156 Dr. Francis Hamiuron’s Commentary 
Commeline, however, does not venture to compare this with any plant then 
known; and it was with uncertainty that Plukenet quoted it for his Prunifera 
arbor seu Nuciprunifera folio dodrantali longitudine, levi mollitie predito 
(Alm. 306.; Phyt. t. 218. f. 1.), a West Indian plant that I cannot trace in 
modern authors, unless it be the Achras Sapota, which, according to the Hor- 
tus Kewensis (ii. 312.), is called the Bully-tree, if that be the same with the 
Bully-Bay used in Barbadoes according to Plukenet. Should this be the 
case, the West Indian plant can have no affinity with the Tsjeroe. 
M. Lamarck thought that the 7sjeroe might be a Mangifera, and it is ac- 
cordingly mentioned (Enc. Méth. Suppl. iii. 584.) under the name of Mangifera? 
racemosa, M. Poiret justly doubting of its being a real Mangifera. This is the 
only notice, so far as I know, that was taken of this tree by modern botanists, 
until I visited Chatigang in 1797, and Mysore in 1800. On my return from 
the former, I gave young plants to Dr. Roxburgh ; and on my return from the 
latter, I showed him a drawing and specimens, which were afterwards given to 
Sir J. E. Smith, under the name of Holigarna Ferniv; but Dr. Roxburgh 
called it Holigarna longifolia (Hort. Beng. 22.). The plant, which I saw, 
seems to be that which Rheede calls T'sjeroe, or Bibo, without prefixing a spe- 
cific name, and differs from the Cattu Tsjeru, or Rana Bibo, of which he gives 
a figure, in having much shorter racemes, and these not at the end of the 
branches, but from their sides, and also in a singular small tooth-like process 
on each side of the petiolus. Dr. Roxburgh describes another species from 
Silhet, of which I have given specimens to the library at the India House. 
This genus, remarkable for the caustic nature of its juice, which is used as a- 
varnish, I cannot reduce to any of Jussieu's natural orders. It comes nearer 
the Rhus than to any Linnean genus; but has the germen inferum ; on this 
account, as well as its caustic juice, it seems nearly allied to the Rak of Japan 
(Kempf. Amen. Exot. 793.), and to the Arbor Vernicis of Rumphius (Herb. 
Amb. ii. 259. £. 86), which M. Lamarck (Enc. Méth. i. 350.) calls Terminalia 
Vernix. I should, indeed, have no doubt of their belonging to the same genus, 
did not Rumphius say, “ flores plurimis staminibus rubris referti," which, if 
accurate, would show an essential difference between his plant and both the 
Bibo and Terminalia. In fact, the two latter have no sort of affinity, while 
the number of styles and the position of the germen distinguish the Bibo most 
