262 Dr. Francis HAMILTON’s Commentary 
suras caulis oritur spica cum unico flosculo femineo." Now, in 
the Codi Avanacu the spica is not situated as thus described, but 
is axillary, as Ray indeed expressly notices; for he called the 
plant Lathyris frutescens fructu in foliorum alis echinato. 
'The younger Burman, having had the advantage of the Species 
Plantarum, calls this plant Tragia Chamelea, and omits altoge- 
ther the Esula of his father; but continues as synonymous with 
the Codi Avanacu his Chamelea and Tithymalus, already quoted, 
although the latter is an aquatic plant, while the Cod? Avanacu 
grows in sandy and rocky places. Which he meant I cannot say. 
If, therefore, the Chamelea of Burman was the plant which 
Linnæus described, the Tithymalus of Burman seems to have 
been wisely omitted by Willdenow (Sp. Pl. iv. 326.), who gives 
a new specific character, in which the folia integerrima are 
omitted. In quoting Rheede he follows the error of the plate, 
and in quoting Burman he perverts the cyphers, ee table 52 
in place of 25. 
M. Poiret (Enc. Meth. vii. 726.) continues the synonyma as 
left by the younger Burman, and gives a specific character in- 
cluding the folia integerrima. He had not seen specimens, and 
seems to have drawn his account almost entirely from the elder 
Burman. 
In the Hortus Kewensis (v. 256) the Cadi (Codi) Avanacu alone 
is quoted, and the plant seems to have been sent by Dr. Rox- 
burgh ; but whether he had sent seed procured from the coast of 
Coromandel, where he had seen and described the plant (Tragia 
Camolia, Hort. Beng. 103.), or whether he had sent part of the 
seed procured from China, I cannot say: but the plant which I- 
found growing at Calcutta from the last-mentioned seed, is no 
doubt the Codi Avanacu. ! 
ANA 
