200 Dr. Francis HamiLron’s Commentary 
cordingly yellow flowers ; nor have I seen one which had scarlet 
flowers as described by Rheede. 
Burman the elder, when he published the Thesaurus Zey- 
lanicus (165.), united the Belilla with his Mussenda Zeylanica, 
flore rubro, fructu oblongo polyspermo, folio ex florum thyrso 
prodeunte albo: but although the flowers of this, like those of 
Rheede, are red, the white leaf of the corymbus does not pro- 
ceed from an enlarged division of the calyx, but is one of the 
bractez. This, therefore, must be a different species from the 
Belilla of Rheede, as well as from both those of Rumphius, 
with which Burman unites it. It would also seem to be diffe- 
rent from the plant of Ray, which Burman also quotes, and 
which is described as ** Mussenda, arbor Indica, floribus in 
summis ramulis veluti in fasciculos dispositis, e quorum medio 
surgit folium latum, singulare, flavicans." Now the yellow 
colour distinguishes this plant of Ray from all the species of 
Mussænda yet mentioned ; and that it was not an accidental tinge 
communicated to a dried specimen seen by Ray, as might have 
been supposed, we may infer from the account given of the Mus- 
senda of Hermann (quoted also by Burman), who described from 
the living plant: ** Folium, quod ex florum thyrso prodit, dif- 
fert a ceteris, estque coloris luteo-virescentis.” Burman indeed 
elsewhere (p. 166.) says of these bracteæ ; ** color in his albus, 
vel flavescens :” so that if they are liable to this variation, the 
plant of Ray and Hermann may be the same with that of Bur- 
man: but I suspect that he merely says this to reconcile Ray's 
account with his own ; a manner of obviating difficulties not I 
believe uncommon with more accurate botanists than he was. 
Burman seems indeed to have often quoted, as synonymous, 
plants which he only considered as belonging to the same genus 
with what he was describing: for although he quotes the Belilla, 
he is at pains to point out essential differences between it and his 
plant : 
