220 BOTANICAL INFORMATION. 
part of the disc was a red five-pointed star. The ground of the dise 
was dirty white, and the divisions of the star (0:025 long) were di- 
rected towards the fissures of the perianth. The margin of the dise, 
which was somewhat elevated, was darker in colour than the star. The 
inner surface of the perianth presented a striking dissimilarity to that 
of R. Patma ; for whereas in the latter species it is smooth and even, 
in this it is entirely covered with long stalks, bearing warts from one 
to six lines long and one line thick, cylindrical, the longest of them 
being situated at the base of the perianth, and the shortest in the 
upper part. The hue of the expanded flower was dark red, with the 
warts of the same colour, and much smaller than in R. Patma. It 
departs from R. Cumingi in the processes, and other peculiarities 
already indicated. The flower seen by these gentlemen was a male, 
and no trace of a pericarp was discernible. 
I trust, ere long, to send you a full description of this interesting 
discovery, for I am in expectation of receiving from Java a specimen, 
growing on the Cissus, which M. Teysman has kindly promised to 
transmit to the Royal Garden of Leyden. 
Extract from a Letter of the Rev. W. CoLENS0, relating to a second 
species of * NEW ZEALAND FLAX,” PHORMIUM. 
Ihave been both gratified and amused with the remarks of M. 
Auguste Le Jolis, in the 7th volume of your * London Journal of Bo- 
tany,” p. 533, &c., “on a new kind of Phormium.” His is a very plain 
and true statement, as far as the description, &e., of his Phormium 
goes; but, without doubt, it is the very identical plant which I first 
mentioned to you in my letter of July 20, 1841 (an extract from which 
you published in the Lond. Journ. Bot., vol.i. p. 305), and which I 
subsequently showed, growing and flowering in my garden, to your 
son, Dr. Joseph Hooker, in the spring of the same year, and which I 
brought thither, a small plant, from the east coast some considerable 
time previous. In my long journaldike letter to you, dated Sept. 1, 
1842 (and which you published in the Lond. Journ. Bot. vol.iii.), I 
spoke of this “new species” as “ P. Fosterianum” (vide p. 8); and, 
in a subsequent letter to you, dated Dec. 1, 1842, I again refer to it. 
And, in the more elaborate account of that ramble (subsequently pub- 
lished in the * Tasmanian Journal, vol.ii. p. 219), T also allude to it 
by its then published name, * P. Fosterianum,” adding (in a note), “ I 
