PROPOSITIO V.

Problema.

Motum apsidum in orbe satellitis quamproximé circulari, quatenùs ex figurâ planetæ primarii sphæroidicâ oritur, investigare.

Per propositionem primam vis perturbatrix, quâ trahitur satelles ad centrum planetæ primarii, est ad satellitis gravitatem in ipsum primarium, ut 3bc ⁄ 5l² - 9kkbc ⁄ 5l⁴ ad 1, sive, quia per Prop. 2. est k ⁄ l = m × SH (Fig. [4].) ponendo scilicet m pro sinu inclinationis orbitæ satellitis ad æquatorem primarii, et scribendo y pro SH, ut 3bc ⁄ 5l² × (1 - 3m²y²) ad 1; et summa harum virium in totâ circumferentiâ cujus radius est 1, est ad gravitatem satellitis toties sumptam ut 3bc ⁄ 5l² × (1 - 3m² ⁄ 2) ad 1. Vis igitur mediocris, quæ uniformiter agere in satellitem supponi potest, dum revolutionem suam in orbitâ propemodùm circulari absolvit, est ad ejus gravitatem in primarium ut 3bc ⁄ 5l² × (1 - 3m² ⁄ 2) ad 1; atque hac vi movebuntur apsides, si nulla habeatur ratio vis alterius quæ orbis radio est perpendicularis et per medietatem revolutionis satellitis in unum sensum tendit, per alteram medietatem in contrarium. Jam quia ex demonstratis in hac et primâ propositione sequitur gravitatem satellitis circa planetam, cujus figura est sphærois oblata, revolventis in distantiâ l generaliter esse ad ejusdem gravitatem in majori distantiâ L, ut 1 ⁄ l² + B ⁄ l⁴ × (1 - 3m² ⁄ 2) ad 1 ⁄ L² + B ⁄ L⁴ × (1 - 3m² ⁄ 2), existente B quantitate datâ exigui valoris, sive ut 1 ⁄ l² ad 1 ⁄ L² - B ⁄ l²L² × (1 - 3m² ⁄ 2) + B ⁄ L⁴ × (1 - 3m² ⁄ 2) quamproximé, ideò gravitas satellitis diminuitur in majori quam duplicatâ ratione distantiæ auctæ quoties m minor est quantitate √⅔ id est, ubi inclinatio orbitæ satellitis ad planetæ æquatorem non attingit 54° 44´; diminuitur autem in minori ratione, quoties est m major quàm √⅔, id est, ubi illa inclinatio superat 54° 44´; adeoque in priore casu progrediuntur apsides orbis satellitis, in posteriori regrediuntur. Quantitas autem hujus progressûs vel regressûs sic innotescet.

Per exemplum tertium prop. 45 lib. 1. Princ. Math. Newt. si vi centripetæ, quæ est ut 1 ⁄ l², addatur vis altera ut e ⁄ l⁴, hoc est, quæ sit ad vim centripetam 1 ⁄ l² ut e ⁄ l² ad 1, angulus revolutionis ab apside unâ ad eamdem erit 360° √1 + e ⁄ 1 - e vel 360° ⁄ 1 - e quamproximé, existente e quantitate valdé minutâ. Porrò cum sit motus satellitis in orbitâ suâ revolventis ad motum apsidis ut 360° ⁄ 1 - e ad 360° ⁄ 1 - e - 360°, hoc est, ut 1 ad e, erit motus apsidis tempore revolutionis satellitis ad fidera æqualis 360° × e, et hic motus apsidis erit ad ejusdem motum tempore alio quovis dato ut tempus periodicum satellitis ad tempus datum. Est autem in hac nostrâ propositione e = 3bc ⁄ 5l² × 1 - 3m² ⁄ 2; unde datur motus apsidum quæsitus. Q. E. I.

Coroll.

Si ad lunam referatur hæc determinatio, habebuntur b = 1, l = 60, m = sinui anguli 23° 28´ ½, et si fuerit c = 1 ⁄ 229, erit e = 1 ⁄ 1803203, atque motus apogæi lunæ spatio centum annorum æqualis 16´ proximé in consequentia; si fuerit c = 1 ⁄ 177, erit e = 1 ⁄ 1393742, et motus apogæi æqualis 20´, 7. Hac igitur quantitate minuendus est motus medius apogæi lunæ prout observationibus determinatur, ut habeatur motus ille quem generat vis solis.

Pro quarto autem Jovis satellite, erunt b = 1, l = 25,299, c = 1 ⁄ 13, m = sinui anguli 3°, e = 1 ⁄ 13924,7; hincque motus apsidis spatio unius anni solaris prodit 33´, 95 vel ferè 34´ in consequentia, qui tempore annorum decem fit 5° 40´. Insuper autem notandum est vi solis perturbari motum satellitis simili modo quo perturbatur motus lunæ; ideoque, quoniam vis solis, quâ perturbatur motus lunæ est ad lunæ gravitatem in terram in duplicatâ ratione temporis periodici lunæ circa terram ad tempus periodicum terræ circa solem, hoc est, ut 1 ad 178,725; pariter vis solis, qua perturbatur motus satellitis Jovialis, est ad ipsius satellitis gravitatem in Jovem in duplicatâ ratione temporum periodicorum satellitis circa Jovem et Jovis circa solem, hoc est, ut 1 ad 67394,6: vires igitur, quibus perturbantur motus lunæ et satellitis, sunt ad se invicem, relativé ad eorum gravitates in planetas suos primarios ut 1 ⁄ 178,725 ad 1 ⁄ 67394,6 sive ut 37,708 ad 1. Unde cum viribus similibus proportionales sunt motus his viribus dato tempore geniti, si vis prior vel ejusdem vis pars quælibet motum apsidis generat æqualem 40° 40´ ½ in orbe lunari annuatìm, vis posterior vel ejusdem pars similis et proportionalis motum apsidis eodem tempore generabit æqualem 6´ ½ in orbe satellitis, atque decem annorum spatio 1° 5´ in consequentia. Addatur 1° 5´ ad 5° 40´, et motus apsidum totus in orbe satellitis extimi Jovialis ex duabus prædictis causis oriundus spatio decem annorum erit 6° 45´ in consequentia. Observationibus Astronomicis collegit Ill. Bradleius hunc motum tempore prædicto esse quasi 6°; differentia illa qualiscumque 45´ inter motum observatum et computatum actionibus satellitum interiorum debebit ascribi.

Scholium.

Ex præcedentibus colligere licet motuum lunarium inæqualitates originem suam omnem non ducere ex vi solis, sed earum partem aliquam deberi actioni Telluris quatenùs induitur figurâ sphæroidicâ. Sufficiat hîc illarum computasse valorem, et legem, quâ generantur, demonstrasse: utrum autem hujusmodi correctiones tales sint ut tabulis Astronomicis inscribi mereantur, dijudicent Astronomi.

Item manifestum est præter inæqualitates eas, quæ in motibus satellitum Jovialium ex vi solis et actionibus satellitum in se invicem nascuntur, oriri alias ex figurâ Jovis sphæroidicâ ita notabiles ut Observationes Astronomicas continuò afficere debeant.

De Variatione motûs Terræ diurni.

Si terra globus esset omninò sphæricus quicumque foret revolutionis axis, manente eâdem in globo motûs quantitate, eadem maneret rotationis velocitas: secùs autem est, ubi ob vires solis et lunæ terra induit formam sphæroidis oblongæ per aquarum ascensum. Hîc enim non considero figuram telluris oblatam ob materiæ in æquatore redundantiam, sed sphæricam suppono nisi quatenùs per aquarum elevationem et depressionem in sphæroidicam mutatur. Jam verò in sphæroide hujusmodi, quamvis eadem maneat motûs quantitas, mutatâ inclinatione axis transversi ad axem revolutionis, mutabitur revolutionis velocitas, uti satis manifestum est: cùm autem axis transversus transit semper per solem vel lunam, singulis momentis mutabit situm suum respectu axis revolutionis ob motum quo hi duo planetæ recedunt ab æquatore terrestri et ad eum vicissìm accedunt.

Problema.

Variationem motûs terræ diurni ex prædictâ causâ oriundam investigare.

