224 Dr. Francis HAMILTON’s Commentary 
Bhengt Bengalensium. 
Hnzn-i Barmanorum. 
Habitat ubique in Indiæ lucis umbrosis. 
Frutex 2—10 pedes altus. Rami pilis adpressis strigosi, com- 
pressiusculi, non sulcati. Folia ovata, vix unquam subcor- 
data, utrinque hispida, nervis inferioribus parvis subalternis 
costata ; inferiora inæqualiter dentata, superiora integer- 
rima.  Panicula terminalis brachiata, trichotoma, vel di- 
chotoma axillis floriferis. Calyx floriferus viridis. Flores 
albi, rubro ad fauces inquinati. Calyx fructiferus maxime 
auctus, patens, sanguineus. Bacca globosa, tetrasperma. 
Now, if what I have above stated be taken into consideration, 
I think it will appear that the Bhengt of Bengal is different from 
the Peragu, from the Petasites agrestis, and from the Cleroden- 
dron of Burman, all of which have been included in the C. infor- 
tunatum, aud all of which I have endeavoured to show are diffe- 
rent from one another. 
Peragu folia habet profunde cordata, acuminata, integerrima, 
. velutina, quinquenervia; calyces fructiferos patentes, bacca 
multo longiores. 
Petasites agrestis folia habet dentata, cordata, 5—7-nervia; ca- 
lycem bacca quadriloba minorem, erectum. 
Clerodendron Burmanni folia habet integerrima, obtusiuscula ; 
 calycem fructiferum erectum, drupa subrotunda minorem. 
NarvGcu, p.43. fig. 26. 
Commeline ventures no commentary on this plant; nor can 
we place any confidence in the conjectures of Plukenet (Mant. 
27. 40.), who compares it to two trees, one from the West Indies, 
and the other from the Cape of Good Hope, which probably 
have no affinity either to the Nalugu or to each other : for, so far 
as 
