726 
THE PHARMACEUTICAL JOURNAL AND TRANSACTIONS. 
[March 9, 1872. 
How can we alter this ? The answer is certainly not 
alone hy mossing , as is strikingly shown by an analysis 
of Mr. Broughton’s now before me, the unmossed bark 
yielding 2*18 per cent, sulph. cinchonidine, and the old 
mossed bark of the same parcel of C. succirubra not less 
than 4’66 per cent., whilst the quinine is less in this latter. 
There remains the process of the re-formation of the 
hark over surfaces from which it had been removed. 
This gives rise to the production of lax cellular tissue, 
full of quinine (which I have described anatomically 
and chemically in ‘ Quinology of the East India Planta¬ 
tions’). Mr. Broughton admits this fact,* and it is 
doubtless familiar to Mr. MTvor, so that I am at a loss 
to understand why this plan is not pursued to a greater 
extent than appears to be the case. 1 have obtained 
large percentages of quinine from bark of this descrip¬ 
tion, more than sufficient to repay the extra cost, unless 
there are circumstances unknown to me which tend 
greatly to augment the cost of the operation, or to ren¬ 
der it, from some cause, undesirable. 
I have now stated the objections to the cultivation of 
C. succirubra. On the other hand, I am bound to say 
that its inherent good qualities have secured it a fa¬ 
vourable reception in the English market, and a price 
which may probably be found satisfactory to the pro¬ 
ducers. 
At a quite recent sale of bark grown on the Govern¬ 
ment plantations at Ootacamund, the “old mossed suc¬ 
cirubra ” brought 2s. 3d. per lb., the “small mossed 
succirubra ,” 2s. Qd. per lb., the “unmossed succirubra 
realized 2s. 10^. per lb. These were all sold (as far as 
as known) for pharmaceutical purposes, whilst one parcel 
of “unmossed and old mossed succirubra” was sold for 
the extraction of quinine, and obtained 2s. 7 d. per lb. 
It is a favourable feature that the attention of leading 
druggists in London is being aroused to the merit of the 
article, and that the prices above named were the result 
of the competition of purchasers from the Continent with 
these in London. 
I suggested to the Government in June, 1854, that 
the bark of the small branches might be advantageously 
sold for pharmaceutical preparations, and it now seems 
as if the bark of the whole tree would be welcome for 
the purpose. On the review of all that is apparent at 
present, I do not think it wise to rest the success of the 
cultivation on this one species. It cannot be looked 
upon as the quinine tree of the future. 
I come next in order to the C. officinalis and its 
varieties, representing in India the “Loxa” or “crown 
barks,” which used to be supplied from South America 
to the European markets. 
These latter may now be looked upon as belonging to 
the past, as none are forwarded at present from Loxa, 
and it is not very probable that the inertia of the people 
of those parts will be overcome so far as to cultivate 
them, and thus replace the worked-out forests. It is 
therefore a most fortunate circumstance that all, or 
nearly all, the varieties should have found so congenial 
a home as India. 
There have now been several importations of the 
“ officinalis ” barks from different plantations in the 
East, and I can speak well of all I have seen, and that 
without any of those reservations which attach them¬ 
selves to the former species. I have no doubt that these 
barks will improve with age, and they already command 
a price equal in some cases to that of calisaya. That of 
the variety angustifolia , if it can be produced equal to 
the specimen analysed by Mr. Broughton and myself, 
would of course realize a much larger amount. In 
reference to this sort, Mr. Broughton wrote to me in 
April, 1869, that “the flower did not appear to differ 
from the other officinalis blossom,” and in July of the 
.same year, “some further experience quite supports 
your views that it is a crown bark. I can now trace all 
* “Return” of 9th August, 1870, page 195. 
gradations into the Bonplancliana type.” I may add, 
that having received dried specimens which were gathered 
in the latter part of 1868 at Ootacamund and sent home 
by Mr. Batcock, 1 sowed some of the seed remaining in 
the capsules of one of these, which is marked “No. 6 
(?), var. C. officinalis, var. crispa ” (the duplicate of 
which, as of the other numbers, is in the Royal Museum 
at Kew). This appears to be the same as Mr. Batcock’s 
“No. 4, C. officinalis (? p), crispa” but differing widely 
from the real crispa of Tafalla. 
From these seeds I obtained several plants, of which 
two remain. One of these is more like the parent, but 
the other plant represents exactly the “ No. 11,” or var. 
angustifolia. It appears to be a freely growing sort, 
being at this time five feet in height and having nearly 
a dozen small branches. This, for a three years’ growth 
(under all disadvantages of cultivation under glass), 
promises well. Mr. MTvor wrote me, under date 29th 
June, 1869, “we are now propagating the lanceolate 
officinalis from cuttings as fast as we can. It is, I believe, 
only a variety, and consequently it will not come true 
from seeds ; and therefore the only way to get up a 
large stock quite true is by cuttings and grafts.” In 
confirmation of its only being a variety, Mr. Broughton 
sent me specimens, of which he writes, under date Octo¬ 
ber, 1869, “I have a set of [ crispa ?] specimens just 
ready to send you. Those marked A, B, C, D, E, are all 
from crispa seed. You will, I think, see a gradation in 
all characters between two marked types. I want your 
opinion on these.” 
These very well selected specimens nearly bridged 
over the interval between the var. Bonplandiana and the 
var. angustifolia , to which latter I should assign C, D, 
and E, as differing by no specific tokens from the No. 4 
and No. 6 above, nor yet from No. 7, which is termed 
“ the strong growing variety.” A and B are of a sepa¬ 
rate type. 
I should like to take one further step to establish the 
specific identity of these forms,—to sow the seed from 
No. 11, and see whether it would not originate the other 
sorts. In the meantime it remains to propagate dili¬ 
gently the var. angustifolia by layers and cuttings, as 
Mr. MTvor was already doing in 1869. By this time 
the plants thus raised may have amounted to a large 
number, for the plant of C. officinalis (raised from seed 
from Uritusinga in 1859) which I had the honour to 
present to the Indian Government, gave rise, under the 
skilful care of Mr. MTvor, to many thousands in the 
same period; and the last I heard was that he hoped to 
plant sixty acres from that one tree. Now, it is easy to 
understand how valuable a plantation in suitable soil 
and climate of the var. angustifolia would be; but if 
this seems scarcely attainable it might, at all events, be 
easy to intersperse these among closely set plants of the 
C. officinalis (in its other varieties), and to remove these 
latter year by year as required, cutting them down 
cleanly to the root and sending in the bark to the 
English market. This would pay all expenses, and then 
the more valuable trees might in the meantime acquire 
a large size, whilst between them an undergrowth of 
offshoots from the cut-down stems would be coming on 
for fresh cutting. I mention this plan in connection 
with the C. officinalis especially, because in these crown 
barks the very youngest shoots that could be peeled 
have often been sold and even preferred by the trade. 
It will be seen how this bears upon the question of 
quick return of capital by some such plan as the above. 
There is no fear that the bark of these varieties of C. 
officinalis should deteriorate with age, so that the trees 
left might in time rival those of the Bolivian forests; in 
these there have been found specimens both of calisaya■ 
and land folia , yielding as much as o cwt. of bark each; 
but it is not our own generation that will see such trees 
in India. 
T have not much to remark in reference to the re¬ 
maining varieties of C. officinalis. I have quite recently 