Exhibeat sphærois oblonga ADCd (Fig. [7].) terram fluidam, cujus centrum T, AC axis transversus jungens centra terræ et solis vel lunæ, Dd axis minor, EO diameter æquatoris, et XZ axis motûs diurni. Centro T et radio TD describatur circulus BDd secans axem transversum AC in B, et agatur BK perpendicularis in TE: tum ex quovis circuli puncto P ductâ PM ad axem XZ normali quæ secet TA in H, sit Ppr circumferentia circuli quam punctum P rotatione suâ diurnâ describit, ad cujus quodvis punctum p ducatur Tp et producatur donec occurrat superficiei sphæroidis in q; deinde demissâ pG perpendiculari in PM, et GF perpendiculari in TA, si per puncta AqC transire intelligatur ellipsis ellipsi ADC similis et æqualis, erit ex naturâ curvæ, quia sphærois nostra parùm admodùm differt à sphærâ, pq = AB × (TF)² ⁄ (TP)² quamproximé. Jam designet U velocitatem particulæ in terræ æquatore revolventis motu diurno circum axem XZ ad distantiam semidiametri TP, eritque U × PM ⁄ TP velocitas particulæ P circulum Ppr describentis, et cum sit TF =(GM - HM) × TK ⁄ TP + TH, erit motus totius lineolæ pq æqualis pq × U × PM ⁄ TP = U × AB × PM ⁄ (TP)³ × ((GM - HM) × (TK)²) ⁄ TP + TH, adeoque summa horum motuum in circuitu circuli Ppr, hoc est, motus superficiei inter circulum Ppr et sphæroidem in directione Tp contentæ, æquabitur circumferentiæ hujus circuli ductæ in U × AB × PM ⁄ (TP)³ × ((TK)² × (PM)² ⁄ 2(TP)² + (TK)² × (HM)² ⁄ (TP)² - 2TK × HM × TH ⁄ TP + (TH)²) sive quia est HM. TM ∷ TK. BK, et TH. HM∷ TP. TK, scribendo D pro circumferentiâ circuli BDd, æquabitur ille motus quantitati U × AB × D ⁄ 2(TP)⁶ × ((TK)² × (PM)⁴ + 2(BK)² × (TM)² × (PM)²). Deinde horum motuum summa in toto circuitu globi collecta, hoc est, motus totius materiæ globo BDd incumbentis prodibit æqualis U × AB × DD ⁄ 32 x 3(TP)² - (BK)² ⁄ (TP)². Ubi planeta in plano æquatoris consistit, fit BK = 0, et motus prædictus æqualis U × 3AB × DD ⁄ 32. Motus autem globi QPR circa eumdem axem est (uti facilé demonstratur) U × TP × DD ⁄ 16, adeoque motus terræ totius fit U × TP × DD ⁄ 16 + U × AB × DD ⁄ 32 × 3(TP)² - (BK)² ⁄ (TP)², qui cum idem semper manere debeat, denotet V velocitatem in superficie æquatoris terrestris ubi planeta versatur in plano æquatoris, eritque U × TP × DD ⁄ 16 + U × 3AB × DD ⁄ 32 = U × TP × DD ⁄ 16 + U × AB × DD ⁄ 32 × 3(TP)² - (BK)² ⁄ (TP)²; unde scribendo 1 pro TP quatenùs est radius ad sinum BK anguli BTK, habetur V. U∷ TP + 3AB ⁄ 2 - AB × (BK)² ⁄ 2. TP + 3AB ⁄ 2, indeque, quia minima est altitudo AB respectu semidiametri TP, U - V. V∷ AB × (BK)². 2TP, et U - V = V × AB × (BK)² ⁄ 2TP: pro V autem patet scribi posse velocitatem angularem terræ mediocrem quia ab eâ differt quam minimé et ducitur in quantitatem perexiguam AB × (BK)² ⁄ 2TP, et quia tempora revolutionum terræ circa centrum suum sint reciprocé ut motus angulares U, V, fiet differentia revolutionum terræ ubi planeta æquatorem tenet et ubi ab æquatore distat angulo BTK, æqualis 23ʰ 56´ × AB × (BK)² ⁄ 2TP. Quoniam igitur est acceleratio horaria ad motum terræ horarium mediocrem circa centrum suum ut AB × (BK)² ad 2 TP sive (quia est sinus p inclinationis eclipticæ ad æquatorem ad radium 1 ut sinus BK ad sinum distantiæ planetæ ab æquinoctio, quem sinum dico K) ut AB × p² × K² ad 2 TP; adeoque acceleratio horaria rotationis terræ crescit in ratione duplicatâ sinûs distantiæ planetæ à puncto æquinoctii, et summa omnium illarum accelerationum, quo tempore transit planeta ab æquinoctio ad solstitium, est ad summam totidem motuum horariorum mediocrium, hoc est, acceleratio tota eo tempore genita est ad tempus illud ut summa quantitatum omnium AB × p² × K² in circuli quadrante ad summam totidem 2TP, id est, quia summa omnium K² in circuli quadrante dimidium est summæ totidem quadratorum radii, ut AB × p² ad 4 TP. Quamobrèm, si denotet P quartam partem temporis planetæ periodici circa terram, erit acceleratio tota motûs terræ circum axem suum in transitu planetæ ab æquinoctio ad solstitium genita æqualis AB × P × p² ⁄ 4TP, atque eadem erit retardatio in transitu planetæ à solstitio ad æquinoctium. Unde sponte nascitur hoc Theorema: Est quadratum diametri ad quadratum sinûs obliquitatis eclipticæ ut quarta pars temporis periodici solis vel lunæ ad tempus aliud; deinde, est semidiameter terræ ad differentiam semiaxium ut tempus mox inventum ad accelerationem quæsitam.

Ascensus aquæ AB vi solis debitus est duorum pedum circiter, existente semidiametro terræ mediocri TP = 19615800, unde prodit per theorema acceleratio terræ circa centrum suum gyrantis facta quo tempore incedit sol ab æquinoctio ad solstitium, æqualis 1´´´ 55ⁱᵛ in partibus temporis; et si vi lunæ ascendunt aquæ ad altitudinem octo pedum, acceleratio revolutionis terræ inde orta, quo tempore luna transit ab æquatore ad declinationem suam maximam, erit 34ⁱᵛ: et summa harum accelerationum, quæ obtinet ubi hi duo planetæ in punctis solstitialibus versantur, cum non superet duo minuta tertia temporis cum semisse sive 37 minuta tertia gradûs, vix observabilis erit. Q. E. I.

Cùm igitur tantilla fit hujusmodi variatio in hypothesi sphæricitatis terræ; qualis evaderet, terrâ existente sphæroide oblatâ, frustrà quis inquireret.

CXI. Some Observations on the History of the Norfolk Boy. By J. Wall, M. D. In a Letter to the Rev. Charles Lyttelton, LL.D. Dean of Exeter.

SIR,

Read Dec. 14, 1758.

THE history of the Norfolk Boy, which, you inform me, has been communicated to the Royal Society, seems to deserve a place in the memoirs of that illustrious body, as well on account of its utility, as its singularity.

The symptoms in this case most evidently arose from worms in the intestines; which often occasion unaccountable complaints, and frequently elude the most powerful medicines, as they did in the instance before us, till at last they were dislodged by the enormous quantity of oil-paint, which the poor boy devoured; and the cause being thus removed, all the effects ceased.

At first sight it appears wonderful, that this immense quantity of white lead did not prove fatal; and that it was not so, could be owing to nothing but the oil, by which it was enveloped, and its contact and immediate action on the coats of the intestines thereby prevented. But the oil did not only obviate the dangerous effects of this mixture, but appears, to me at least, to have been the chief cause of the success, with which it was happily attended. I speak this with some restriction, because the lead, as its stypticity was thus covered, might, by its weight, assist in removing the verminous filth, especially as the bowels were made slippery by the oil.

Oil has long been observed to be noxious to insects of all kinds, so that not only those, which survive after being cut into several pieces, but those also, which live long with very little air, and those, which revive by warmth after submersion in water, die irrecoverably, if they are immerged in, or covered with oil. Rhedi and Malpighi have made many experiments to this purpose; and account for the event very rationally from the oil stopping up all the air-vessels, which in these animalcula are very numerous, and distributed almost over their whole bodies.

