GYNANDRIA 35o 



heres to the style. This, if constant, could only con- 

 cern that genus, for the rest of the Order are in no 

 sense gynandrous. 



2. Diandria. To this Order Cypripediiim, Engl. Bot. t, 



1, must be referred, having a pair of very distinct 

 double-celled anthers. See Tr. of Linn. Soc. v. 1. 1. 



2, 3. Here we find Forstera, so well illustrated by 

 Professor Swartz in Sims and Konig's Annals of Bot- 

 any, r. 1. 291, ?. 6 ; of which genus Phyllachme, t. 

 5 of the same volume, is justly there reckoned a spe- 

 cies. Of the same natural order with Forstera is Sty- 

 lidium, but that having I think, 4 anthers, belongs to 

 the fourth Order of the present Class. Gunnera, plac- 

 ed by Linnaeus in Gynandria Diandria, is not yet 

 sufficiently well understood. 



3. Triandria. Salacia, if Linnasus's description be 

 right, is properly placed here ; but Jussieu doubts 

 it, nor does my dried specimen serve to remove the 

 uncertainty. Stilago proves to be merely the barren 

 plants o{ Antidesma alexiteria, and belongs to Dioecia ; 

 as Sisyrhichiwn and Ferraria do to Monadelphia, the 

 tubular united stamens of the two last having been 

 mistaken for a solid style. Rhopium of Schreber {Me- 

 borea oiAublet, t. 323,) seems therefore the only cer- 

 tain genus of the Order under consideration ; unless 

 Lamarck be right in referring to it Jacquin's Strump- 



fa, upon whicli I have not materials to form any opin- 

 ion. The original discoverer attributes to this plant 

 5 stamens with united anthers ; hence it found a place 

 in the Syngenesia Monogamia of Linnaeus. Lamarck 



