69 
tubus turbinatus germine brevior, pedicello continuatus, 
lacinie limbi subequales tubo valde longiores, filamenta 
complanata apice filiformi, sepalina ori tubi petalina supra 
inserta, anthere parvula, stigma trigonum, stylus persistens, 
germen obtusum breve trisulcum, odor alliaceus nullus. 
Quoad, vidi, petala sepalis parum augustiora. Caloscordum 
is therefore distinguished therefrom thus, — tubi germen 
comprehendentis formá et articulo, filamentis profundiüs 
insertis non membranaceé dilatatis, stylo marcescente, limbi 
flexu. The subject cannot be dropped, without adverting 
to the next genera Triteleia and Brodiza, concerning the 
frst of which Professor Kunth says, that it differs in 
nothing but a trifid stigma and emarginate anthers from 
Pseudoscordum, and is rather a section thereof, entirely dis- 
carding the connection of the latter with Allium. Such 
trivial differences would not even constitute a section. Ger- 
men tenuiter productum basi longé stipitatà, tubus longé 
infundibuliformis limbum valde longitudine superans, are 
amongst other differences which separate Triteleia from Al- 
lium and its subordinates. Concerning Brodisa, which Prof. 
Kunth has confined to one species, grandiflora, elevating 
congesta into a genus which he names Dichelostemma, it 
must be remembered that both were figured and described by 
Salisbury in Paradisus Londinensis under the name Hookera, 
in compliment to the excellent artist of that work, and that 
Salisbury therein accused Sir J. E. Smith of having read a 
paper, wherein he named the plants Brodiza without noticing 
his name and definition after it had been published. I do 
not know the correct facts, so as to decide whether the name 
Brodiea did properly supersede Hookera, but if congesta is 
not of the same genus (as Prof. Kunth asserts) with gran- 
diflora, on which Salisbury founded Hookera, that name 
should remain to the latter plant, and Smith's Brodiza be 
confined to congesta. Professor Kunth's new character for 
congesta is contained in 21 lines, ending thus, It is dis- 
tinguished from Brodiea by the habit and form of the sterile 
stamens. Let us see what difference he states. None 
distinctly ! but on comparing the two descriptions we find 
that in the latter they are merely stated to be “ petaloid, 
much longer, lance-spathulate ;" in the former they are stated 
to be also petaloid, and their length is not noticed, leaving no 
point but lance-spathulate for contrast with his description, 
