on the Hortus Malabaricus, Part IV. 249 
was no longer considered by Linnzeus as a Lobelia, but called Scaevola Lobelia; 
for he transferred the name Lobelia of Plumier to the Rapuntium and Trache- 
lium of Tournefort, with which he had originally confounded it; and thus, 
with his usual spirit of innovation, gave the name Scevola to the original 
Lobelia. There is also room to suspect that his Scevola Lobelia is neither the 
plant of Herman nor that described by Plumier; for Mr. R. Brown (£T. Nov. 
Holl. i. 583.) assures us, that the Scævola Lobelia of the Linnzan Herbarium 
is the Scevola Kenigii (foliis obovatis apice subrepandis), while the plant of 
Herman in the Flora Zeylanica is defined * foliis ovali-oblongis integerrimis," 
which terms are also applicable to the Lobelia Plumieri, to which we shall 
again have occasion to return. 
Gertner, adhering to the genus Lobelia as founded by Plumier, called the 
Bella Modagam, Lobelia Taccada (De Sem. i. 119. t. 25. f. 5.); but he considers 
the Buglossum litoreum as the same plant, and probably described it alone ; for 
he says, that the figure of the drupa in the Hortus Malabaricus does not exactly 
agree; and he points out most essential differences in the American plant. 
Dr. Roxburgh, under the name Scavola Taccada (Hort. Beng. 15.), I have 
no doubt described Geertner’s plant, and I have given to the library at the 
India House specimens from his garden; but the plant is not a tree, was sent 
from the Eastern Islands by Mr. W. Roxburgh, and agrees entirely with the 
description of the Buglossum litoreum, although the figure of the Bella Moda- 
gam is also very like, and is quoted by Dr. Roxburgh. This likeness, however, 
consists chiefly in the foliage, liable to considerable variation ; and the size of 
the Bella Modagam, and its being a mountain plant, seem to me insuperable 
objections to our considering it as Dr. Roxburgh's Scaevola Taccada. 
M. Lamarck (IU. Gen. ii. 70.) considers the American and an Indian plant 
different, calling the former (no doubt Plumier's Lobelia) Scevola Plumieri 
(t. 124. f. 1.), and the latter Scavola Kenigii (t. 124. f. 2.), in imitation, pro- 
bably, of Vahl; and this last is, no doubt, the same with the S. Lobelia of the 
Linnean herbarium, as described by Mr. R. Brown. This Indian plant, 
M. Lamarck says, is the same with the Lobelia Taccada of Gzertner, from 
whom he no doubt has copied the delineations of the fruit marked b, c, d, e, f, 
g, h, and i; but then at a is represented the branch of a plant, agreeing with 
Mr. Brown's account, but quite different from either the Buglossum litoreum 
