inter denies stamineos, sessiles, hisce hrcviores, crectcB, ohlongce, 2-loculares, 

 pilosulce. Ovarium parvum, ovatum, tuhulo appcndiculari corolla: inclusum, 

 5-loculare? fi-spermum? ovulis erectis? Siylui^ Jilifor mis, longitudine Jila- 

 mentorum. Stiii;ma capitatum, carnosum, intra untheras latens. Fructus 

 hand visus. Wallich 1. c. 



Columna staminum cylindracea, petalorumlongitudine, apice antheras 10 

 sessiles gerens, dentibus totidem stellatim patentibus interjectis. Antherse 

 oblopgce, connectivo lutco lucido carnoso piloso, loculis parvis in facie con- 

 nectivi sitis, longitudinaliier dehiscentibns. Discus cylindricus, conicus, 

 basin styli ambiens. Ovarium minimum, depressum, 5-loculare, loculis dis- 

 permis ; ovulis asccndeniibus, una stipra alterum. 



" My acquaintance with this shrub is limited to some 

 living individuals in the Honourable Company's Botanic 

 Garden at Calcutta, which were sent from the mountains 

 near Silhet, by Francis de Silva, in 1825, and which blos- 

 somed soon afterwards in February and July. I have 

 never received any dried specimens of the plant, nor have 

 I seen the fruit ; I am unalDle, therefore, to determine the 

 genus with certainty. It seems to be nearly allied to 

 Trich'ilia. The leaves are neither dotted, nor have they 

 any aromatic smell ; the pinnse have sometimes a small 

 additional leaflet or appendix attached to or between their 

 bases." 



Such is the account given of this plant by Dr. Wallich, 

 by whom it was brought to England in 1828, and presented 

 to the Horticultural Society, in whose Garden it flowered 

 in March 1830. It is a tender stove plant. 



We quite agree with our learned friend in considering 

 this a doubtful species of Turreea. The curious disk or 

 series of barren stamens is especially deserving of atten- 

 tion ; but we know not how far its presence may be com- 

 mon among Meliacese, and the want of acquaintance with 

 the fruit renders us unwilling at present to create a new 

 genus. We leave the question unsettled the more willingly, 

 because we know it will be better determined by M. de 

 Cambessedes, who is now occupied with the reconstruction 

 of the order. 



J. L. 



