*1^ 



r J 



^ ■" 



106 



MR. N. E* BROWN : NEW AND OLD 



I firsL i<a\v the plant it appeared so distinct tliat I made tlic' mistake of 

 considering it to bo a now species* Its synonymy is therefore as follows : — 



M. JjEHMANNI, El'U. & Zeyli. Enum. PL Afr. Austr. p. 310 : Salm- 

 Dyck, Mescmb. § i2, fig. 1 : Sondor in Fl Cap. vol. ii. p. 430 : 

 Berger, Mescmb. p. 121), fig. 22. M. sexparlliuni^ N. E. Br. in Kew 



Bulh 1008, p. 407. 

 UiTi:NHA(iE Div.^ Near the Zwartkops Biver, Zeijlier^ 2570 ; Karoo, 



JPiUarfS ! 



M. Thunbergii, ITuiv. Stem about 1 ft, (30 cm.) long, decumbent, 



braneliingj terete, jointed^ half as thick as a quill-pen, 



glabruu^j g 



an 



"reyish. 



Branches short, erect, leafy, similar. Leaves about 1 inch (25 mm.) long, 

 erect, closely placed^ decussately opposite, connate (at the base), trigonous 

 or subtercte, fiattish above, obtuse, smooth, glabrous^ not dotted. Flowers 

 terminal on the branchlets, solitar^^ yellow. Calyx 4-lobed; lobes opposite, 

 two o£ them shorter than the others. — JA 1 hunherriH^ Haw. Misc, p, 8l) 

 (1803) ; & Bev. p. 150 : DC. Prodr. vol. iii. p. 437 : G. Don, Gcu. Syst. 

 vol. iii. p, 141. A£. hwe^ Thunb. in Nov. Act. Ephem. Nat. Curios, vol. viii. 

 App. p. 16 (179 J), & Fl. Cap. ed. Schultes, p. 425, not of Aiton. 

 UiTEXHAGE Dtv. Near the Sundays Biver, fl 



Thuuherg. 



owering in December, 



I give a translation of Thunberg's description of this plant in order to call 

 attention to it, because although Haworth correctly perceived that the plant 

 •which Thunberg described as J/. l(vve could not possibly be the same as that 

 which Aiton had two years earlier (in 1789J described under the same name, 

 yet subsequent authors^ not quoted above, have not only ignored Thunberg's 

 description by replacing it with a description of AL duhium, Haw., but have 

 also quite ignored the earlier M, Ucve^ Aiton, which is a tall plant, differing 

 in having a 5- instead of a 4-lobed calyx and purple instead of yellow flowers, 

 Sonder and also Berger (who throughout his work seems to have compiled 

 from Sonder and the descriptions given by Salni-Dyck without investiga- 

 tion) gives a description of M, fZ?r?>/?/w, Haw. ^ based upon that of Salm-Dyck, 

 as being a description of M. lave^ Thunb. As I have not seen the type of 

 M. lav€y Thunb. I cannot say if they are correct in su])posing it to be the 

 same as M. duhium^ Haw. or not. Yet, as Tliunberg describes the leaves of 

 M. hrve as being 1 inch long, obtuse, smooth, without dots, and the calyx as 

 4-lobed, whW^tM.dubmm (the il/. Urve oE Sonder and of Berger) is described 

 and figured as having leaves 2 inches long, acutely mucronate, slightly 

 scabrous, with numerous very minute dots, and a 5-lobed calyx, it is clear 



f r m 



these discrepancies either that M. Iwve^ Thunb., and AJ. dnliu 



m are 



distinct species, or that one of them has been wrongly de£-cribed. It should 

 be noted, however, that the descriptions of AL hvve given by Sonder and 

 bv Berger refer exclusively to AJ, duhium^ Haw,^ and do not accord with 



