is the same is not quite so certain, though it most probably 
is, and the small number of racemes described and figured 
by them has been perhaps owing to their specimen being 
taken from the lower part of the branch. 
We were much inclined to think, that our plant was the 
same species as Berseris Aguifolium of Pursn ; but it is 
described as an upright shrub five or six feet high; whereas 
the latter is said to be an under shrub, about a foot high, 
with procumbent branches, producing abundance of scions. 
_ By the advice of our friend Mr. Rosert Brown, we have 
not adopted Nurraui’s name of Maunonza, because there 
does not seem to beany constant generic characters by which 
the pinnated-leaved Barberries can be separated from the 
simple-leaved. Indeed, the simple leaf in the common 
Barberry, and all the other species belonging to the same 
section, being articulated with the petiole, proves, accord: 
ing to this excellent physiologist, a naturally compound 
nature, just as the leaf of the Jasmine, which is more 
usually compound, becomes in several species simple; but 
still shows its compound nature by its articulation with the 
petiole; there is therefore no more reason on this account 
to separate the pinnated-leaved Barberries from the simple- 
_leaved, than there is to divide the Jasmines with simple, 
from those with compound leaves. Nurratn and_ 
‘Canvoze have erroneously adduced the want of glands at, 
the base of the petioles as a distinguishing character, a3 _ 
Mr Brown finds that these exist in all the known species, 
though varying in size, and sometimes, as in our plant, 
nearly concealed by the breadth of the flat filament. 
only other character of importance in the attempt to estab- 
lish Manonza as a distinct genus, is the teeth on the fila- 
ments, which Mr. Brown finds are present in three of the 
pinnated-leaved species, but entirely wanting in two; 
viz. glumacea and nepalensis. Another argument against 
separating the pinnated-leaved Barberries from the simple- 
leaved is afforded, by the circumstance that in Dr CA%- 
poute’s third section of the genus BreRBeris are rec 
two species, one from Tournrrort’s, and the other from 
an ee apts which have compound leaves; 
im which the petiole is terminated with a spine inst 
of ~~ leafletssit ov | = re 
ative of New Spain, whence it was brought to the 
Madrid garden, by M. Neg. It is not Fraprobable that this 
shrub may hereafter be found to be sufficiently hardy ' 
bear our winters in the open ground, pe? nthe 
