24 



How largo the différences between the analyses of va- 

 iïqus authors are, results from the following quotations! lu 

 1869 we find in Howard: (M 



I obtained from thèse leaves (dry ones sent to him from 

 India) to the extent of 0. 11 °/ o of alcaloid. From thèse 

 data it seems to follow that the leaves (C. succirubra) will 

 not supply a material for the extraction of Quinine but 

 that they will nevertheless be very usefull when used 

 fresh or in recently prepared décoction or infusion for the 

 cures of the fevers of the country. 

 He furthermore cites from a report ( 2 ): 



„I regret to be obliged to confirm the opinion I expres- 

 sed in my last, that the leaves will not supply material 

 for the extraction of quinine, although the quantity of 

 the first rough precipitate from an acid solution having 

 the appearance of a hydrated alcaloid is considérable mo- 

 re than I succeeded obtaining before, being equal to 1, 31°/ 0 

 of the weight of the leaves.... Nevertheless the further 

 prosecution of the inquiry and the attempt to purify 

 the alcaloid, showed me clearly that I had to do with a 

 state of things very différent from that which existed in the 

 bark and that 1 should not succeed in obtaining an avai- 

 lable sait of quinine. 



Later on Howard apparently found even less. Moens ( 3 ) 

 quotes from an article by Howard (Ph. I. F. Jan. 1873 p. 

 541) which is inaccessible to me, that Howard once found a 

 little; but later obtained no alcaloid at ail from twenty 

 pounds of leaves. 



Broughton obtained from fresh leaves of C. succirubra also 

 only 0. 0041 % of alcaloid: 0. 0016 % of which /cas quinine. 



(!) Howard. The Quinology of the East-Indian plantations. Reeve & Co. 

 Covent Garden. 1869 p. 14. 

 (2) 1. c. 15 



('■) Moens. De Kinacultuur in Azie p. SOI. 



