BENTHAM ON MIMOSE^. 397 



FolioJa multijuga parva. Capitula parva globosa, axil- 

 laria v. racemosa. Calyx minutus. Corollse lacinite mul- 

 tistriatae. Legumina linearia, angusta, pluri-v multiarti- 

 culata, inermia, glabra v. ssepius plus minusve setoso-v. 

 gianduloso-hispida, articulis latitudine saepius longioribus. 

 • — Species Americanas. 



* Aculeatce. Pedunculi Jiliformes et capitula glabra. 



134. M. acutiflora (sp. n.), ramis petiolisque aculeolatis 

 dense rufo-hispidis eglandulosis, stipulis lanceolato-subulatis, 

 pinnis 4 — 6-jugis, foliolis multijugis imbricatis linearibus ob- 

 tusis glabx'is v. vix ciliolatis, bracteolis parvis, corollis acutis, 

 legumine longe stipitato multiarticulato uiidique dense setoso 

 et glanduloso-hispido. — Brazil, Pohl. 



133. }\l. podocarpa (sp. n.), ramis petiolisque aculeolatis 

 viscoso-pubescentibus et glanduloso-birtis, stipulis lanceolato- 

 subulatis, pinnis 5 — 10-jugis, foliolis multijugis imbricatis 

 linearibus obtusis glabris v. vix ciliolatis, bracteolis parvis, 

 corollis obtusissimis, legumine longe stipitato multiarticulato 

 undique parce glanduloso-liispido. — Brazil, Po/il, Sello. 



136. M. som?iians (Humb. et Bonpl. in Willd. Spec. iv. 

 1036.), ramis petiolisque aculeatis glabris v. hispidulis, stipu- 

 lis ovato-lanceolatis setaceo-acuminatis, pinnis subquadrijugis, 

 foliolis multijugis linearibus acutiusculis glabris, bracteolis 

 parvis, legumine stipitato nniltiarticulato hispidulo. — New 

 Granada, Humboldt and Bonpland. 



137. M. somnicidosa (Humb. et Kunth. Nov. Gen. et Sp. 

 vi. 257.) ramis petiolisque aculeatis pilosis, stipulis lanceola- 

 to-subulatis, pinnis 10 — 12-jugis, foliolis multijugis lineari- 

 bus acutiusculis glabris v. vix ciliolatis, bracteolis parvis — 

 Tropical America, Humboldt and Bonpland. 



The four preceding species (of which the two latter are 

 only known to me by Kunth's description,) are very near to 

 each other, and may possibly be marked varieties of one spe- 

 cies ; yet the two which I have described appear to me suffi- 

 ciently distinct, and neither of them agree entirely with the 

 characters of either of Humboldt's. — I have not added M. 



