236 Dr. Francis Hamiuron’s Commentary 
corymboso-fastigiata. Rami teretes, pubescentes, sparsi. Bractew vix 
ullae. Flores odore hircino gravissimo subherbacei, pedicellati, fascicu- 
lati. 
Calyx minimus, inferus, quinquedentatus. Petala quinque lanceolata, revo- 
luta, acuta, integra. Filamenta decem lanceolata, receptaculi basi inserta ; 
quinque petalis opposita breviora. dnthere orbiculatz, compresse. Ger- 
men oblongum, receptaculo. conico suffultum. Stylus teres, crassus. 
Stigma magnum, orbiculatum, depressum. 
Bacca ovata, aurea, punctis oleiferis aspersa, glabra, coriacea, quinquelocularis 
septis membranaceis e pariete ad receptaculum deductis. Loculorum 4—2 
szepe deficientes. Receptaculum centrale, tenue. Semina in singulis loculis 
solitaria, magnitudine et forma loculi oblonga, utrinque acuta, hinc con- 
vexa, inde angulata, angulo ad receptaculum adheerentia. IJntegumentum 
simplex, membranaceum, tenue, facile secedens. Albumen nullum. Em- 
bryo semini conformis, inversus, lzte viridis. Cotyledones foliacez, altera 
minore subrotundæ, ad se invicem adhzerentes, plicato-fasciculate. Ra- 
dicula teres, viridis, supera, plicis cotyledonum tecta. 
This singular structure of seed I have found in the Libanus Thurifera of 
Colebrooke, and in a species of Schinus, both plants belonging to the Terebin- 
thacee, which shows how nearly these are connected with the Aurantie, as 
these are again allied by the Bepou with the Melia. 
Kari Verr, p. 111. tab. 54. 
This and the following plant, which, as Commeline justly remarks, have no 
affinity either in appearance or qualities, are included in one genus, not only 
by the vulgar of Malabar, but by the Brahmans, the former calling the genus 
Vetti, and the latter Daliqui, or Dalaqui. Neither Dutch nor Portuguese 
residents bave fallen into such a gross error, and I suspect some mistake in 
procuring the native names. 
. Commeline does not hint at any affinity to the Kari Vetti; but Plukenet 
compares it to his “Olea laurino folio Portoricensis, summo margine crenato” 
(Alm, 269.; Phyt. t. 206. f. 6.). As his figure has neither flower nor fruit, 
little can be said on this subject. The leaves have a resemblance ; but there 
