DIOECIA. 367 



doubtful, not having any partial calyx or corolla to 

 divide the stamens into separate blossoms, so that the 

 whole may be taken either for a polyandrous or a mo- 

 nadelphous flower, as well as for an assemblage of 

 monandrous ones. Najas is a good and immutable 

 example of this Order. Of Thunberg's Phclypcea I 

 have not materials to form a judgment. 



2. Diandria. The wonderful ^alis?iena, already de- 

 scribed/?. 262, is a decisive example of this. Cecro- 

 pia also seems unexceptionable. Of Saiix, see Engl. 

 Bot.v.20 and 21, Sec, I have already spoken,/?. 

 361. The scales of its barren and fertile catkins are 

 alike ; its nectaries various. 



3. Triandria, Eleg'ia and Restio, hard rushy plants 

 chiefl}' of the Cape of Good Hope and New Holland, 

 appear to be without any difference in the accessory 

 parts of their flowers, which is certainly the case with 

 Empetrutn, Ejigl. Bot. t. 526, Ruscus, t. 560, 

 brought hither from Dioecia Syngenesia^ Osyris, Ex- 

 oxcaria and Maba ; Caturus only seeming diff*erently 

 constructed in this particular ; but I have not been 

 able to examine the three last. 



4. Tetrandria. Trophis^ JBatis, and Hippophae, t. 425, 

 are good examples of this, though Mr. Viborg is re- 

 corded by Schreber to have occasionally found united 

 flowers intermixed with the barren ones in the last- 

 mentioned genus. If this be usual, H;ppophae must 

 be removed to Polygarnia Dioecia. The rest of the 

 Order appear to have the accessory parts alike in both 

 flowers, as Fiscum, t. 1470. 



