Am.  Jour.  Pharm.) 
Feb.,  1885.  J 
Red  Bai'k. 
97 
RED  BARK. 
By  Robert  Cross. 
A  little  over  two  years  ago,  after  arrival  on  the  Nilgiri  hills,  in 
Madras,  with  a  collection  of  cinchona  plants — for  which  I  was  sent  bj 
the  India  Office  to  South  America — I  called  attention  to  the  mistake 
which  had  been  committed  in  planting  at  Naduvatum  and  other  places 
on  the  hills  a  comparatively  useless  cinchona,  the  Huanuco  bark  of 
Peru,  for  the  true  "red  bark''  of  Chimborazo,  Cinchona  siiGcirubrcij 
plants  of  which  were  dug  up  by  myself  on  the  slopes  of  that  moun- 
tain and  brought  direct  to  India  twenty  years  previously.  To  those 
who  thought  I  might  be  mistaken  in  my  assertions  I  may  say  that, 
after  having  dressed  and  transplanted  the  original  stock  of  "red  bark" 
plants  twice  in  their  native  forest,  I  would  just  as  likely  be  liable  to 
mistake  my  own  handwriting. 
At  the  time  of  the  introduction  of  the  cinchonas  into  India  it  so 
happened  that  the  Huanuco  and  "  red  barks "  reached  the  JSTilgiris 
about  the  same  time,  were  propagated  in  the  same  hothouse,  and  so 
had  become  indiscriminately  mixed  up  together.  In  this  way  the 
"  red  bark  "  was  lost  sight  of,  and  was  mistaken  for  the  Huanuco  spe- 
cies, which  it  resembled  in  the  form  and  color  of  the  leaves,  especially 
when  forced  in  a  hothouse.  As  the  plantations  grew  up  a  sprinkling 
of  "  red  bark  "  trees  were  found  thinly  dispersed  therein.  Had  the 
two  sorts  been  kept  carefully  separate  the  loss  experienced  by  planters 
and  others  would  have  been  avoided.  An  examination  of  the  cinchona 
blue  books  will  show  that  it  never  was  intended  to  cultivate  the  Hua- 
nuco bark  to  any  extent. 
In  India,  as  in  South  America,  two  distinct  varieties  of  "red  bark" 
are  observed.  One  of  these,  which  possesses  smooth  foliage,  is  called 
by  South  American  collectors  Pata  bark;  while  to  the  other,  the 
leaves  of  which  are  hairy  underneath,  the  term  teja  or  "  tile  "  bark  is 
applied.  These  sorts  are  not  kept  separate  in  commerce.  The  Pata 
sort,  however,  seems  to  inhabit  a  rather  higher  zone  on  the  mountain 
slope,  and  so  may  prove  hardier  than  the  other.  Probably  both  vari- 
eties are  of  equal  merit  as  quinine-producing  plants. 
Before  leaving  India  I  collected  a  little  bark  of  both  sorts  for  pur- 
poses of  comparison,  together  with  a  few  samples  of  "  crowii "  barlv. 
Most  of  the  samples  were  taken  from  renewed  trees,  the  aim  being  to 
7 
