“ China by the Horticultural Society, and published provi- 
“ sionally as CraTEGUS indica in the Botanical Register, 
“ which differs in having spreading red stamens longer 
* than the calyx, and much longer leaves. In the same 
* collection we have also remarked a fourth species with 
* long willowlike leaves, which may be distinguished by 
“ the name of R. salicifolia” Lindley collect. 3. 
We must here protest against Mr. Lindley's ascribing 
to us the intention of giving the plant of the 468th 
article of this work provisionally for CrataGus indica of 
Linnæus; for we really believed the plant to be of that 
species at the time we published it, and do so still. Had we 
meant to have given it provisionally, we should bave said 
so ; we had no mental reservation. Our plant may not be 
the Cnaræcus indica of Loureiro, that being described with 
roundish petals; but we do not see any reason why Lou- 
reiro's plant should be the one intended by Linnæus, as 
Mr. Lindley supposes, rather than the one we ourselves 
have published for it, and disagree with Mr. Lindley 
in regard to the proposed adoption of the new specific name 
of pheostemon for it. It would be better to give a new name 
to Loureiro's plant. 
The drawing was taken at the garden of the Horticul- 
tural Society, where our sample flowered in the hothouse; 
and was supposed to have been imported from China. We 
had no opportunity of inspecting it, but believe it a good 
species, as well as indica and rubra. 
We are obliged to Mr. Lindley for the notice of our 
plant being his R. salicifolia. 
