a"dE?hKm"-}      Botany  Bay  or  Eucalyptus  Kino.  631 
its  properties  the  official  catechu  and  kino,  and  may  be  used  for  a 
similar  purpose."  (Bentley,  "  Manual  of  Botany  ").  The  Ironbark 
tree  above  alluded  to  is  the  E.  resinifera  of  A.  Cunn.  (E.  siderophloia, 
Benth.),  but  neither  it  nor  the  E.  resinifera  of  Smith  extends  to  Tas- 
mania. 
As  has  already  been  mentioned,  there  are  two  eucalypts  called  E. 
resinifera.    They  are  : — 
1.  E.  resinifera,  Smith  (White's  "  Voyages,"  p.  233;  "B.  Fl.,"  iii, 
245;  figured  in  Decade  I.  of  Mueller's  "  Eucalyptographia  ").  It  is 
commonly  called  "  Red  or  Forest  Mahogany,"  and  is  the  tree  to 
which  the  species-name  attaches  by  priority. 
2.  E.  resinifera,  A.  Cunn.  (Syn.,E.  siderophloia,  Benth.);  "  B.  FL," 
iii,  220.  Figured  in  Dec.  IV.  of  Mueller's  "Eucalyptographia." 
"Ironbark"  or  " Bed  Ironbark." — At  the  latter  place  Baron 
Mueller  states,  "The  Rev.  Dr.  Woolls  observes  that  the  Botany  Bay 
kino  is  more  extensively  obtained  from  E.  siderophloia  than  from  E. 
resinifera  (Smith,  of  course),  which,  as  the  specific  name  implies,  is 
generally  regarded  as  the  main  or  even  sole  source  of  that  drug."  And 
Dr.  Woolls,  in  his  "Plants  of  New  South  Wales,"  (1885),  states,  "The 
Botany  Bay  kino  was  procured  principally  from  this  species,  and 
hence  Allan  Cunningham  and  other  botanists  were  accustomed  to  call 
it  E.  resinifera" 
But  what  are  the  characteristics  of  kino  ?  The  official  kino  (Ptero- 
earpus  Marsppium)  is,  according  to  the  British  Pharmacopoeia  ot 
1885,  "almost  entirely  soluble  in  rectified  spirit.''  This  is  an  import- 
ant property,  and  on  it  the  tinct.  kino  B.  P.  is  based.  Works  on 
materia  medica,  while  pointing  out  certain  unimportant  points  of  dis- 
similarity between  the  official  and  eucalyptus  kino,  never  state  that 
the  latter  does  not  dissolve  in  rectified  spirit,  while  some  make  the 
specific  statement  that  it  is  soluble  in  that  liquid.  But  my  experi- 
ments have  shown  that  no  kino  is  more  insoluble  in  spirit  than  that 
of  E.  siderophloia.  I  obtained  four  samples  from  widely  different 
localities  in  New  South  Wales  and  Queensland,  and  collected  at  dif- 
ferent times.  They  all  agree  in  their  very  partial  solubility  in  alco- 
hol, by  reason  of  the  very  high  percentage  of  gum  they  contain.  The 
E.  resinifera  of  Smith  is  also  comparatively  little  soluble  in  spirit, 
for  a  similar  reason.  For  this  reason  alone,  I  do  not  hesitate  to  say 
that  "  Botany  Bay  kino "  is  neither  the  produce  of  E.  resinifera, 
Smith,  nor  E.  resinifera  A.  Cunn.    Both  these  kinos  would  be  quite 
