FLORA OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS. 287 



Plantas de Filipinas no includas en la Flora de las Islas de la 

 l a ni 2 a edicion.' This was also published at Manila, and the 

 species are even more obscure than in Blanco's work. Besides 

 the above, a large number of Philippine plants have been de- 

 scribed in various Monographs, in DeCandolle's ' Prodromus,' 

 and elsewhere, from the collections of Callery, Lobb, and others, 

 but especially from the large collection made by the late Mr. 

 Hugh Cuming, and which has been so widely distributed. It is 

 unfortunate that a number of Cuming's plants, collected in 

 Malacca, have been distributed and published as from the Philip- 

 pines * ; also that the numbers in various Herbaria do not always 

 correspond, owing to the loose numbers getting astray. How 

 much of this might be prevented by the number being attached 

 to the plant when gathered, as in Burchell's collections, and the 

 acknowledged uncertainty of the system of quoting numbers 

 prevented. From a list of Cuming's plants preserved at Kew, it 

 appears that numbers 1 to 2242 are from the Philippines, 2243 

 to 2251 from Sumatra, 2252 to 2399 from Malacca, and 2400 to 

 2436 from Singapore. It is important, however, that his pre- 

 vious collections from America and the Pacific islands should not 

 be confounded, as these also run from 1 to 1499. A new edition 

 of Blanco's ' Flora de Filipinas ' has recently been published, but 

 w r ith some considerable differences from the original one. This 

 third edition comprises four folio volumes, besides 408 plates, 

 equivalent to three volumes more. There are two editions of the 

 plates, one of ordinary black impressions, the other of coloured 

 chromo-lithographs. The first three volumes of text contain a 

 reprint of Blanco's work (the two previous editions compared, 

 and the corrections of the later one retained), with a Latin trans- 

 lation by Father Andres Naves and Father Celestino Fernandez 

 Villar. The fourth volume contains a reprint of the afore- 



* In this way two genera of Myrtaceae (Bceckea and Rhadamnia) and six of 

 Melastomacea; {Allomorpha, Sonerila, Marnmia, Anplectrum, Pternandra, and 

 Kibessa) have erroneously found their way into Villar's enumeration. "Philip- 

 pines" is written on a sheet of each of the above in the Kew Herbarium, and 

 this led to the Philippines being included in the extra-Indian distribution of 

 the same in Sir J. D. Hooker's ' Flora of British India,' whence they were ex- 

 tracted by Villar. They are, however, all from Malacca, as proved by an old 

 MS. list preserved at Kew, and also by the specimens in Bentham's Herbarium. 

 Still worse is it when this circumstance leads to the imposition of an erroneous 

 specific name, as in the case of Henalovia philippmeneti, A. DC, founded on 

 Cuming n. ±25">, which is really from Malacca. 



