246  Analysis  of  Cine  ho- Quinine. 
nucleus  is  near  the  smaller  end.  The  distance  from  it  to  the  smaller 
end  is  usually  \  to  \  of  that  to  the  larger  end.  The  grains  are  almost 
invariably  simple,  but  occasionally  one  with  two  nuclei  is  found  (Fig. 
I,  a\  and  very  rarely  one  with  three  nuclei. 
Potato-starch  is  much  used  in  the  arts  for  making  a  stiffening  paste, 
and  for  other  purposes.  It  is  said  to  be  sometimes  surreptitiously 
replaced  by  poor  grades  of  wheat- starch  (Wiesner).  It  is  also  some- 
times mixed  with  ground  fibre  (probably  woodv),  and  is  adulterated  with 
earthy  matter  (Soubeiran).  Its  use  as  an  adulterant  of  arrow-root  and 
other  starches  and  drugs  has  already  been  mentioned. 
In  the  next  number,  the  most  important  of  the  other  pharmacat 
starches  will  be  described  and  figured. 
ANALYSIS  OF  CINCHO-QUININE. 
BY  EBENEZER    M.  WELLS,  PH.G. 
[Abstract  from  an  Inaugural  Essay.) 
Several  years  ago,  a  preparation  called  Cincho-Quinine  was  thrown 
upon  the  market,  which  is  represented  as  having  all  the  constituents  of 
cinchona-bark  in  their  alkaloidal  condition,  and  as  being  fully  equal  to 
sulphate  of  quinia  in  therapeutical  effect,  when  given  in  the  same  dose. 
By  diligent  and  profuse  advertising,  and  being  sold  at  a  lower  price  than 
sulphate  of  quinia,  it  has,  in  many  localities,  gained  considerable  favor, 
and  is  frequently  prescribed  by  some  practitioners  as  a  substitute  for 
sulphate  of  quinia,  solely  upon  the  testimonials  in  the  circulars,  which 
accompany  each  bottle,  and  from  wThich  it  appears  that  many  have 
used  this  nostrum  with  success. 
This  nostrum  was  analyzed  in  1870  by  Wm.  T.  Wenzell,  in  1874  by 
Albert  E.  Ebert,  in  1875  by  Profs.  Scheffer  and  Diehl,  and  in  1875 
by  Profs.  S.  P.  Sharpies,  F.  A.  Genth  and  others.  Neither  Wenzell 
nor  Ebert  were  successful  in  determining  the  presence  of  quinia,  Profs. 
Scheffer  and  Diehl  found  quinia,  quinidia,  and  probably  cinchonidia 
("Amer.  Journ.  Pharm.,"  April,  1875)  in  very  small  quantities.  The 
other  analysts  succeeded  in  determining  the  presence  of  quinia,  qui- 
nidia and  cinchonidia,  besides  cinchonia  ("  Drug.  Cir.,"  April,  1875,  p. 
85) ;  but  the  amount  of  each  is  not  stated,  which  in  justice  to  the  pub- 
lic at  large  should  have  been  done. 
What  is  cincho-quinine  ?     Does  it  really  contain  quinia,  and  how 
