March i, 1882. J THE TROPICAL AGRICULTURIST. 
78 
the cinchotannic acid in which it abounds having 
become oxidized and changed into cinchona red, and 
under these conditions the alkaloids also appear to 
undergo some corresponding alterations. They are now 
implicated with resin, which appears to have also 
become oxidized so as to act tho part of ati acid, 
and is with difficulty separated; the chlorophyll has 
disappeared. Kiuovie acid is still present ; gum, which 
Contributed to this so-called resinous character and 
was abundant in the bark of the smaller branches, 
has undergone a decrease. But the most remarkable 
feature is the altered conditions of the alkaloids them- 
selves. Quinine, which formed a considerable portion 
of the whole, ie now greatly diminished, cinchonine 
and cinchonidine remaining much the same. The 
total percentage has undergone no diminution, and an 
alkaloid, quinicine (?) which was either entirely absent 
from tho smaller quills, or present in a feeble pro- 
portion, now appears in notablo quantity. 
"This was tho result of my observations on South 
American barks up to 1862, I then thought the 
total percentage of alkaloids had not diminished with 
age. The quinicine (?) I found associated with aricine(?) 
or perhaps the quina ('.') of Uatka." 
Tho chief part of this troublesome and noxious 
residuum I now suppose to be parieine (1881.) 
Correspondence as to the New Species. 
In order to show at once the importance and the 
difficulty of this investigation, 1 add the following 
letters, which complete the history of the subject up 
to the present time. 
I have written to India for more precise botanical 
details. 
Description by a Planter of the. Pubescent Species. 
"This tree has a very thick stem and the bark also 
was very thick. The foliage of the tree forms a 
perfect pyramid ; the branches dropping down aud then 
turning up at the ends. The leaves are of a dark 
green colour, rather round at the ends and very 
pubescent on the under side." 
Analysis of Bark. 
Quinine. Cinchonidine. Cinchonine. Quinidine, 
3-50 1 19 0.24 0-35 
or equal to sulph. quinine 4 , 6'7 per cent. 
(From Mr. JUc Ivor's Letters. J 
" Ootacamund, Dec. 10, 1873. 
"This bark is taken from a hairy leaved variety 
of C. officinalis. It is a tree of wonderful growth. 
It produces enormously thick bark aud the tree is 
not injured by wind. The tree from which I now 
•end you the bark is only live years old. It is 2(5 ft. 
high and has a stem of lb' in. circumference at the 
(ground, aud the bark now sent you is taken in a 
Bp from the stem to tho height of about 13 ft. 
!rom the ground. 
"This tree grows at least twice as fast a3 the C. 
meirubra, Tho bark of this variety which I sent to 
)r. de Vrij «us taken from a tree grown at a high 
ilevation, and from a N. W. exposure. The hark 
low sent yon is taken from a tree growing at a low 
levation with a N. E. exposure. Dr. de Vrij found 
ho bark of this species to yield 10 "67 of total alkal- 
itls with 4*72 of crystallized sulphate of quinine. 
"If under all conditions this bark he found to 
ieh! thin amount of alkaloids, and ••specially quinine, 
i is certainly tin- best plant wo can grow, being 
anly and of rapid growth and perfeotly free from 
anker and other di- caves to which the ifficiimlis and 
ipeoially the calisnyii are liable. 1 therefore sincerely 
Ope that you will be able to< milirin l)r. do Vnj's reunite, 
ml if this ocoura in the two barks taken from differ- 
»t positiona and elevations il will establish the value 
' the sp> en s beyond douhl. Am the matter at pre nut 
*nds, the extraordinary vigorous habit of growth 
and hairy leaves, leave on my mind the impression 
that it is a species of rather doubtful quinine-pro- 
ducing qualities. I shall therefore be very glad if 
you are able to confirm Dr. de Vrij's results." 
My analysis was as follows 
Sulph. Quinine 
G 00 per cent. 
Sulph. Cinchonidine 
5-00 
Cinchonine 
060 
Amorphous Alkaloid 
0'60 
12-20 
Thus rather beyond Dr. de Vrij's results. 
"Ootacamund, April 30, 1874, 
"Allow me to thank you very much for your letter 
of the 20th February last, and your kindness in having 
made the analysis of my hairy leaved variety of 
C. officinalis. This plant is, I believe, a true officinalis, 
but as it had the aspect of a bad quinine producing 
species, I received with some doubt the several previous 
analyses I got of this variety, and therefore troubled 
you to examine its bark. I am now quite confident 
that this will be one of the most profitable varieties 
we can grow on the Nilgiris, and our cultivators here 
will, therefore, be much indebted to you for the 
information your letter contains. 
" There are two strong growing varieties very much 
alike, the one having a very smooth leaf, the other 
(your pubescens) a hairy leaf. The two plants, a few 
yards off, look quite identical. They are so in habit 
and vigorous growth, and it was two years ago [therefore 
in 1872] that my attention was attracted by the hairy 
leaved vaiiety, on all occasions on which I tested or got 
it tested, yielding a much larger amount of quinine and 
total alkaloid than the other. 
" No doubt the specimens sent you, and to which you 
refer, were of the smooth leaf glowing variety. It is 
to be regretted that your pubescens (which I think is 
very well named), produces so much cinchonidine ; but 
as this alkaloid is rising in the market and in public 
esteem, in a few years this objection may diminish, hut 
5-50 of quinine is, I concluded, a bark that will always 
command the attention of manufacturers. 
"Although C. pubescens is a mere variety, still, it 
comes true from seed, aud I have not noticed any seedling 
of the hairy variety produce the smooth leaved variety, 
so closely allied to it, or vice versa." 
" Ootacamund, June 27, 1874. 
" I had great pleasure to receive your letter of the 
29th nit/, and will have much pleasure in sending yon 
dried specimens of tho C. pubescens, and the kindred 
smooth leaved variety, as soon as I am able to get 
them. At present the plants are out of the flower and 
wo are in the middle of our rains and enveloped in 
mists. The pubescens is, I think, intermediate between 
('. sued rubra and O. officinalis, but partakes more of 
the officinalis type. It is a much more robust growth 
tluiu either, and in nil situations far outtops the.<i«v/™/</v;. 
I scud you a few seeds which, I have no doubt, you 
will tind come up quite true, as it does not vary very 
much when raised from seed, when the plants from 
which the seeds aro collected are kept separate from 
other kinds. 
"I take the liberty of again sending yon some hark 
of V. pubescens. The bark is the narrow strip left on 
the same tree from which 1 took the hark sent to you 
in December last. If not giving you too much trouble, 
I would very much like to know what this hark yields ; 
tho more, as Mr. BrOUghtOD and Hr. Hiiiie have been 
trying to impress on the (ioveriimelit here, that mossing 
does not improve the hark on the trees generally, hut 
that the renewing hark drains the alkaloids from the 
natural hark adjoining, i.e.. that the alkaloid-, in the 
natural hark are transferred to the nticwing hurk. 
"I do not believe tin-, to he the case; hut if it is 
no, in any degree, tho bark now ocut you will uhow ev 
