ME. BENTHAM ON LOGANIACEJB. 67 



allies in South-westem Australia. The distinction of the speciea 

 allied to Z. campanulata, Br,, from the same part of the country, ia 

 likewise involved in much obscurity. 



One species from the same district again which I hare ventiuped 

 to describe as new, under the name of i. micrantha, is very remark- 

 able from the ovules as well as tlie seeds being solitary in each 

 eell, which would technically exclude the plant not only from the 

 genus, but from the tribe, and place it in a new one to correspond 

 ui Loganiace(je with SpermacocecB among Bubiace(B. But I should 

 regard it as rather a specific anomaly in Loganiaj similar to what 

 we observe in Hedyotis monosperma, W. & Arn., where the ovules 

 are likewise solitary. For the great development of the placenta 

 a^d the position of the seed seem to point to the abortion of 

 other ovules, which the observation of the ovary in a living 



stat« at a very early period of growth might probably enable us to 

 detect. 



Dr. Hooker has described a species from New Zealand, so far 

 extending the limits of the genus beyond Australia itself. On the 

 other hand, it is probable that there is some mistake in the sup- 

 posed South African species described by Ecklon. No one appears 

 to have since seen it, although the Uitenhage flora is now pretty 

 well known ; nor have Ecklon's specimens been re-examined by 

 ^y competent botanist. 



10. GoMPHO STIGMA, TvTcz. 11. NuxiA, Lam.—sjxA. 



>:y'- I 



JJi^ 



A- 



I We nothmff to adH to t.lift rUstinetive characters of these three 



any : 

 thus. 



as given in the tenth volume of the ' ProdromuS; 

 w species been added either to Gomphostigma c 



ume of the ' Jjinnaea 



described three South African Nuxias as new. His N. pubescens, 

 which we have from Burke and Zeyher, is a weU-marked one, of 



an 



-^. tomentosa appears, as suspected 



N. emaraincrta^ is imkn 



13. BrPDLEIA, i»»^ 



beautiful 



Hv 



imalaya, 



lan 



species described by Eemy, and both unknown to me, and 

 1^0 less than thirteen supposed new species from Mexico,— three 

 published by Martens from Galeotti's dried collection, and ten by 

 K^unth Mid Bouch^,from specimens cultivated in the Berlin garden- 





