EUGENIA. MYRTACEÆ. 331 
1026. (1) E. Rottleriana (W. & A.:) much branched: young shoots, pe- 
tioles, peduncles and calyx, covered with rusty silky tomentum: leaves very 
narrow-lanceolate, tapering at both ends, obtuse at the point, glabrous on 
both sides except while very young, pellucid-dotted : peduncles axillary or 
somewhat lateral, 3-4-together, sometimes solitary, filiform, scarcely one- 
fourth of the length of the leaves: bracteoles 2 under the calyx: s dip. k 
ments 4, triangular-ovate, obtuse: petals 4, much longer than the calyx, vil- 
lous on the margin: stigma simple, acute.— Wight ! cat. n. 1075. 
1027. (2) E. bracteata (Roxb.:) shrubby: young shoots, petioles, pe- 
duncles and calyx clothed with a rusty pubescence: leaves ovate-oblong, 
tapering or cuneate at the base, obtuse or with a short blunt acumination, at 
first slightly downy, at length quite glabrous and shining above, pellucid- 
dotted: peduncles usually axillary or sometimes terminal, short, 1-flowered, 
longer than the petioles, 1-4-together, with 2 small bracteoles under the 
calyx: calyx-segments 4, unequal, linear-oblong, obtuse, ciliated: petals 4: 
style slender: fruit globose, glabrous, 1-2-seeded.— Roxb. fl. Ind. 2. p. 490: 
DC. prod. 3. p. 264; Wight! cat. n. 1076.—E. Roxburghii, DC. prod. 3. 
p.271; Wall.! L. n. 3621; Wight! in Hook. journ. of bot. 1. p. 66. t. 124.— 
E. Zeylanica, Roxb. l. c. (according to Wallich).—E. læta, Ham. in Wern. 
soc. trans. 5. p. 338.—Myrtus bracteata, Willd. sp. 2. p. 969 ; Spr. syst. 2. p. 
480.—M. littoralis, Roxb. in E. I. C. mus. tab. 151.—M. Coromandeliana, 
Koen.—M. ruscifolia, Willd. sp. 2. p. 970 (description bad) ; DC. prod. 3. p. 
241; Spr. syst. 2. p. 482.—M. latifolia, Heyne in Roth, nov. sp. p. 232.—M. 
Heynei, Spr. syst. 2. p. 482 ; DC. prod. 3. p. 241.—Pluk. t. 427. f. 3.—— 
Very common on all the Coromandel coast near the sea-shore. 
t1028. (3) E. Zeylanica (Willd.:) leaves shortly petioled, oblong, nar- 
rowed at the base, acuminated with the point blunt, coriaceous, sh ig, 
veined, not dotted : peduncles filiform, 1-flowered, solitary or in pairs, axil- 
ry or on the leafless branchlets, with two short subulate bracteoles under 
the calyx.— Willd. sp. 2. p. 963.—E. Willdenowii, DC. prod. 3. p. 265 ; Wall.? 
L. n. 3623.—Myrtus Willdenowii, Spr. syst. 2. p. 480. AE 
, Dr Wallich, in his List, n. 3623. c, quotes E. ruscifolia of Wight's herba- 
rium, on which account we feel doubtful about his plant, no specimen among 
Dr Wight's collections agreeing with Willdenow's character. 
. 1029. (4) E. subcordata (W. & A.:) branches terete: leaves shortly pe- 
tioled, ovate, a little acuminated with the point blunt, slightly cordate at the 
base, glabrous, shining on the upper side, pellucid-dotted : peduncles axillary, 
fascicled, 2-10 together, filiform and slender, about half as long as the leaves, 
ping, usually without bracteoles under the calyx or occasionally with one 
subulate and caducous: calyx glabrous: segments 4, orbicular, villous on the 
Y petals 4, orbicular: style filiform ; stigma pointed.— Wight / eat. 
* 1030. (5) E. aeris (W. & A.:) arborescent, glabrous: young branches 
acutely 4-angled: leaves elliptic-oval, obtuse, more or less convex, coria- 
Ceous, very glabrous, upper side reticulated with elevated veins, finely pel- 
-dotted: peduncles compressed, axillary and terminal, trichotomous, 
corymbose, rather longer than the leaves: calyx-limb 5-partite -, — 
roundish: style filiform, acute: berry globose, 1-4-seeded.— Wight goes . n. 
1078.—E. Pimenta, 6 ovalifolia, DC. prod. 3. p. 285; Wall. L. er ron 
yrtus aeris, Swartz ; Spr. syst. 2. p. 487.—M. Pimenta var. latifolia, "eie E 
hort. Bengh. p. 37.—M. aromatica, Poir. enc. meth. 4. p. 410.—M. — - 
lata, Jacg.—Myrcia acris, DC. prod. 3. p. 243; Hook.! in Bot. mag. t. 3153.— 
M. Pimentoides, DC. 7. c.—Pluk. t. 155. f. 3.—Courtallum. — , js 
. An analysis of the seed, even although far from ripe, shows this to kong 
to Eugènia and not to Myrcia, in which the cotyledons ought to be folia- 
ceous and crumpled. De Candolle states that he had not seen the fruit, a 
cireumstance which must have escaped Dr Hooker when he wrote his obser- 
