March 9, 1872.] 
THE PHARMACEUTICAL JOURNAL AND TRANSACTIONS. 
725 
(Reply to the above.) 
Letter from J. E. Howard, Esq., to the Under Secretary 
of State for India , dated Tottenham , 16z;4 January , 
1872. 
In compliance with a request from the Secretary of 
State for India, dated the 6 th inst., I beg to transmit 
the following remarks, which I have the more pleasure 
in doing, as I can now report more favourably of the 
results of the cultivation than at any previous period of 
the undertaking. 
In reference to “the species which is likely to produce 
the most remunerative bark for sale in the London 
market,” I will remark, in the first place, on that which 
has been the most largely cultivated, the red bark tree, 
or Cinchona succirubra. 
Two circumstances especially recommended this sort 
for cultivation; its free propagation and growth, and 
the very high price paid for the mature bark of this sort 
in the London market. 
I have never been favourable to the almost exclusive 
preference paid to this sort by many cultivators. I have 
shown,* in a recent examination of two trees sent me 
by the Indian Government (one of this sort and the 
other of C. officinalis), that the more rapid development of 
the former species did not secure a comparative advan¬ 
tage as to the production of alkaloid, since the quinine 
in the latter kind exists in a more abundant quantity as 
to its percentage in the bark, and also in a much purer 
state than in the former (the C. succirubra). 
I am happy to be able, in this view of the subject, to 
coincide entirely with the published report of Mr. 
Broughton, whose more extended opportunities of ob¬ 
servation supplement the more limited character of my 
own personal investigation. In reference to the price of 
the bark I remarked, in my report dated loth June, 
1864, that “the very high price of between 8s. and 9s. 
which has been recently paid for red bark in this mar¬ 
ket, applies only to those pieces of bark from the trunk 
which possess from their age a peculiarly bright ap¬ 
pearance.” 
A further recommendation of the C. succirubra to no¬ 
tice exists in the fact that it gives on the whole a very 
large product of alkaloid, and also of the cinchona red, 
so that it may be called the most cinchonaceous of all the 
Cinchona:. Against this must be set the fact that, in connec¬ 
tion with the gradual oxidation of the cincho-tannic acid 
and the production of the cinchona red, there is a gradual 
diminution and waste of the alkaloids, so that the bark 
does not really improve by age, but the contrary. This 
is the peculiar habit of the species, and it would seem, 
from the accompanying report of Mr. Broughton, that 
the effect of this idiosyncrasy is already beginning to be 
apparent, f. 
It will be noticed that, whilst the total alkaloids have 
risen from 6*74 per cent, in 1868 to 7'85 in 1871, the 
“ sulphate of quinine obtained crystallized,” which (to a 
large extent) marks the value of the bark in the eyes of | 
the quinine manufacturer, has steadily declined from 
2 - 21 per cent, in 1868 to l’lo per cent, in 1871. The 
sulphate of cinchonidine obtained crystallized has, in 
the meantime, risen from 3‘85 per cent, in 1868 to 4’30 
per cent, in 1871. It will immediately occur that this 
is, to a certain extent, a counterpoise, as no doubt it is, 
but to a certain extent only, as will be explained here¬ 
after. 
It is needful also to remark that the waste of alkaloid, 
which has been apparent to the writer in the examina¬ 
tion of many specimens of South American bark of the 
age of perhaps one or two centuries, has not yet taken 
place in these still young Indian specimens, and also 
that it is open to question whether the apparent con-! 
version of quinine into cinchonidine is due to deoxida- 
* Pharmaceutical Journal, November, 1871. 
f i. e., in the present change, to be followed by future 
waste in the alkaloids. I 
tion, * which increases also the proportion of cinchonine, 
or to some other cause. 
In my report, dated 1 st August, I 860 , I remarked, in 
reference to the preponderating product of cinchonidine, 
'which I could not help foreseeing,—“ This difficulty 
must be looked steadily in the face, and I would suggest 
that it may be obviated either by a change being wrought 
in the opinion of the medical world as to the value of 
cinchonidine as a medicine, or by the plant being en¬ 
couraged to produce quinine instead of cinchonidine.” 
The Secretary of State for India (Sir Charles Wood) 
lost no time in acting on the first of these suggestions, 
and consulted Sir Ranald Martin,f who entered cordially 
into the subject and approved of both ideas. The result 
was, through Sir Charles Wood’s recommendation to 
the Governor-General of India,]; the appointment of a 
medical commission, whose labours have been most ad¬ 
vantageous. It is not for me to speak of their value to 
medical science, but to show the bearing of the report 
of this commission on the cultivation of the C. succirubra , 
as its outcome differs somewhat from what might have 
been anticipated. 
The commission has shown that all the alkaloids are 
to be relied upon more or less in the cure of intermittent 
fever, or, in the language of the Report, “ that they form 
a very valuable class of therapeutic agents,” and (taking 
the order of the instructions sent to medical officers) they 
consider them to be— 
Febrifuges, anti-periodics and tonics. 
Their general effects are similar to those of quinine, 
though perhaps in an inferior degree. 
As variously estimated, they possess the same 
effects as quinine, to the extent of one-half or 
two-thirds. 
They are very efficacious in treating the common 
fever of the country and disordered digestion, 
etc. etc. 
Their relative value seems to be— 
1 . Quinine. 
Quinidine. 
Cinchonidine ) aW equaL 
1 . 
2 . 
3. 
4. 
5. 
2 . 
3. 
1 
6 . 
Cinchonine 
Their proper doses are— 
Quinine . . 
. . from 
3 
to 
20 
grains 
Quinidine 
• • 
5 
20 
Cinchonidine 
• * J? 
7 
V 
20 
Cinchonine . 
• * 5? 
7 
V 
20 
>> 
It is clear that quinine keeps its long-maintained and 
acknowledged supremacy, and that next in order of 
merit we must place quinidine; but quinidine (except in 
•some rare and quite exceptional cases) is what C. succi¬ 
rubra does not produce. 
Then cinchonidine and cinchonine are looked upon as 
of equal efficacy, if we read the report aright. 
There are other circumstances which lead to quinidine 
maintaining its price, and it seems to be, and probably 
will continue, the favourite next to quinine. But next 
to quinidine comes in, not cinchonidine, but cinchonine, 
the obvious reason being that it can be delivered at a 
lower price ; in addition to which it is (at least in one 
of its combinations) a more convenient medicine to pre¬ 
scribe. 
So wo have, after all, cinchonidine rather falling 
behind in the race, and if the effect of this on the cul¬ 
tivation of C. succirubra be well considered, it will tend 
to confirm our doubts about the result. 
We then come to the second of my suggestions.. Can¬ 
not the C. succirubra be encouraged to grow quinine in¬ 
stead of cinchonidine ? • We have seen that its tendency 
is increasingly the reverse. 
* In connection with the cincho-tannic acid taking .from 
the alkaloids, oxygen, tor which it has very strong affinity. 
Both the alkaloids contain a smaller amount ot oxygen than 
quinine possesses. 
t “Return,” 18th June, 1866, p. 136. 
X “ Return,” p. 316. Letter dated 30th September, 1865. 
