184 NOTICES OF BOOKS. 



fined to the island of Mauritius), which is included in the Natural 

 Order Brexiacece bj Lindley and others; and Brexiacece cannot be ex- 

 cluded from the Natural Order Saxifragem by any constant artificial or 

 natural characters. The next Order is Piinicece, which certainly should 

 not be removed from Myrtacece. Brunoniacem again was considered a 

 section of Goodenomece by Brown ; Leoniacem consists of Leonia^ which 

 is truly a member of Violariece ; Cyphiacece is almost unanimously re- 

 garded as a member of Campanulac^ee ; Alangie(B is certainly not dis- 

 tinct from Cornea! ; Calycanthece are scarcely distinguishable from Bo- 

 sacece ; BJiizobolecB are included by some in Guttifera ; Aquilarinea 

 are a section of Bajphnecig in the opinion of some excellent botanists ; 

 and Centrolepide(je are only a section of Bestiacece, 



The object of the selection of sixteen made by M. de CandoUe is to 

 show, that there is a certain relation between the number of species a 

 family possesses and the extent of the area it inhabits, the smaller 

 Orders having narrow ranges ; but, as we have seen, some of these 

 Orders are not worthy of being considered as such ; and further, some 

 of these and of others have a wider distribution than he assigns to 

 them, as Aurantiacece (which have several Australian and even South 

 African genera, and apparently one American*), Alangieae, Aquilarintce, 

 Centrolepidecs , EpacridecB, and MoiiotropecB. It would further be easy 

 to select more than sixteen groups, all very small, and as well or better 

 entitled to be considered Natural Orders, which have very wide ranges, 

 as Cuacutets, Ulmacece, Cassythea, HermndiefS, Surianece, Basellacea, 

 CJdoranlJiacea, Scleranthacece , Elatinea, Podostemacea, Saururacea, Tri- 

 uridea, Balmiophorea, Bafflesiacece, Amyridcje, Nelumliacece , Hydropel- 

 tide(E, BeammmacecB, Bldzopliorem, Amcmniede, Pangiacece, Atherosper- 

 mecBy Beiulacem^ Hamamelide(B, CalUtricJiacea, Bmpetracea, Cycadea, 

 Typhacem, Lemnacece, and indeed many others. 



Amongst Monocotyledons, of which M. de Candolle says that no 

 family is so limited as those of the Dicotyledons he mentions, there 

 are Aposiasiace^, Philesiacea?, Gilliemcets, P/iilydrea, Cydanthem.Pliy- 

 tehphetB, Nipade^, all of which are as entitled to rank as natural fami- 

 lies as those mentioned, though we do not allow them all that rank, 

 and which are very limited in number of species and in range too. 



The above observations are not put forward to disprove M. de Can- 

 dolle's conclusions, but to show that they are based upon insufficient 



V 



* See Casimiroa. Seemann, in Vov. Herald. 