On this account oil has been recommended as a vermifuge both by Andry and Hoffmann, though I believe it has been seldom used in practice in that intention; or at least has not been given in quantities sufficient to answer it. Indeed Hoffmann[222] himself seems not to lay much stress on it as an anthelmintic, recommending it only as serving to line the inside of the intestines, and to relax spasms in them; and therefore as a proper preparative to be given before any acrid purgatives are ventured on.

The medicines commonly prescribed, and most depended on, are either of a virulent and drastic nature, or such as are supposed to be able to destroy those animals by some mechanical qualities e. g. to cut, tear, or otherwise affect their tender bodies, and yet not have force enough to lacerate or injure the stomach or intestines. Of the former kind are the leaves and juice of helleboraster, the bark of the Indian cabbage-tree, coloquintida, resin of jalap, glass of antimony, and the like; the effects of which are commonly violent and dangerous, and sometimes fatal. Of the latter class are crude mercury, and the milder preparations of that mineral, aloes and other bitters, tin filings, neutral salts, and vitriolic acids. Every one conversant in practice too well knows, how often these medicines are administred ineffectually. When I had therefore attentively considered the history of the Norfolk Boy, I determined to try the efficacy of oil in such cases, as it seemed capable of producing great effects, and yet could not be attended with any hazard or danger.

The first person, to whom it was given, with this view, was —— ——, a patient of our Infirmary, who was judged to have worms, but had taken several approved medicines for a considerable time without success. In a consultation with the other physicians, the following form was prescribed.

℞. Ol. Oliv. lb.ss. Sp. vol. aromat. ʒij M. cap. Cochl. iii. mane et H. S.

The volatile spirit was added here to make the oil saponaceous, and by that means more easily miscible with the juices in the stomach and primæ viæ. This medicine answered our expectations, and in a few days brought away several worms.

—— Lacy, a poor boy of the parish of Feckenham in this county, aged 13 years, was, as I was informed, about three or four years ago seized with convulsive fits, which gradually deprived him of his senses, and reduced him to a state of idiocy. He had taken several anthelmintics and purgatives, particularly the Pulv. Cornachin. but never had voided any worms, though all the symptoms seemed plainly to shew, that they were the cause of his disorder. As he greedily swallowed any thing, which was offered him, without distinction, I at first ordered him a mixture of linseed oil ℥vij Tinct. sacr. ℥j: of which he took four large spoonfuls night and morning. He persisted in the use of this one whole week without at all nauseating it, towards the latter end of which time he voided one round worm of a great length. He now began to shew much aversion to the medicine; on which account the Tinctur. sacr. was omitted, and he was ordered to take the oil alone in the same quantities. This he continued to do a fortnight longer, during which time he voided 60 more worms, and in a great measure recovered the use of his reason[223]. This account I had from the Apothecary, who, by my directions, supplied him with the medicines.

Soon after this I ordered the same medicine to be given to Elizabeth Abell, a poor girl in the same neighbourhood, reduced by epileptic fits to such a state of idiocy, as to eat her own excrements. It caused her to void several worms, but she did not recover her senses.

Since this time I have given the oil to several persons with good success, and therefore I cannot but recommend a further tryal of it; since it is a remedy, which may be used with safety in almost any quantity; a character, which very few of the anthelmintic medicines deserve.

It is probable, that some oils are more destructive to worms than others. Andry (Traité de la Generation des Vers, cap. 8) prefers nut oil, and tells us, that a human worm, voided alive, being put into that oil, died instantly; whereas another worm, voided at the same time, lived several hours in oil of sweet almonds, though in a languishing state. This difference he afterwards (Cap. 9) endeavours to account for, by supposing, that the oil of almonds is more porous, and consequently less able to preclude the entrance of air into the worms. And indeed there is some reason to conclude, that oils, which dry in the open air, such as nut and linseed oils, are of a closer texture, less mixed with water, and consequently more anthelmintic, than those oils, which freeze by cold, and will not dry in the open air;[224] such as those from olives or almonds. Andry tells us, that at Milan the mothers have a custom to give their children once or twice a week toasts dipt in nut oil, with a little wine, to kill the worms: and I know a lady in the country, who gives the poor children in her neighbourhood the same oil with great success.

I would recommend this remedy to be used in as large doses as the stomach will well bear: to which purpose it may be adviseable to join it either with aromatics, bitters, or essential oils, such as the case may require. Andry orders the oil to be taken fasting, assigning this for a reason, that the stomach being then most empty, it more readily embraces and stifles the worms. During this course it will be necessary, at proper intervals, to give rhubarb, mercurial or aloetic medicines.

I cannot close this paper without observing, that, from the history of the Norfolk Boy, we may learn, in similar cases, where the head is not idiopathic, never to despair absolutely of a cure, notwithstanding the disease has been of very long standing. For in this boy, though the oppression in the brain and nerves had continued many years, and had been so violent, as to deprive him not only of his intellectual faculties, but almost all his sensations; yet were not the organs much impaired thereby, but he recovered all his senses again, as soon as the irritation and spasms in the intestines, which first caused all these terrible symptoms, were removed. The same thing in a less degree was observable in the Feckenham Boy, mentioned before; and we have had two remarkable instances of the same kind at the Worcester Infirmary; where a boy and his sister, of the name of Moyses, received a perfect cure, and recovered the entire use of their senses, after having been rendered idiots (though not in so high a degree as the Norfolk Boy) for more than two years, by epileptic fits proceeding from worms.

J. Wall.

Worcester Dec. 7, 1748.

P. S. As the following history has some analogy with the subject we are now upon, I beg leave to subjoin it by way of postscript.

A young girl of the name of Lowbridge, at Ledbury, in Herefordshire, nine years old, had been long troubled with a gnawing pain at the stomach, which growing gradually more violent, I was at last called to her. About a quarter of an hour before I reached the house, she was seized with a violent vomiting, whereby she brought up an amazing number of living animals supposed, to be upwards of a thousand, together with a vast quantity of clear viscid phlegm. In shape they exactly resembled millepedes, except that some of them, being examined by a magnifying glass, appeared to have a small filament, which arose from the middle of the belly, and might probably have served to fix them to their nidus. They were of different sizes, from that of the largest millepede, to some, that were scarce perceptible; so that they appeared to have been generated at different times, and grown in the stomach. As the child was suddenly seized with this effort to vomit, she discharged her stomach on the floor of the parlour where she was sitting. The millepedes, they told me, were at first very lively, and crept briskly different ways; but they did not live long in the open air. They were lying in the slime when I came to her, so that I could not be imposed on as to the verity of the fact. After this evacuation, the child’s stomach grew perfectly easy, and continued so.

CXII. Observations upon the Corona Solis Marina Americana; The American Sea-Sun-Crown. By John Andrew Peyssonel, M.D. F.R.S. Translated from the French.

Read Dec. 14, 1758.

I Shall call this insect by this name, because of the resemblance it bears to the flower called Corona Solis; since it is, like this, open and spread.

This insect adheres to the rocks by its basis, which is flat and round; and tho’ this roundness is sometimes mis-shapen, it is only occasioned by the inequalities of the rocks, to which it sticks. Its diameter is about two or three inches, bearing, from the center, certain rays, like white nerves, upon a moist flesh, of a livid violet colour. These rays or nerves pass from the centre to the circumference; they, too, consist of a soft fleshy substance, which resembles bowels or intestines; the whole length of which is covered with glandulous bodies of a dirty grey colour; and all these glands filled up the middle of the fish, making the flowrets, or petals, that form the disk of the flowers. There is an infinite number of these glands attached to those filets or nerves, all very distinct from one another: these filets are well ranged when viewed downwards; but the upper part is covered by these glands, which are placed in a confused manner. These filets pass to the circumference, forming an edge full of rugosities, which leaves the body of the animal full of flaws. These hard bodies, upon which it lives, are not always permanent in the same place, but capable of changing their places from this edge or circumference; like a skin or texture of fibres or flesh, such as the body of the sea snail I have already described; of the same thickness, of a greenish colour, and sometimes of a greenish spotted grey, without shell, bone, or stay. The body or muscular fleshy skin raises itself up perpendicularly to three inches; rounds itself at the top, when it is touched; but it leaves a hole like a sphincter, formed by the reunion of the fleshy body, which enlarges itself again. The base opens to the whole extent of the bottom, makes a reversed prepuce, and immediately brings to view three rows of papillæ, which are of a conical figure, of one or two lines long, resembling the glands under the tongues of oxen, and which may here be compared to the demi-flowers or radiated flowers of the Corona Solis.

