298 
CINCHONA LEDGERIANA. 
By Dr. Orro Kunrtzz. 
To maintain the supposed species a er iana Moens, Dr. 
Trimen attempts (p. 131) to controvert two of my statements, upon 
which my hybridity —— of that plant is spieten? but ae (1) seems 
to me to contradict own former statements, and dr an 
erroneous soietuidan fat the opinion of one of his miei ccinbcbn 
(1.) Dr. ee wrote in this Journal for 1881 (p. 821) :— 
(a.) ‘In our own plantations in Sikkim, after years of neglect 
as one of the ie hieiica and hopelessly variable forms of C. 
Calisaya, the plant [(. Ledgeriana] is now the object of careful 
ivation. d (p. 822 n India i istingui 
(b.) ‘In Java, too, 4 was soon observed that ough showing 
a good deal of vari ation.” ‘Seed from the ~ [C. Ledgeriana] 
has {not hitherto been found to come very id (J ourn. Bot. 
1881, p. 322 
Dr. Trimen now writes (p. 132) :-— 
‘«*There are no C. Ledgeriana trees in the Hast that have 
been descended from Mr. Ledger’s seed from the Rio Mamore.” 
‘‘ Tts great variability exists only in Dr. Kuntze’s imagination.” 
A communications of the planters and intendants, oo 
are often no botanists (as, for instance, Mr. Gammie and 
Moens), are not seldom contradictory, of which Mr. Gammie ea 8 
me roof, an exact botanist must Indge chiefly from bota- 
- a researches; and I have proved that the C. Ledgeriana of 
o differs from the Bolivian ool taae sbi by shrubby habit 
ahd divaricate panicles with slender ramification,— two charac- 
aa that can only originate from Mungpo specimens of the 
parents :—— C. Weddelliana (Calisaya) with shrubby habit, and C. 
Peechtdica (micrantha) with slender panicles, which species grow in 
s. Gammie and Bier- 
mann had shown me, as the only C. Ledgeriana eaitiiie there, 
those shrubby or artificially tree-like C. Ledgeriana with slender 
i ammie ga 
m Dr. Trimen; but the former information of Mr. Gammie, and 
shat of the re chief gardener in the Mungpo plantations, Mr. 
roving accords strictly with the 7. fc a) given veg of 
Dr. Trimen, who m ot them the Reports of the 
botaninal ~paperintendant of the Sikkim ceahees sia tetas, Dr. 
The best proof of the hybridity of the Mungpo C. Ledgeriana 
lies in its botanical marks, as I have shown here, and more exten- 
sively in my monograph of Cinchona, 
2). If Mr. Christie, a planter, whose letter is partly cited by 
Dr. en, had said that isolated trees of C. Ledgeriana were fertile 
