206 Dr. Francis Hamilton's Co/wj«e7i/fl/-?/ 



patens, petiolo triplo longior, uniflorus, incrassatus, tomen- 

 tosus. Bractece ad pedunculi partem imam geminae, deci- 

 dual, subpalmatae, stipulas longitudine aquantes. Flores 

 flavi, folio latiores, erecti. Calijcis foliola quinque ovata, 

 concava, acuta, quorum duo exteriora majora, tomentosa. 

 Petala quinque calyce duplo longiora, obovata, oblique 

 retusa, unguibus incrassatis mucronata. Filamenta decem 

 alternis longioribus subulata, basi in urceolum hypogynum 

 sessilem coalita. Anthera orbiculata, compressEe. Ger- 

 men superum, subrotundum. Styli quatuor vel quinque, 

 subulati, staminibus paulo longiores. Stigmata reniformia. 

 Germen paulo auctum loculos habet quatuor vel quinque. 



From the last-mentioned circumstance we may probably con- 

 jecture, that this is not only a different species from the Modera 

 Canni; but, like the H. serrata, can scarcely be considered as 

 belonging to the same genus, the fruit is so different. 



Carim Curini, p. S\. fig. 9.0. 



In his Fliytographia {t. 171. /. 4.) Plukenet gave the figure of 

 a plant, which he calls Curitii forte, prima species, seu Carim 

 Curini Hort. Malab., which implies that he doubted of his plant 

 being the same with that of Rheede : and he seems to have 

 suspected that it might rather be the Manja Ciiriui ( Hort. Mai. ix. 

 t. 62.) : but for this I see no reason ; and the elder Burman 

 {Thes. Ze?y/.) joins Plukenet's plant, without doubt, to the Carim 

 Curini, as do most subsequent authors. Burman's figure indeed 

 {t. 4. /. 1.) is not so good as that of Plukenet : but he describes 

 a plant with a white flower, while those of the Carim Curini are 

 blue. This difference alone is however too slight to be reckoned 

 a foundation for two species ; yet Burman was justified in call- 

 ing them varieties, in which however he is not followed by 



succeeding 