After this threefold ray of conical pointed papillæ, there appears a body of a livid violet colour; I took it for a particular substance or body; but having examined it, I observed it was only a pellicle, or membrane, that covered a part of the papillæ I mentioned. This membrane has sixteen separations, which form kinds of purses, and yet leave, in the center of the animal, an empty space, wherein several glands are brought in view. I do not know, whether, in the natural state, these membranes do not retire to the circumference, in order to discover the glands within, which they usually hide, and which fill up all the middle of the crown; but when the fleshy body is gone up again, it covers all the interior parts, closes them in, and preserves them from the touch of any extraneous body. I cannot tell how these fishes live, or what is their mechanism; for I could not distinguish either a mouth, or any viscera, nor any other organ serving to their nourishment.

Philos. Trans. Vol. L. Tab. XXXIV. p. [845].

CXIII. An Account of several rare Species of Barnacles. In a Letter to Mr. Isaac Romilly, F.R.S. from John Ellis, Esq; F.R.S.

London, Dec. 21. 1758.

Dear Sir,

Read Dec. 21, 1758.

THOSE rare and very extraordinary new species of Barnacles, which you have lately received from abroad, are so different from any of the common species, that I have seen, that I was resolved to inquire into the nature of an animal, which, like a Proteus, appears in so many different shapes or coverings in different parts of the world. For this end I have consulted that excellent collection in the British Museum, and some others in the cabinets of my curious friends.

In this inquiry I met with some very rare ones, which have not yet been described, as you will observe in the annexed plate [See Tab. [XXXIV.]], where I have given exact drawings of yours, as well as the other species of this genus.

This marine animal is called, by writers on natural history, Balanus, and Concha Anatifera: but the celebrated Professor at Upsal, Dr. Linnæus, calls the internal active part, or fish, the Animal Triton, and the covering or testaceous habitation Lepas, which he says is a multivalved shell, composed of unequal valves. The Animal Triton he describes, as having an oblong body, a mouth with a tongue in it, twisted about in a spiral manner; sixteen tentacula or claws: six of the hinder ones on each side, he says, are cheliferous.

This account differing from that given by the ingenious Mr. Turberville Needham, F.R.S. in his Microscopical Essays, I shall give the character of this animal, as it appeared to me from the many observations I made on it, while alive in salt water; and these I compared not only with many dried specimens of other varieties, but likewise with some of yours, that were preserved in spirits; and I found that the parts of the animal agree in all the species.

The experiments, that I made, were on the common English Barnacle, which is very frequently met with, at this time of the year, on oysters and other shell-fish. The microscope, that I made use of to observe it, was Mr. Cuff’s aquatic one; where the animal, when taken out of the shell, may be put into the watch-glass with salt water, or spread on the round glass plate on the stage of the microscope, and kept moist with a hair pencil and salt water during the time of observation: this will keep the claws and proboscis alive and in motion for many hours together.

This animal has 24 claws, or cirrhi (See Fig. [A]), which are disposed in the following manner: the 12 longest stand erect, arising from the back part of the animal: they are all joined in pairs near the bottom, and inserted in one common base. These appear like so many yellow curled feathers: they are clear, horny, and articulated. Every joint is furnished with two rows of hairs on the concave side. The animal, in order to catch its prey, is continually extending and contracting these arched hairy claws, which serve it for a net.

The 12 smallest claws are placed next to these, six on each side: these are divided into pairs; that is, two claws to one stem, like the chelæ or claws of the crab. These are more pliable, and fuller of hairs, than the others, and seem to do the office of hands for the animal.

The whole number of claws lessen in size gradually each way, from the tallest in the back, to the last but one of each side in the front; which last two are of the middle size.

The proboscis, or trunk, rises from the middle of the base of the larger claws, and is longer than any of them: this the animal moves about in any direction with great agility: it is of a tubular figure, transparent, composed of rings lessening gradually to the extremity, where it is surrounded with a circle of small bristles, which likewise are moveable at the will of the animal. These, with other small hairs on the trunk, disappear when it dies.

Along the inside of this transparent proboscis the spiral dark-coloured tongue appears very plain: this the animal contracts and extends at pleasure.

The mouth appears like that of a contracted purse, and is placed in front, between the fore claws. In the folds of this membraneous substance are six or eight horny laminæ or teeth standing erect, each having a tendon proper to direct its motion. Some of these teeth are serrated, others have tufts of sharp hairs instead of indentations on the convex side, that point down into the mouth; so that no animalcule that becomes their prey can escape back.

Under the mouth lie the stomach, intestines, and the tendons by which they adhere to the shell.

This then is the general character of the animal of the whole genus, whether with stems or without.

I shall now give you a short description of the several kinds I have met with, besides those of your own, and shall divide them into two kinds; those that have stems, and those that adhere by their shelly bases.

The first and most remarkable of those that have stems is the Barnacle, [Fig. 1.] This differs from the Lepas of Linnæus in not having a testaceous, only a cartilaginous or fleshy covering. On the top of it are two erect tubular figures like ears: these have a communication with the internal parts of the animal ([See Fig. 1. b]). These inner parts agree with the general character already given. The stem, which is here dissected, was full of a soft spongy yellow substance, which appeared, when magnified, to consist of regular oval figures, connected together by many small fibres, and no doubt are the spawn of the animal.

This extraordinary animal (of which there were seven together) was found sticking to the Whale Barnacle ([See fig. 1. & 7.]), by Mr. Smith of Stavenger in Norway, who cut both kinds together off a whale’s lip, that was thrown upon that coast last year, 1757, and immediately immersed them in spirits of wine; by which means we have been able more exactly to describe them.

I have called this animal the Naked Fleshy Barnacle with Ears; but it appears to claim the name of Triton rather than Lepas, according to Linnæus, as having no shelly habitation.

[Fig. 2.] is the next animal of this class: this is not yet described. I found several of them sticking to the Warted Norway Sea Fan, which Dr. Pantoppidan, the Bishop of North Bergen, sent you: from its appearance, I have called it the Norway Sea Fan Penknife. The stem of this is covered with little testaceous scales. The upper part of the animal is inclosed in thirteen distinct shells, six on each side, besides the hinge-shell at the back, which is common to both sides: these are connected together by a membrane that lines the whole inside. One of these is magnified a little at [fig. 2. a], in order to express the figure and situation of each shell the better.

[Fig. 3.] is taken from D’Argentville’s Lithologie, Pl. 30. fig. H, who says it is found in the British channel sticking to sea plants; and that these shells consist of five pieces. This, from its appearance, I have called the British Channel Penknife, to distinguish it from the other.

[Fig. 4.] is a species of Barnacle called Poussepieds by the French, and described by Rondeletius as commonly found adhering to rocks on the coast of Brittany. He says the people there boil and eat the stem, which is first of a mouse-colour, and afterwards becomes red like our prawns. There are many heads, that arise out of one stem, each of which consists of two shells, in which are the same parts of the animal as in the other species. This I have called the Cornucopia Barnacle. Some of the shells of this Barnacle were drawn from a specimen in the British Museum. This Lepas is the Mitella of Linnæus.

[Fig. 5. and 6.] are the Barnacles called Conchæ Anatiferæ: these are the sorts so well known to sailors, and formerly supposed to produce a large species of duck called a Barnacle. These consist of five shells. The tube, that supports one of these kinds, branches out like some species of corallines, bearing a shelled animal at the end of each branch. They are generally found adhering to pieces of wood in the sea, and most ships have some of them sticking to their bottoms. Those of the southern and warmer climates are generally of a larger kind than those of the colder and more northern climates.

The next division of these animals is, those that adhere by the base of their shells, having no stems.

Here I must observe, that the bottoms of the several species of this division conform in shape to the substances they adhere to, or grasp them in such a peculiar manner, as to render their situation secure from the violence of the element they live in. Another provision of nature for the security of these animals are the four opercula, which, upon their retreating into the great shell, they can draw to so close after them, as to secure themselves from outward danger.

