubicunda, Fée; e. 
scabra, Lodd.; C. tenuis, Ruiz; C. vanilliodora, Fée. Nor are the 
species ER by modern AS at from Chinchona always referred 
to the right genus; for instance, C. corymbiflora, Forst., is not an 
Exostemma but a Badusa, A. Gray. We should also have been glad 
to see the usual sign of identification used when a species is trans- 
ferred to another genus (viz. S instead of a comma; it would have 
made the whole so much cleare 
We shall allow Mr. Marken to give his own account of the work 
of Mutis, which is entitled ‘El Arcano de la Quina,' and divided into 
four parts. 
" He commenced its publieation in a periodical called * El Diario,’ at Bo- 
gota, in 1793-94, and an MINE abstract of the first two afterwards 
‘Mercurio Peruano.’ But Mutis appears to have subsequently 
