131 
CINCHONA LEDGERIANA. 
By Henry Triven, M.B., F.L.S. 
With reference to the remarks upon Cinchona Ledgeriana by Dr. 
Kuntze, printed in the January number (pp. 5-9), it does not seem 
necessary to do more than controvert the two Bsbcte upon 
which his hy bein pe is based. 
Firstly. On p. 6 it is said ‘‘C. Ledgeriana originated spon- 
porate in the Govartimant, plantations of Mungpo in ikkim”’ 
and ‘ ammie and the late Mr. Biermann assured me that 
: 0. Ledge me tana had originated ~ commeprttanyd there in —v pov 
field.’ To settle this it seemed best to write direct to 
on. the subject, and this is what he shea (20 Feb., 1888) :— oo 
r. Kuntze must have one of our hybrids in his mind’s eye, and 
not Ledgeriana, as having originated oe pected in the eres 
field at Mungpo. Certainly I never told him so of Ledgeriana” 
—e he further adds, - “ You are quite right i in shinies that all our 
f Ledger’s 8. American 
pe I got from the Nilgie in the early part of 1866; and Moens 
is equally right i . stating that I have never seen it from any other 
source. §o that the Sikkim experience of it is identical with that 
of Java.” This i is conclusive, and I think it is pretty clear that if 
Dr. Kuntze ever knew C. Ledgeriana ea does not know it now 
: v3 eae Be ; 
often, and therefore the descendants of Tapes are mos 
degenerated, ’ &e. This being a practical matter I have requested 
the opinion of several Cinchona-growers upon it, and I now gi ive 
some portions of a letter (30 Jan., 1883) from Mr. T. N. Christie, 
who is a very trustworthy observer, and possesses one of the finest 
plantations of C. Leds tana in shot barn He o8ay8; 5 find oss. lana 
tected 
remarkably tr 
he contention of this species being a ‘a hybrid i is 7 a singularly 
unfortunate one; it is I think also much to be regretted that such 
unfounded and careless statements as those of Dr. Kecntas s should 
have been published. Further acquaintance with more and older 