[Fig. 7.] represents the Whale Barnacle, called Pediculus Ceti, just as it was cut off the whale’s lip, with the seven naked Barnacles with ears, already described. [Fig. 7.a] is the bottom of the shell. This has the appearance of the gills of a mushroom. All the spaces between these laminæ were filled with the blubber of the whale: by this means they adhere to the gristly skin of the fish. The narrow cavities between the branched laminæ are the places where the ligaments or tendons, that move the opercula, are inserted.

[Fig. 8.] is the Cup Barnacle, taken off an East India ship from Sumatra. The testaceous flat bottom of this was marked with the seams and lines of the sheathing, and with the rust of the nails. In one of these shells the animal is represented protruding his claws thro’ the opercula.

[Fig. 9.] is called the Bell-shaped Barnacle. This was taken off the bottom of a ship from Jamaica, and had its flat testaceous base marked as the former.

[Fig. 10.] This represents part of a most elegant specimen in the curious collection of Dr. John Fothergill. It is called the Tulip Barnacle, and very properly, as well from the shape of its shell, as the beautiful stripes of red mixt with white. It adheres to a piece of the true red coral, and was fished up near Leghorn, on the coast of Italy. It is not improbable, but that these groups of Barnacles, growing at the same time with the animals that formed the red coral, may have received an addition to their fine red colour from the coral.

[Fig. 11.] is a group of Barnacles of a conical form, composed of purplish tubes like small quills. [Fig. 11.a] represents one of the same, with a view of its base, from the collection of Mr. Peter Collinson, F.R.S. This was brought from the East Indies. The insides of these shells have the appearance of the spongy parts of bones.

[Fig. 12.] is called the Tortoise-wart Barnacle, being often found upon that animal. This shell is of a plano-convex shape, and looks like polished ivory. The divisions between the valves represent a star with six points. If these shells are put into soap lees, they will in a few hours separate into six pieces or valves, each shelly valve having two ears, like the scallop-shell: so that this species has its valves connected by membranes, instead of testaceous sutures, as most of the others have. [Fig. 12. a] represents the under part of the same shell.

[Fig. 13.] This shell is marked with six rays like a star, as the former; but is much deeper in proportion to its diameter. Several of this kind were found sticking to a crab, that was lately brought from the island of Nevis; from whence I have called it the American Crabs-wart.

[Fig. 14.] is called the Side-mouth Barnacle. This was found on the southern coast of Africa, near the Cape of Good Hope, where it adheres to a particular species of striated purple muscle. [Fig. 14.a] represents two of the opercula of this Barnacle remarkably horned. The shell of this is very thin; but its obliquity may probably be owing to its situation.

[Fig. 15.] This egg-shaped Barnacle with a small mouth is found in clusters sticking to the Buccinum tribe of shells in the West Indies.

[Fig. 16.] is the Cornish Barnacle, shaped like a cone, and with a small mouth. This is described and figured by the Revᵈ. Mr. William Borlase, F.R.S. in his Natural History of Cornwall, lately published.

[Fig. 17.] This is the common English Barnacle, that is found in such plenty upon all rocks and shells round this island. From the animal of this, examined in the microscope, I have taken the character of the fish of the Barnacle genus.

[Fig. 18.] This I have called the Limpet-shaped Barnacle, from its likeness to some species of that shell. I am indebted to our late worthy member, Mr. Arthur Pond, for this shell, who assured me it was brought to him from Greenland. It was, with several more, found sticking to a very large species of muscle.

[Fig. 19.a.] This Sea-Fan, with the Barnacles inclosed in it, was brought from Gibraltar. I have called it the Slipper Barnacle, from its shape. See [Fig. 19.] These shell-fish adhere, while they are young, to the slender branches, which are produced by the animals that compose this species of Sea-fan; and as the next succession of young animals of this sea-fan creep up its sides, to increase the bulk and extension of these first-formed ramifications, they inclose the shells all round, leaving only their mouths or apertures open, for the Barnacles to procure their food. But it frequently happens, that the animals of the Sea-fans destroy these Barnacles, by overrunning and involving them in the very center of their stems. These small Barnacles, interspersed here and there on the branches, have been taken for fruit or berries by some gentlemen, who look upon the internal or horny part of the Sea-fans to be vegetables.

[Fig. 20.] is a very curious Barnacle, taken from an elegant specimen in the British Museum; which, from its figure, I have called the Persian Crown.

I shall now add some further observations on the nature of these animals.

Upon opening the shells of many of the common English Barnacles ([Fig. 1.]) while they were alive, I found the lower part of the shell, which contained a cavity equal to two thirds of the whole, full of spawn; so that the Barnacles, which adhere by the base of their shells, as well as those that are supported by fleshy tubes, are propagated by eggs, which they send forth in inconceivable numbers; as appears by the clusters of young shells, which we find adhering not only to the parent animals, but to all hard substances near them.

The bottom shell of these animals, as well as their upper shells, vary in form according to their situation, which occasions some difficulty in determining their several species with exactness. The form of the base shell of our common English Barnacle, is the flat radiated figure represented adhering to a scallop shell in the front of a group of them at [Fig. 17.] The Barnacles at [Fig. 8. 9. 14. 15. and 20.] have the same kind of base.

I have very lately observed a singular kind of flat Balanus, on a white Mandrepora coral from the coast of Italy, in the possession of Mr. Mendez D’Acosta, F.R.S. whose base appears sunk into the coral, and of the form of an inverted cone, bending a little to one side. The inward surface of this conical base shell appears curiously striated with tubular radii, which terminate on the surface of the coral, to receive the extremities of the six valves, that compose the upper shell. This peculiar form of the base seems owing to the animals of the coral and of the Barnacle growing up together, the latter keeping possession of its proper space, while the former grew close about it.

The bottom shell of the Barnacle like a Limpet, at [Fig. 18.] increases from a small point by many thin shelly margins, which exactly correspond to the indentations which we observe on the base of the outward shell; so that it appears not unlike the drawing of a fortification in miniature.

I am,

Dear Sir,
Your most affectionate Friend,
John Ellis.

P. S. The Rev. Mr. William Borlase is now of opinion, that the Cornish Barnacle at Fig. [16.] which he has described in his History of Cornwall, is rather a Limpet or Patella.

CXIV. A further Account of the poisonous Effects of the Oenanthe Aquatica Succo viroso crocante of Lobel, or Hemlock Dropwort, by W. Watson, M.D. F.R.S.

To the Royal Society.

Gentlemen,

Read Dec. 21, 1758.

IN the month of June 1746. I communicated to you some observations concerning the Oenanthe aquatica Succo viroso crocante of Lobel, in relation to its poisonous effects upon some French prisoners at Pembroke. These observations were afterwards published in the Philosophical Transactions[225], with an accurate representation of the plant itself, from an original drawing by that compleat artist Mr. Ehret. This at that time I thought the more necessary, as it was of no small importance to the public, to be well acquainted with a plant, the effects of which, when taken into our bodies, were so much to be dreaded. This account of mine, as well as the representation of the plant, were republished from the Transactions into the periodical works of that time; from whence a more extensive knowlege of and acquaintance with this plant might have been hoped for. A late instance however has evinced, that these endeavours have not had their full effect, as the plant in question is not yet sufficiently known, and attended to.

John Midlane, a cabinet-maker of Havant in Hampshire, aged about 58, and of a gross habit of body, was advised to make use of the water parsnep, as a remedy for a severe scorbutic disorder, which he had long been troubled with; and for which he had taken a variety of medicines. Instead of the water parsnep, which he purposed to take, there were gathered for him some roots of the oenanthe above mentioned; a large one of which was pounded in a mortar, and the juice thereof squeezed through a linen cloth, and amounted to about five spoonfuls. This was suffered to stand all night, and the next morning (Mar. 31. 1758.), at about half an hour past five, he drank the whole quantity, except the sediment.

In about an hour and half after he had taken this juice, he walked about the town upon some business; and a little before seven, upon his return home, about an hundred yards from his own house, he first complained that he was ill; and having walked about thirty yards further, was so bad as to go into a neighbour’s house to rest himself. He was soon led from thence to his own house by two men, and told them, that he was affected as though he had lost the use of his limbs. When he was placed in his chair, he complained greatly of pain all over him; but particularly in his head. His stomach was immediately after affected, and he had great reachings to vomit. At the second attempt he threw up about half a pint of a clear watry liquor; at the first and third attempt he discharged scarce any thing. He was then seized with a great propensity to go to stool, which went off in about three minutes. After this, he with the greatest difficulty was conducted upstairs to bed, where he pulled off part of his cloaths himself. When he was put to bed, he was attacked with very severe convulsions, which in about a quarter of an hour deprived him of his senses; and continued, with a few intermissions, till he died, a little before nine o’clock; which was about three hours and half after the juice had been taken. A profuse sweat accompanied the whole of these symptoms: he foamed considerably at the mouth, and his belly swelled greatly. He purged very much soon after he was dead, but not before.

