BOTANICAL INFORMATION: 481 
detailed work on Italian Muscology, of a Flora of Capraia, 
&c., has very much enlarged and improved the collection in 
the botanical garden : he is forming a general herbarium and 
actively investigating the Flora of Liguria, where there is 
probably much to correct or to verify, and something to add. 
Besides him, Dr. Casaretto is at present a resident at Genoa. 
His herbarium contains, in addition to Italian plants and collec- 
tions made by him during a visit to the Crimea, a considerable 
number of Brazilian plants from the provinces of Rio 
Janeiro and Minas Geraes, with a few from S. Paul, the 
result of his voyage to Brazil eight years since, at the 
time Guillemin was there. His own. specimens are very 
good, and botanically selected; there being a much greater 
proportion in fruit than we usually see; and he also procured 
many specimens from Riedel and Claussen. Dr. Casaretto 
bas also a botanical library, chiefly in reference to Brazilian 
botany, and has published a Century of his plants of that 
Country, under the title of * Novarum Stirpium Brasilien- 
sium Decades.” Unfortunately there is no good general 
botanical library at Genoa; and many of his species are 
repetitions of some, previously published in English or 
German periodicals, or in other works not specially relating to 
Brazil. Thus, among the few I had time to look over, 
Stemodia cruciflora, Casar. is S. trifoliata, Reichb.: Schwenkia 
breviseta and S. longiseta, having been here published before. 
the tenth volume of the Prodromus, have the priority over 
the names there adopted; unless the S. longiseta prove to be 
the S. Brasiliensis. Clelia ornata, Casar., published as a new 
Benus of Mimoseæ, is Calliandra cylindrocarpa, Benth. Syn. 
Mim.: Chrysoxylon Vinhatico, Casar., of which the speci- 
.  Wens are in fruit only, also considered a new genus, must 
. Temain doubtful till its flowers are known: the pod is 
exactly that of Plathymenia, Benth. ; but the foliage appeared — — 
_ to me somewhat different; and I had no means of comparison. —- 
Lupinus chrysomelas appeared to be one of those described in m 
. Dargk’s plants, but not taken up by Walpers; so that I 
VOL. vi. ; So I e NN". — . 
