756 
THE  TROPICAL  AGRICULTURIST. 
("June  i,  1893. 
Regarding  the  two  principal  constituents  of  gam- 
bir,  viz.,  catechin  and  catechu-tannic  acid,  it  still 
remains  to  be  proved  that  they  are  identical  with 
the  homonym  extract  from  Catechu  (Acacia  Catechu), 
even  the  formulae  of  both  bodies  are  not  definitely 
fixed.  It  has  generally  been  assumed  that  catechu- 
tannic  acid,  essentially  differs  from  catechin  in 
being  directly  absorbable  by  hides,  but  from  the 
experiments  made  both  catechin  and  catechu-tannic 
acid  combine  with  isinglass,  gelatine,  etc.  The 
ordinary  method  of  separating  catechin  and  catechu- 
tannic  acid  is  therefore,  obviously  inapplicable,  and 
the  same  applies  mutatis  mutandis  to  tbe  usual  method 
of  estimating  tanning  principles  (in  the  case  of 
gambir)  by  means  of  permanganate. 
Before  we  can  determine  the  value  of  gambir 
for  tanning  purposes,  it  has  to  be  settled  which  of 
the  two  constituents  — catechin  and  catechu-tannic 
acid — is  “physiologically  active,”  that  is,  produces 
good  leather,  and  which  is  merely  pathological,  and 
we  shall  then  know  whether  in  the  manufacture  of 
gambir  we  should  aim  at  production  of  much  cate- 
chin and  little  catechu-tannic  acid  or  vice  versa. 
The  carriage  of  this  amount  of  gambir  to  Malacca 
cost  §36  as  the  plantation  was  a long  way  off  and 
the  roads  not  very  good  for  part  of  the  way. 
Now  to  tabulate  this : — 
Preliminary^  expenses,  clearing 
ground,  etc §80 
Coolies  for  second  year  . . . . 2,150 
Coolies  for  third  year  . . . . 150 
Weeding  for  two  years  . . . . 8 
Carriage  of  gambir 70 
Expenses  §138 
Produce,  second  year  after  planting 
half-crop  60  pikuls. 
Produce,  third  year,  full  crop  . . 120 
At  §6  a pikul  . . 
Expenses  of  produce 
180  pikuls. 
= §1,080 
438 
Nett  Profit 
§042 
Cultivation  fob  Profit. 
Now  I will  give  some  observations  on  the  culture 
of  gambir  for  profit,  and  again  wil]  remark  that, 
with  improved  methods,  a larger  output  of  better 
material  would  doubtless  result. 
The  best  plantation  I have  seen  was  that  of  a 
Chinaman,  Kee  Ann,  in  Malacca. 
The  owner  cultivated  other  plants  besides  gambir, 
but  possessed  eight  hundred  acres  of  the  latter  and 
was  opening  up  more  land  for  the  same  cultivation. 
He  made  a large  profit  on  pepper  and  tapioca  ap- 
parently, and  did  not  care  much  for  the  gambir, 
though  he  evidently  spared  no  pains  to  grow  and 
manufacture  it  well,  according  to  the  Chinese  method. 
I got  the  following  details  as  to  expenditure  and 
profit  from  him. 
The  estate,  800  acres,  produces  6 pikuls  a day, 
which,  taking  a year  at  350  working  days,  gives 
2,100  pikuls  a year.  This  selling  at  §5  a pikul  gives 
a sum  of  §10,500  a year.  The  expense  of  making 
a pikul  including  cooly-labour,  firing,  &c.,  amounts 
to  §3.75,  so  that  2,100  pikuls  cost  §7,875  to  turn  out. 
This  works  out  to: — 
Sale  of  Gambir  ...  §10,600 
Expenses  of  making  7,875 
§2,625  dollars  a year  profit. 
This  does  not  appear  a very  high  profit,  but  I 
believe  he  was  really  under-estimating  it.  For 
while  he  was  assuring  me  that  this  did  not  pay 
him  sufficiently,  he  was  yet  opening  up  fresh  gam- 
bir fields. 
The  gambir  he  produced  was  block  gambir  No.  1 
which  is  priced  in  Singapore  at  §6  a pikul.  If, 
therefore,  ho  could  get  full  price,  the  net  profits 
should  be  §4,725  a year  on  an  estate  of  800  acres. 
Kee  Ann  was,  as  I have  said,  using  the  ordinary 
rough  machinery  of  the  Chinese  method.  With 
improved  apparatus,  such  as  copper  cauldrons  instead 
of  iron,  a better  form  of  press  than  an  old  wooden 
one  which  he  used  for  pressing  out  the  water  of 
the  drug,  and  more  rapid  drying  apparatus,  he  would 
be  able  to  get  a greater  out-turn,  while  manuring 
the  plants  and  increasing  the  growth  of  leaf,  by 
removing  the  flower  heads,  except  wtiere  wanted  for 
seed,  would  give  a greater  production  of  leaf,  though 
adding  a little  to  the  expenses. 