As this poor man had taken this dose before his family were up, no one could imagine from whence his disorder arose; and consequently the apothecary, who was called to him, was able to form a judgment of his case only from the symptoms; as on his coming he found his patient senseless, and who had not, while his mind was undisturbed, told any one the probable cause of his complaints. He took from him however about ten ounces of blood, and endeavoured to get some vinum ipecacuanhæ into his mouth: but his jaws were closed so fast, not above a spoonful passed, and that by the accident of his mouth opening of itself.

The symptoms, with which the person above-mentioned was attacked, were much the same as those which were observed in the French prisoners, who were poisoned by the same root at Pembroke. In both instances occurred those severe muscular spasms, which kept the under jaw so close to the upper, that, while the spasm continued, scarce any force could separate them. In both instances likewise a considerable time passed before the persons, who had eaten of this root, though they had taken enough of it to destroy them, perceived themselves disordered by it.

Philos. Trans. Vol. L. Tab. XXXV. p. [859].

J. Mynde sc.

I am obliged for this communication to Richard Warner, Esq; of Woodford, a gentleman of great merit, whose zeal for the promotion of useful knowlege I have many times experienced.

The expediency of laying before you observations of this sort, which may tend, by making people careful of what they take, to the saving the lives of many, makes no apology necessary for so doing. I am, with all possible regard,

Gentlemen,
Your most obedient humble Servant,
W. Watson.

Lincoln’s-Inn-Fields, 20 Dec. 1758.

CXV. Extract of a Letter to John Eaton Dodsworth, Esq; from Dr. George Forbes of Bermuda, relating to the Patella, or Limpet Fish, found there.

2 April, 1758.

Read Dec. 21, 1758.

AS a curiosity for your esteemed friend Mr. Theobald, the Captain will deliver you two fishes, intirely singular here, and never before observed amongst us. The one is of the shell kind, and changed its figure so often, that it was difficult to make a drawing. However I got a young man to take it in two different positions, and have sent the drawings with the fish. See Tab. [XXXV.]

The small one may be called the sea-batt; and in some sort resembles that species of animals when it is swimming.

Additional Remark by Charles Morton, M.D. F.R.S.

The Patella, or Limpet Fish, whose generic characters, as enumerated by Bishop Wilkins, are, that it is an exanguious testaceous animal, not turbinated; an univalve, or having but one shell; being unmoved; sticking fast to rocks or other things; the convexity of whose shell doth somewhat resemble a short obtuse-angled cone, having no hole on the top.

CXVI. A Discourse on the Cinnamon, Cassia, or Canella. By Taylor White, Esquire, F.R.S.

Read Dec. 21, 1758.

THE Cinnamon, Cassia, or Canella, are shrubs of no great height: they grow in Ceylon, Malabar, Java, Sumatra, and other places in the East Indies; as I think, in the island of St. Thomas, and on the coast of Coromandel.

They are described by Mr. Ray, in his History of Plants, vol. ii. f. 1559. under the title de Arboribus Pruniferis.

Philos. Trans. Vol. L. Tab. XXXVI. p. [860].

J. Mynde. sc.

Linnæus, in his Species Plantarum, places them under the title Enneandria Monogynia, by the name Laurus.

The leaf, flower, and fruit, of this plant, are particularly described by Mr. Ray.

The leaf is smooth and shining; has one large vein running thro’ the midst, and a remarkable one on each side; the middle one generally running near the length of the leaf.

The leaves differ in shape, some being more acute, others more oval or obtuse.

The flowers grow in an umbel, somewhat like the Laurus Tinus; but they are small, consisting of one petal, of a tubular form at the bottom, and divided at the top into six segments in the form of a star.

The flowers are succeeded by berries growing out of a capsula, like acorns in shape; which berries contain a shining seed.

The description of Mr. Ray of the flower, in his description of the Cinnamon of Malabar, is extremely accurate; as is also the figure in the Hortus Malabaricus, Nº. 54. and the description, fol. 107. under the name Carua. I shall therefore refer to those.

I shall not trouble you with the question debated by Mr. Ray, whether the Cinnamon and Cassia of the ancients were, or were not, the same with those so called by the moderns? whether the Cinnamon of the ancients was the twigs of the tree bearing cloves, or any plant now unknown to us? Mr. Ray has largely treated on this subject; and to him I refer such as are curious to be informed on this subject.

But as the Cinnamon and Cassia of the ancients are said to have been used as perfumes, and to make perfumed ointments, I think they must have differed from ours, whose smell is not very fragrant, nor is emitted to any great distance.

The matter of the present inquiry is, whether the Cinnamon of Ceylon is the same sort of plant with that growing in Malabar, Sumatra, &c. differing only by the soil or climate, in which it grows, which is the opinion of Garcias; or from the culture or manner of curing the plant, as I am inclined to believe; or whether it is really a different genus or species of plant, as many people believe, and some botanical writers seem to indicate.

I shall endeavour to explain this matter by producing, 1st, The descriptions of the most celebrated authors:

2dly, By producing the most accurate figures of the plants of Sumatra and Ceylon: [See Tab. [xxxvi.]]

3dly, By shewing the specimen of the leaves and branches brought from Sumatra.

I have no specimen from Ceylon; but have carefully examined the specimens kept in the British Museum, with the assistance of Dr. Maty and Mr. Empson, and compared them with the specimens I have from Sumatra; from whence I traced exactly the figures brought herewith: which specimens are undoubtedly brought from Ceylon, and were the collections of Boerhaave, Courteen, Plukenet, and Petiver.

But, previous to this inquiry, I would premise, that the writers, who give the description of the Cinnamon of Ceylon, were probably not acquainted with that of Malabar at the time of their publishing their works.

Mr. Ray also, who so accurately describes the flower of the Cinnamon of Malabar, seems not so well acquainted with its fruit; and probably had then never seen the specimens of the Cinnamon from Ceylon; for his description is plainly borrowed from others, and not his own. Tho’ I have reason to think he afterwards saw the specimens of Mr. Courteen, and was convinced, that the plants were the same.

In his description of the Cinnamon of Ceylon, he supposes differences in the manner of veining the leaf, which are not found in the leaves themselves. He supposes, that the Cinnamon of Ceylon differs from that of Malabar by its berries growing in cups like acorns; which is apparently the same in both, as may be seen in its figure in the Hortus Malabaricus.

The other differences taken notice of by the botanic writers are as follow:

In the Flora Zeylanica, p. 545. and in the Materia Medica, 190. the Cinnamon of Ceylon is called Laurus foliis trinerviis ovato-oblongis nervis unientibus: which description is adhered to in the Hortus Cliffordiensis, p. 154. under the name Laurus foliis oblongo-ovatis nitidis planis. And Burman, in his Flora Zeylanica, 62. T. 27. calls it Cinamomum foliis latis ovatis. Whereas the Cassia of Sumatra is distinguished by these writers: that in Flora Zeyl. 146. and in Materia Medica, 191. is called Laurus foliis trinerviis lanceolatis nervis supra basin unitis: and Burman, Zeylan. 63. T. 28. calls it Cinamomum perpetuo florens folio tenuiore acuto.

The distinction therefore, which these writers would make us believe there is between these plants, consists in the leaves of the one being oval, the other sharp-pointed; and that the nerves are limited at the bottom in the Cinnamon, but not so in the Cassia: for as to the semper florens, mentioned by Burman, that must undoubtedly be common to both.

Now as to the different shape of the leaves, we know how often this happens by seminal varieties, and from the age of plants, as in the leaves of holly and ivy; and that even the shapes of leaves vary greatly on the very same plant, and sometimes on the same branch; as in the ash, and many other plants, the leaves of the young shoots are more oval than those on the old boughs, which are generally more pointed. But this variety is much more frequent in the plants of warm countries. In the sassafras, part of the leaves generally near the bottom of the plant are plain, whilst the other leaves are divided into three lobes or segments. I have observed great difference also in the leaves of almost every one of the American oaks.

