364 Dr. WankEn-AnNorr on Samara læta, Linn. 
they apply also to the Linnean specimens, then in England; but it is not 
probable that Swartz examined the latter, otherwise he must have taken 
notice of one of the flowers having stamens longer than the corolla. 
In 1810, Mr. Brown in the * Prodromus Flore Nove Hollandiz; p. 533, 
refers the Samara coriacea of Swartz to Myrsine along with the S. floribunda, 
Willd., and S. pentandra, Hort. Kew.; but although specimens of.S. læta. were 
in the Banksian herbarium, there is no indication there, or in any other of his 
valuable writings, so far as I can discover, what were the opinions he enter- 
tained of the species in question, or of Samara itself as a genus. ] 
That it ought not to be compared with the Rhamneæ, at. least as now 
restricted, must be obvious to any one who attends to the description of the 
small quadripartite calyx, which is minute in comparison of the corolla, while 
in the RAamnec the calyx is large, and the petals either wanting, ór of so 
anomalous a shape that they scarcely merit the name. On the other hand, 
if we compare the Linnean character with Myrsine, the principal difference 
lies in Samara being said to have four distinct petals, Myrsine usually five 
and united at the base into a gamopetalous corolla. It was these considera- 
tions which principally induced me in 1833, whilst disposing of Burmann's 
‘Thesaurus Zeylanicus, tab. 31, to suspect that Samara might be the same 
as the genus now called Choripetalum by M. Alph. DeCandolle. At the same 
time, as other species referred to Samara had been ascertained to have a gamo- 
petalous corolla, an examination of the Linnean specimen was necessary. 
This I was not able to accomplish before 1845, when I had an opportunity 
of seeing the specimen in both the Banksian and Linnean herbaria, and was 
permitted to analyse a flower of each. And here I may mention, that the 
specimens I have seen are six in all; three in the Linnean, and three in the 
Banksian herbarium. In no other collection have I yet met with any similar 
plant, or one liable to be mistaken for them. The three in the Banksian her- 
barium are all from China. No. 1 from H. Bradley, 1779; No. 2 from Macao, 
David Nelson, 1780; and No. 3 from Sir G. Staunton: probably all are from 
Macao or the neighbourhood of Canton. These agree in every respect with 
each other : all have perfect stamens not longer than the corolla, and a sterile 
ovary without a style. Of the three preserved in the Linnean herbarium, two 
have a fertile ovarium and style, and no station attached to them: one 
