CHEMICAL AND MICROSCOPICAL INVESTIGATIONS. 
5 
In this specimen, grown in full sunlight, the Quinine and Cinchonidine may he looked upon as more than 
doubled, and the Cinchonine reduced by three-quarters. 
No. 3. Bark of C. succirubra, taken from trees planted in the open garden six feet apart, on 
June 1, 1863. 
Sulphate of Quinine . 
■ Quinine, uncrystallized 
Cinchonidine . 
Cinchonine 
1-90 
1-18 = 3-08 
•53 
•32 
Total . .3-93 
The Cinchonidine is diminished one-half, and the Cinchonine in almost the same proportion, the Quinine 
i 
has suffered less. The time of planting-out I suspect to have been less favourable in this case. 
Microscopical Observations on the above Specimens. 
No. 1, grown in the forest under dense shade, presents a very regular and beautiful microscopical 
structure, which, however, did not indicate superiority in produce of Quinine. I observed no crystallized 
alkaloid in this section. 
No. 2, grown in full sunshine, has also a regular and promising structure. The laticiferous vessels are 
rather large. The crystals of alkaloid, probably of some salt of Cinchonidine, become conspicuous in this 
section. 
No. 3, planted out sixteen months later, and in the month of June, has a comparatively shrivelled and 
unhealthy look, such as I have described in reference to the section of C. Pahudiana grown in Java ; * 
the same abnormal formations also occur ; so that I am not inclined to draw any absolute deductions from 
the chemical analysis of this peculiar specimen. I am satisfied that there have been some unfavourable 
conditions existing either in the season of planting or in the manner in which this was done. 
The general result of these experimentsf is, that sunlight favours the production of Cinchonidine and 
dense shade that of Cinchonine, whilst it appears from other observations that the most favourable circum- 
stances for Quinine are, that the leaves should be well exposed to light whilst the stem-bark is shaded from 
the direct action of the sun. 
Success of the Acclimatization of the Cinchonce in India. 
In reference to this question, I must refer the reader to some extracts from the very able and impartial 
address of Dr. Weddell to the Botanical Congress held in 1867, in Paris, which will be found in the Appendix. 
My own belief is, that success, though notf to the fullest possible extent, has been assured by the steps 
already taken; but it would not be well to overlook the fact that in Java]; some disappointment has 
* See Illustr. Nueva Quin, plate iii. fig. 34, Micr. Secs. 
f I am glad to find that in one point these observations coincide with remarks made by Mr. Broughton, who says m a letter 
to me (under date July 28, 1867) Some Crown Barks grown under partial shade, which I examined, yielded but little 
Chinchonidine, whereas those in full sunshine yielded one and a half per cent. I believe you will find little m the plants m your 
conservatory, and should be greatly interested to know the results should you ever analyse their bark.” (Vide No. 2, p. 3.) 
f A Report by Van Gorkom, which has just reached me, speaks, however, very hopefully, especially of the prospects of the 
Ccilisaya plants, of which three or four varieties are growing in Java. It is specially remarked that about 3000 plants raised from 
seed from British India, present a quite peculiar character, which partly belongs to the G. micrantha. I assisted at the purchase of 
the bag of seeds (collected by Leckler) for British India, to which no doubt this refers, and having some growing freely, side by 
side with the C. micrantha, brought by Pritchard from Huanuco, can quite confirm this resemblance. The plants are, I think, those 
of the G. micrantha (Bolivian variety), of Weddell. 
The plantations in Java have, by the last accounts (fourth quarter of 1867) suffered somewhat from heavy rains. The 
number of plants is as follows 497-320 G. Galisaya ; 5'559 G. succirubra; 18'569 G. Gondaminea ; 0'559 C. landfoha ; 0'385 
G micrantha. It is said that “a recent chemical examination of young roots of the C. Pahudiana appears to allow that this sort 
should attract new attention in order to be further cultivated.” They appear to have been examined by Maier, with “not 
unfavourable” results, but the Report of Van Gorkom wishes to say little till more is known.— Flora, 1867, 1868, Regensburg. 
C 
