746 NOTES FROM THE BOTANIC GARDENS, NO. X., 



glaucescens) as "ovato- v. oblongo-lanceolatis vel fere ovatis 

 obtusis et brevissime acuminatis v. apiculatis." Surely there is 

 no essential difference in Mr. Baker's description of the leaves of 

 P. Paddisoni and Bentham and Mueller's description of the 

 leaves of P. lanceolata, especially as both are glabrous and both 

 are paler underneath. 



There remains only the difference of the "equal calyx-lobes." 

 R. Brown says nothing about " unequal calyx-lobes " in his very 

 short original description of P. lanceolata; Mueller also says 

 nothing about " unequal calyx-lobes '' in his very detailed 

 description of P. lanceolata (as P. glaucescens) in the 'Fragmenta.' 

 Bentham alone adds this character to the description of the 

 species. 



The calyx-lobes in our specimens of P. lanceolata are long and 

 narrow, exactly as figured in P. Paddisoni; they are mostly, but 

 not always, rather unequal in length, but the character is not by 

 any means conspicuous nor of importance. 



The six Australian species of Parso7isia are distinguished 

 chiefly by the shape of the corolla, and by the absence or presence 

 of variously disposed reversed hairs or bunches of hairs in the 

 corolla-tube or throat; by the anther-cone being enclosed in or 

 exserted from the corolla-tube; and by the filaments being short 

 and free in some species, or long and united and generally spirally 

 twisted in others. If two plants agree in all these essential 

 characters, as P. la7iceolata and P. Paddisoni do, surely a new 

 species should not be established on such trivial grounds as 

 advanced in support of P. Paddisoni; we cannot even admit it 

 as a variety; it is simply the western form of P. lanceolata. 



R. Brown's description of P. lanceolata in his ' Prodromus ' 

 (p. 466) is a striking instance of the confusion that may be 

 caused by too short and superficial descriptions of new species. 

 His whole description is comprised in the six words : " cymis 

 bifidis, foliis lanceolatis acuminatis glabris," without a word 

 about the flowers. In Brown's time this description was suflicient 

 to distinguish the few Australian species known, but at the 

 present day it would be quite inadequate without access to his 

 types. 