I then  examined  some  Malays,  who  were  manu- 
facturing gambir  at  Pangkalan  Balak  in  Malacca, 
as  to  their  profits.  The  Malays  have  only  small 
holdings  of  about  20  to  30  acres,  and  manufacture 
only  chewing  gambir.  They  adopt  the  Chinese 
method  of  manufacture,  but  turnout  only  the  forms 
described  above  as  Gambir  bulat,  papan,  palm  and 
dudur.  No  Chinese  are  employed  on  the  estates. 
Twenty  acres  of  land  covered  with  jungle  costs  §80 
to  clear,  weeding  costs  §4  a year,  coolies,  20  required 
at  25  cents  a day,  cost  §150  a year.  The  annual 
out-put  of  gambir  is  120  pikuls  amounting  to  §720. 
But  the  profit  should  be  much  more  than  this. 
In  the  first  place  the  cooly  labour  is  far  too  highly 
paid.  In  most  places  coolies  can  be  got  for  six 
dollars  a month  or  less.  Again,  with  so  small  an 
estate,  the  coolies  could  not  be  employed  all  the 
year  round,  but  only  at  the  time  when  tbe  gambir 
was  being  planted  and  prepared, 
The  gambir  I estimate  at  §6  a pikul,  but  the  finer 
class  of  gambir,  which  indeed  these  Malays  were 
turning  out,  was  fetching  as  much  as  §8  a pikul. 
Lastly,  the  price  of  transport  was  exorbitant.  The 
Malays  possess  no  means  of  transport  themselves  and 
had  to  hire  bullock-carts  of  the  Chinese,  and  they, 
of  course,  put  on  a very  high  price  for  their  use. 
It  is  indeed  always  a difficulty  to  get  any  native 
to  tell  you  how  much  profit  he  makes  on  any  business. 
The  Chinaman  gives  false  information  partly  at  least 
because  he  has  some  idea  that  the  enquirer's  object 
is  connected  with  some  tax  on  the  produce  which 
may  be  imposed.  The  Malay  probably  has  no  idea 
what  he  makes  or  loses  on  the  business. 
I consider  it  likely  that  under  careful  European 
management,  with  improved  appliances,  a good  profit 
could  be  made  out  of  gambir.  Indeed  there  are  a 
number  of  wealthy  Chinese  in  the  Straits  who  have 
derived  a large  part  at  least  of  their  wealth  from 
this  source,  and  there  is  no  reason  why  Europeans 
should  not  do  the  same.  Planting  has  not  as  yet 
been  thoroughly  established  in  the  Straits  Settlements, 
and  the  few  Europeans  who  have  commenced  planting 
have  chiefly  devoted  themselves  to  coffee,  tea,  sugar 
and  coconuts.  There  is,  however,  a Company  in 
Johor  which  is  cultivating  gambir  on  a large  scale 
under  the  management  of  Mr.  M.  Lorken,  who  has 
also  a large  coffee  estate  in  the  same  district. 
Gambir  has  several  advantages  which  these  products 
do  not  possess.  The  demand  for  it  is  large,  and 
its  cultivation  are  at  present  very  restricted.  The 
climate,  in  which  it  thrives  is  a peculiar  one.  It 
requires  constant  rain,  and  yet  plenty  of  sun ; dry 
seasons  are  injurious,  and,  if  prolonged  fatal  to  it. 
Another  advantage  it  has  is  that  it  begins  to  bring 
a return  in  a year  and  a half  after  planting,  and, 
if  necessary,  within  six  months,  though  this  is  not 
advisable.  Furthermore,  it  requires  a comparatively 
simple  plant,  and  thus  the  preliminary  expenses 
would  be  less  than  those  of  most  other  products. 
H.  N.  RIDLEY. 
Director  of  Gardens  and  Forests,  S.  S. 
List  of  Literature  on  Gambir. 
De  Bry — Voyages. 
Rumpliius— Herbarium  Amboinense,  vol.  v,  63, 
tab.  34. 
Couperus,  Abraham— Verhandelij  van  het  Bataa- 
vische  Genootschap,  1823,  ii,  p.  209. 
Hunter— Trans.  Linn.  Soc.,  ix,  218  (1808). 
Collingwood— Journ.  Linn.  Society,. vol.  x,  52  (1869). 
Roxburgh — Flora  Indica. 
Fluekiger  and  Hanbury— Pbarniacographia,  p.  337 
Trimen— -Medical  Botany,  vol.  ii,  No.  139.  (1876) 
