NATURAL HISTORY OP THE CINCHONAS. 
35 
The details in the process of drying also vary slight- 
ly in the two cases ; the thinnest pieces of bark from the 
branches or small trunks, intended to make the quilled cin- 
chona, are simply exposed to the sun's rays, and of them- 
selves take the desired form, which is that of a hollow 
cylinder; but the bark taken from large trunks, which is to 
was easily known, and rendered difficult of substitution. The neces- 
sity which was thus imposed upon the cascarilleros of preserving 
this, in many cases, frail part, demanded on their part the greatest 
care. Thus in many places it was the custom to fell the tree two or 
three days before barking it, so that, desiccation having commenced, 
the different layers of bark might adhere together. 
I think that the removal of the peridermis from the surface of the 
thick barks at the time of cutting, is not quite general. Some of the 
cinchonas of New Granada, which I have recently seen, retained the 
outer coating, However this may be, we perceive the necessity of 
studying the bark under both aspects. I am persuaded that many 
museum specimens, collected at a period when it was customary to 
preserve the peridermis, would no longer be thought of doubtful 
utility, if considered in this point of view. 
The process formerly employed for separating the young barks from 
the wood, also differs much from that which is now practised ; hence 
there is a certain difference in the formation of the cylinders prepared by 
the two methods. I have already described the way in which it is now 
done, and it is easy to understand that by this method the dimensions 
of the separated pieces may depend on the patience or skill of the 
cascarillero, or on the circumference of the branch or trunk from which 
they are taken. Formerly, on the other hand, each piece was cut 
by one operation, the cascarillero holding his knife by the two extremi- 
ties, and drawing it rapidly towards him. The flat pieces obtained in 
this way necessarily varied in width, according to the size of the 
trunk from which they were taken, and the quills when dried were 
frequently no larger than a pen. The pieces also had sharp edges, 
and they were thicker at the centre. The defect of this method was 
the immense loss which resulted, for nearly as much bark was left on 
as that which they removed, the former being considered useless on 
account of its being deprived of the peridermis. But this loss was as 
nothing when compared with that which I have next to notice. I allude 
to the almost entire rejection, for some time, of the bark of thick 
trunks. The loss resulting from this cause was immense. Many of 
those experienced in this subject having affirmed that with age the 