In the Virginian cedar, the berries of the same plant produce some plants with juniper leaves, and others with leaves like the savin; and some plants with both leaves growing on the same plant.

I must observe that Burman has, in his figures of the two plants before mentioned, made them extremely different. In that of Ceylon he has made all the leaves oval; and, to make the difference greater, has drawn the rudiments of the berries; to which he has added the flower, or part of it, at the top of the style or rudiment of the fruit: and in that of Malabar he has drawn the flower growing in the umbel.

On these drawings I must observe, that his drawing of the Cinnamon of Ceylon agrees with no one specimen in the British Museum; and scarcely is one leaf to be found of the shape, which he gives.

The first figure, which I shall produce, is a drawing which I procured from the ingenious Mr. Ehret in the year 1754: which, as I am informed by Mr. Empson, was from a specimen, given to Mr. Ehret by him in that year, of the Cinnamon of Ceylon. See Fig. [1.]

This agrees in every thing with the drawing of the Cinnamon of Malabar in the Hort. Malab. fig. 54. fol. 107. and there called Carua; except that it wants the fruit: but that defect is supplied by Mr. Ray’s description of the Cinnamon of Ceylon above mentioned. See fig. of the fruit, Fig. [2.]

In the figure in the Hort. Malabar. it may be observed, that the nerves do not go quite to the bottom of the leaf. But this is merely accidental, as will appear by the leaves of the same plant brought from Sumatra, which I shall produce; in which, part of the leaves have veins going quite to the bottom, and united there, and the others not so. See Fig. [3.]

The next drawing I shall produce contains that of the leaves of the Cinnamon plant, from specimens in the British Museum.

Fig. [4]. A specimen, with the flower, from the collection of Mr. Courteen, who lived long in Ceylon. These leaves were more pointed, but were broke at the end.

Fig. [5]. A whole leaf, with its point, in the same collection, growing on a branch, on which are the rudiments of the fruit.

Fig. [6]. A leaf in Plukenet’s specimens.

Fig. [7]. Another leaf of the same collection, and of the same plant.

Fig. [8]. A leaf of a large specimen from Boerhaave’s collection.

Fig. [9]. Another leaf on the same branch.

Fig. [10]. A specimen from Petiver’s collection. The points of the leaves are broken off.

Fig. [11]. The flower of the first specimen.

Fig. [12]. In the rudiment of the seed before formed, in the state given in Burman’s first drawing.

Note, It is to be observed also, that the specimens of the Cinnamon of Ceylon are probably of cultivated plants.

From all these specimens it plainly appears, that the distinction of foliis ovatis & lanceolatis does not appear well founded.

But were it otherwise, and that the leaves of the plants differed, it would by no means be a proof of any material difference in the nature or quality of the plants; as is well known to persons conversant in natural history.

Before I leave this subject of the description of the plant, it may be proper to mention, that Bauhin calls the one of these plants Cinnamomum or Canella Malabarica & Javanensis, and the other Cinnamomum Canella Zeylanica, Bauhin. pinax 408 and 409; but neither from these names, nor from his description, can any conclusive argument be formed: and that Herman, in his Hort. Lugd. Batav. 129. t. 1655. calls this Cinnamon of Ceylon Cassia Cinnamonia.

If any conjecture can arise from hence, it may be, that the Cinnamon of Ceylon was formerly, as well as that of Sumatra and Malabar, called Cassia; but that the Dutch writers, being acquainted with the excellent qualities, which the ancients ascribed to their Cinnamon, chose to add the name Cinnamon to that of Cassia: and in process of time they have found the name of Cinnamon more profitable than that of Cassia, by which we chuse to call our Canella, to our national loss of many thousands a year.

Having now given an account of the figure of these plants, and in what respect they are said herein to differ; I shall proceed to consider the pretended differences in the Canella itself; which are supposed not to be in form only, but substantial and material; and are generally understood to be so by persons supposed to be acquainted with the subject.

Mr. Ray states this matter fully in his Hist. Plant. vol. ii. p. 1560. in these words: Officinæ nostræ Cassiam ligneam a Cinnamomo seu Canella distinctam faciunt, Cassiam Cinnamomo crassiorem plerumque esse, colore rubicundiorem, substantiâ duriorem, solidiorem & compactiorem, gustu magis glutinoso, odore quidem & sapore Cinnamomum aptius referre, tamen Cinnamomo imbecilliorum & minus vegetam esse, ex accurata observatione Tho. Johnson.

From these reasons Mr. Ray draws a conclusion (I must own not very instructive), that the Cinnamon of Ceylon is Cinnamon; and the Cinnamon of Malabar, &c. is the Cassia of the shops.

From the specimens I shall now produce, it will most plainly appear, that these differences are merely accidents arising from the age of the Canella, the part of the tree from whence it is gathered, and from the manner of cultivating and curing it.

In the Philosoph. Transact. Nº. 278. p. 1099. in Mr. Strachan’s account of Ceylon, which is abridged by Eames and Martyn, vol. ii. p. 183. he says, that there are two sorts of Cinnamon-trees, of which the tree, which is esteemed the best, has a leaf much larger and thicker than the other; but otherwise no difference is to be perceived.

Note, Here is no mention of the folio ovato.

I remember, in an account given some years ago to the Royal Society, three or four sorts were mentioned; and it was said the best sort was cut every three or four years.

This superiority I then guessed (as well as the difference of leaves mentioned by Mr. Strachan) to arise from the cutting the tree down every three or four years; which occasioned it to produce strong and vigorous shoots, thicker and larger leaves, as well as greater quantity of bark, and of a superior quality.

A large shoot or sucker of this plant was produced in the year 1750. or 51. by my worthy friend Dr. William Watson, together with an account of the Cinnamon-tree; which is published in the Philosoph. Transact. vol. xlvii. p. 301. This shoot was a plain proof to me, that the Cinnamon was frequently cut down, and that this shoot arose from the root of a plant so cut; for it was of the size of a walking-cane; and no shrub could have produced such a shoot, unless a strong plant cut down.

This method of treating this plant accounts for the mistake of Garcias, mentioned by Mr. Ray; viz. Quæ Garcias habet de duplice hujus arboris cortice ad modum suberis, nobis suspecta sunt, quæque de deliberatione semel triennio facta; non enim puto renascitur cortex semel detractus.

This shews, that the bark was gathered every three years: but Mr. Ray was not acquainted, that the plant was cut down, in order to take off the bark, once in three years.

In the account above mentioned to be given to the Society by Dr. Watson, no descriptions are given either of the plants of Ceylon, or Malabar; but he quotes Burman, who says, that he had nine different sorts of Cinnamon from Ceylon, of which that, which is the best, is brought to us, and called by the name Rasse Coronde.

What the differences between these sorts were, does not appear; whether in leaf or bark, or manner of culture. And I must observe, that in all the specimens in the British Museum I could observe no difference of species. But this is to be understood, that every sort coming from Ceylon is, by the Dutch and by the shops, called Cinnamon; and that of our own growth is by them always called Cassia. The reason is obvious.

The specimens, which I now produce, of the Canella or bark of the Cinnamon of Sumatra, I procured in the year 1755. from Mr. Tho. Combes, a gentleman then in the service of the East India Company in Sumatra, by means of a friend.

I was then attempting to form a society for the carrying on a General Natural History, to try proper experiments, and to employ proper painters and engravers suitable to the importance of the subject; and therefore attempted to establish a correspondence in those parts, whose productions are as yet little known to the public.

I mention this design, because it would not be possible else to explain what Mr. Combes means by the word Society, which he so often mentions in his letter; of which I shall produce an extract, so far as it relates to the present inquiry.

It seemed to me very improbable (as the same plants are generally found in the same latitude and soil), that the spices now in the possession of the Dutch should grow only in that small tract of land, which is in their possession. And I had many credible informations, that, whatever they may pretend to the contrary, this is only a pretence.

I therefore desired to obtain the best information of the nature and culture of the plants producing spices, as well as of many other things, which are foreign from this inquiry.

I desired to know, how the spices were dried and cured; and that different specimens might be sent me of the plants, their seed, flower, leaf, and bark, and properly cured and prepared.

This produced the answer I lay before you herewith, together with the specimens now produced.

