uae: 
326 REMARKS ON CAMBOGIA GUTTA, 
column, terminating in a head covered with anthers; and the 
fruit is usually furrowed. These might forma third genus, re- 
taining the vacant name of Cambogia : —and lastly, G. pictoria, 
Roxb. (Mangost. Morella, Geert.?); G. elliptica, Wall. (id. 
Graham) and Dr Graham's Ceylon plant, would make up a 
fourth, distinguished by their united filaments, and cup- 
shaped, one-celled, circumscissile anthers; to which the then 
unappropriated name, Stalagmitis, might be given; in prefer- 
ence to disturbing Roxburgh’s Xanthochymus, now well esta- 
blished, by rigidly enforcing the rule of priority, and restor- 
ing that of Murray, thereby causing considerable confusion 
in the synonymy, which might thus be easily avoided.” 
Since the appearance of that article, much additional light 
has been thrown on the subject through the publication, by 
Dr Graham of Edinburgh in the 2d volume of the Com- 
panion to the Botanical Magazine, of a paper entitled ** Re- 
marks on the Gamboge-tree of Ceylon and character of Hebra- 
dendron, a new genus of Guttifere, and to which the tree 
in question belongs.” 
This is an excellent paper, and, imbodying much very in- 
teresting information, well repays the trouble of a careful 
perusal. I cannot however adopt Dr Graham’s conclusions 
as to the propriety of elevating this plant to the rank of a 
distinct genus; nor, supposing that abler botanists than either 
Dr G. or myself consider ourselves, should admit it as such in* 
to the system of plants, do I think his name can be sancti 
The question, whether or not this is the Gamboge plant of 
Ceylon, I look upon as set at rest by the evidence adduced in 
Dr G.’s * Remarks.” All therefore that I have now to con- 
sider are simply the following botanical questions—Ist 
whether this plant ought to form the type of a genus distinct 
. from Garcinia ?—and 2d, if so, whether it ought to receive 
anew name? The first of these questions I answer in the 
. Negative, because I do not think it sufficiently distinguished — 
arcinia by the solitary character assigned—the peculiar y 
. Structure of the anther. To the second I equally return — 
Roos negative, because this plant is undoubtedly the type of the — 
