893 
TETRANTHERA lauriMa. 
JLmrel-le(we4 Tetrdr^hera, 
mmANDHU^ MiokOGriflA. 
Nat. ord. L a k i x x. . Br. prodr. 
TETRANTHERA Jacq. — -7^/o?rs dioici. Iiivolucnun iimlx'lliP, 4-,''> phvl- 
lum, deeidiitna. Pcrianthium liiiilx) 4-<) partito v. riullo. — M<tsc. Sttunlna 
'6-\5. ^iw^Z/ertE 4-loculares. Glandulce ad basin filamentorum interiorum. 
Rudimentum ^hilWi. Fern. G/a/tofM^ee staminaque sterilia. iSfi^ma cUlft- 
tatum, sublobatum. Bacca nuda. Br. prodr. 403. 
T.laurifolm; foliis obovatis oblongis petiolatis supra glabris, petiolo piloso, 
involucris tetraphyllis tortentosis. 
Tetranthera laurifolia. Jnaj. Sdumb. 1. t. 113. Smith in Rees in loco. 
Tomex tetranthera. Willd. sp. pi. 2.839. 
Litsea tetranthera. Pers. syn. 2.4. 
Obs. Tomex sebifera Willd. et Litsea chinensis Laniarckii a T. laurifolid 
differunt, ut aiunt , fiorihus asepalis. Herhario noatro tres adsnnt ramidi, quo- 
rum inms ex horto Calcuttense sub nomine Litsece chinensis 7nissi(s est, alter e 
Mauritio, tertius Guyana ; horum prior 3-5 sepalus, alteri plani asepali ; 
nidlo alio signo distinguendi. Anne igitur ha species ecedem? Charaicteret 
OMtorum nulla signa ostendunt quibus separandte stott. 
.... ■ . ■ 
'Thatthe subject of this article is the Tetranthera lauri- 
folia of .Tacquin, there can, we think, be no reason to doubt. 
Whether it Is not also the Tomex sebifera of Wiildenow, and 
the Litsea chinensis of Lamarck, may also be worthy of con- 
sideration. In the specific characters which have been as- 
signed to the last-mentioned species by authors, we confess 
■ we can detect no differences Beyond that of their bein^ ase- 
palous, by which tliey can be divided from T. lain itblia ; 
between themselves we. perceive no distinction whatever. 
We are unable to tell what value may be •ttached to the 
absence or presence of sepals in these plants, but the * 
importance of such a character appears at most to be 
doubtful. The divisions of the perianthium, or the petals 
as they have been incorrectly called, are deciduous, and 
easily overlooked in dried, and, perhaps, imperfect speci- 
mens. We have in our own possession three branches 
of what appear to be of the sam^ species, of ^hicji one was 
• 
