130 



Remarks on Laurus Cassia. 



[Jan. 



such actually exist in specimen. If they do exist, then the fault is 

 not Murray's, and his name must of right be adopted with an amended 

 character, excluding the numerous species of Garcinia brought under 

 it by Cambessides : if they do not, Roxburgh's genus, which as it now 

 stands is strictly natural, claims the preference. 



On th? Lciurus Cassia of Llnnceus, and the plants 'producing the Cassia- 

 Bark of Commerce. 



The next subject on which I have some remarks to offer is the Lau- 

 rus Cassia of Linnaeus, and the plants producing the Cassia Lign ea or 

 Cassia bark of commerce. My attention was first directed to this sub- 

 ject by a communication from Government, in which I am requested to 

 endeavour to ascertain " whether the common Cassia bark of the 

 markets of the world is a thicker and coarser portion of the bark of the 

 genuine cinnamon plant or tree, or whether it is the bark of a plant not 

 analogous to the cinnamon plant or tree." 



Before it was possible to return a satisfactory answer to this question, 

 it seemed incumbent on me to ascertain what plant Linnaeus meant to de- 

 signate under the name of Lauras Cassia, and whether it was probable the 

 plant so called could supply all the bark passing under that name in the 

 markets of the world. This primary, but most difficult inquiry was ren- 

 dered indispensable by the, generally supposed, ridiculous assertion of 

 Mr. Marshall, that the leaves, and the bark of the trunk and branches of 

 the Lam-US Cassia of Linneeus, so far from being aromatic and spicy like 

 cinnamon, are bitter and have in a slight degree the taste and odour of 

 myrrh. This assertion, wide as it may appear of the truth, is yet found- 

 ed in fact, and what may appear still more extraordinary, has led to a 

 discovery, which, without such aid as he has given, would not probably 

 have soon been made by a professed botanist, a title to which I believe 

 Mr. Marshall does not aspire. He appears to have been led to the dis- 

 covery, that the Laurus Cassia of Linneeus did not produce aromatic 

 bark, simply through the native name, and wonders how it could have 

 received from him the name of Cassia, and had qualities attributed to 

 its bark which it does not in the slightest degree possess. I think I 

 can now answer the question, and explain the mystery which has so long 

 hung over this species, and been hitherto rendered only more obscure 

 by each attempt to bring it to light. 



It is well known to modern botanists, that many of their earlier pre- 

 decessors w^erc but indifferent describers of plants, and often very loose 

 in their quotations of figures as synonyms, a sin of which Linnaeus was 

 often about as guilty as any of his cotemporaries. He seemed to have had 

 an idea, that their figures were geuGrally at best but approximations to 