You see hereby, that the Dutch dry their Cinnamon in sand; probably to take away that viscosity, which is complained of in the Cassia.

And you will observe also, that the specimen produced dried and cured is also as free from any viscosity, as the Cinnamon of Ceylon: That it agrees also with the Cinnamon in every other quality, and in colour; and that none of the distinctions mentioned by Mr. Ray can be found herein; but that they may arise from the part of the tree, from whence the bark was taken; the inner bark of the large wood being red, as you see by the other specimen produced. And the common Cassia taken from the larger branches, and not cured, has the viscosity complained of in some degree, tho’ much less than it had four years since, when I received it.

Mr. Ray says, that one is weaker in taste, as he supposes, than the other. That may be so from its manner of drying, or keeping of it. Dried in large quantities, and by a stronger heat, it will probably be stronger, than if it is dried in a lesser quantity, and slower.

As for the viscosity, the glutinous part is found in every plant in some degree, as well as in every animal. It preserves the parts from moisture; but will be consumed by heat or time; and it will be a preservative to the plant, till it is destroyed; which was the reason, as I suppose, that Mr. Ray mentions Cassia to have kept good thirty years, the viscosity not having been destroyed by drying.

I suppose the reason, which the Dutch have to dry it, is to make it sooner fit for the market, and possibly fitter for distillation.

You will see from Mr. Combes’s letters and specimens, that he thinks there may be two sorts of Cassia or Cinnamon in Sumatra: possibly there may be the same difference in Ceylon; but, if so, I suspect them both to be only seminal varieties, and that their virtues are the same.

Mr. Barlow, some time since a Surgeon in the service of the India company, made a considerable quantity of oil of the Cassia of Sumatra, which was very little, if any thing, inferior to that drawn from Cinnamon; and it was sold to great profit.

If these plants are really the same, or if they are of equal goodness, supposing there was a small difference in the form of the leaf, it might be well worth the attention of the East India company to try to cultivate these plants in the manner they do in Ceylon; that is, to make plantations in a proper soil; and to have regard to the proper distance from the sea of the place, where they try the experiment: for some plants require to be near the sea, and others far from it, in Sumatra; which is the case of the Mango, and Mangosteen; the one of which must be near the sea, the other at a distance from it.

I think the plants should be suffered to grow strong, to be six or seven years old, and then cut every three years, the bark peel’d off and dried in hot sand, and packed close and kept dry. This I take to be all necessary to be done, to try, if our Cinnamon will not produce as good a price as that of the Dutch.

Perhaps the plants need not stand so long before cut; for the vegetation of plants in hot countries is very great.

There are many other most valuable vegetables in Sumatra, which might be made staple commodities, as sagoe, camphire, several sorts of ginger, rice, and many other, which are foreign to the present inquiry.

But it may not be amiss to recommend it to the traders to Sumatra to bring some quantity of the twig-bark of the true Cassia, well cured; and also to the company, to have a chemist at Sumatra, to extract carefully the oil of Cassia; which is best, and in greatest quantities, produced from the bark of the body, and of the larger branches of the tree: and also that the company would procure an exemption of all customs or duties on Cassia, or on the oil of Cassia, for some time: and also that the college of physicians in their dispensatory would direct Cassia or Cinnamon of Malabar or Sumatra to be used, instead of the Cinnamon of Ceylon; and that the same should be used by apothecaries and distillers, and in all simple and compound waters, in which Cinnamon is used.

Extract of a Letter from Mr. Thomas Combes, dated Fort Marlborough, 5 Jan. 1755.

IN regard to the first article of your paper, now before me, which is the inquiry desired to be made concerning the spices, I am of opinion, that the true Cinnamon grows no-where but on the island of Ceylon, unless Cassia be allowed to be the same tree, which I am inclined to think.

Nº. 9. contains seeds of the Cassia or wild Cinnamon-tree. As for the seeds of the true Cinnamon-tree, I believe they are very difficult to be got; for as the Dutch are the sole masters of this spice, and get a good deal of money by it, I fancy, according to their usual custom, they have very well guarded against the transplantation of it. I hope however, that these seeds will not be unacceptable to the society, as Cassia itself is of some value; and as I am very doubtful, whether this tree is not the same with the true Cinnamon, being of opinion, that the difference observed in them arises from the different method of curing their barks, or from the taking the bark from different parts of the tree, or at different seasons, or of different ages, or perhaps all these.

I have made inquiry concerning this from some very intelligent persons, and found them to be of opinion, that the Cassia and Cinnamon-tree were of the same genus. I have inquired further concerning the method of curing it at Ceylon; but as this is done by the natives, the Dutch are not very well acquainted with it; nor could I obtain any good account of it, different people giving me different relations. Some said, it was the inner bark, some the middle, and some the outer; tho’ of the young branches, they seemed in general to agree, that it was gathered at a certain season of the year, and that one part of the cure was burying it in sand for some time. This may be tried with Cassia, and may perhaps take away that viscosity or glutinous quality observed by chewing it, and which is the principal mark for distinguishing it from Cinnamon. As to their chemical oils, I have heard many people say, that they are not distinguishable otherwise, than that from Cinnamon is generally better, or, as it may be called, stronger, than that from Cassia; and accordingly bears a better price. But the Dutch company’s chemist at Batavia, if I may give him this title, informed me, that they are essentially different, and plainly distinguishable. But I must confess myself very doubtful of the knowlege or veracity of this chemist, and strongly suspect, that they are no otherwise different than in goodness, as many other oils drawn from the same subject are.

I observe the price of Cassia is greatly risen in England within these two or three years; but whether this be owing to an increase in the consumption, or a decrease in the importation of this commodity, I cannot say.

The Dutch government of Batavia has this year, in some new regulations of their trade, prohibited to all persons the dealing in any of the fine quilled sort of Cassia, and declared the same to be contraband, and reserved for their company only; and put it upon the same footing as their Cinnamon.

What reasons induced them to this, I am yet a stranger to; but it makes me suspect, that the rise of this commodity in Europe is owing to some other cause than a deficiency in the importation thereof. Perhaps some discovery has been made rendering Cassia equal to Cinnamon.

In Persia, I think, they make not so great a difference between them as elsewhere; and I myself, for want of Cinnamon here for some months past, made use of the fine quilled Cassia; and the difference I observe between them I imagine to arise rather from the greenness and want of dryness in the Cassia, than any thing else, or perhaps from the method of curing it: for if there happens to be a little too much Cassia put into my chocolate (and other things I use in it), a little bitterish taste arises, something like what we meet with in most barks; tho’ I do not remember to have observed this of Cinnamon: but as to its boiling to a jelly, as Quincy mentions, I find no such thing, and think it bears boiling as well as Cinnamon. Nor do I think its distilled water more subject to an empyreuma than that of Cinnamon.

I have inquired of the country people here, who bring it us, and they tell me the finest sort is the inner bark of the small branches; and indeed that it is the inner bark, I think, is evident in Cinnamon as well as Cassia; no outer bark of the youngest branches of any tree having, in my opinion, that smooth surface observable in both these barks.

I once thought, that it was better to take the bark from the body of the tree than from the branches, imagining that the bark from the trunk or body of all trees must in general be stronger, let its natural taste be what it will, than from its branches. This I find to be so in Cassia; and I have been informed, that the large ligneous pieces of Cassia have afforded rather more oil in distillation than the fine quilled sort, their weight being equal; but upon trial I could not make the bark from the trunk curl or roll up, as it ought to do, owing, as I suppose, to my unskilfulness, or to rigidity, or the natural position of its fibres; for the bark of the younger branches curled of itself, wanting hardly any other assistance than the sun.

I have already observed, that Cassia is found in chewing to have a viscidness, which Cinnamon has not. I have endeavoured to remove this in a little I send you, marked B: pray let me know, if it answers; and be assured, it was taken from the younger branches of the tree, of which I send you the seeds.

I send you also, marked C, some of the bark taken from the same tree; as also some of the leaves, marked D.

I have sent you also a little of the bark of the trunk of a tree, which, tho’ called Cassia, seems not to be so, marked E; and also the leaves of the same tree, marked F.

END of the Fiftieth Volume.

AN
INDEX
TO THE
FIFTIETH VOLUME
OF THE
Philosophical Transactions,
For the Years 1757 and 1758.