294 SPICILEGIA FLOR^ SINENSIS. 



This seems to accord very well with Miquel's character of his 

 H. cordifolius, of which he only had female specimens, whilst I 

 only possess male ones, and those very imperfect. Maximowicz 

 without hesitation refers this to H. Lupnlm (Franch. & Savat. 

 Eniim. pi. jap. 409), from which, however, the Chinese plant 

 cei-tainly looks to me distinct. 



61. Broussonetia monoica, sp. nov. — Ramuhs flexuosis castaneo- 

 purpureis tenuiter striatis glaberrimis, foliis ovatis cuspidato- 

 acuminatis serratis supra sparsim liirtis subtus tomentosis breviter 

 petiolatis, floribus monoicis, spica mascula unica ad basin inno- 

 vationum sita deflexa 3-3^ lin. diametro pedunculo subaequilongo 

 fulto, capitulis femineis 3-4 secus innovatioues axillaribus erecto- 

 patentibus 2 lin. diametro pedunculis ^quilongis. 



Secus fl. Lien-chau, prov. Cantonensis, m. Martio 1881, coll. 

 rev. B. C. Henry. (Herb, propr. n. 21933.) 



No monoecious species of Broussonetia has been hitherto 

 described; but the present interesting plant undoubtedly belongs 

 to the genus, and is so exceedingly like B. Kismpferi, Sieb. (with 

 authentic specimens of which, from the Leiden Museum, I have 

 compared it), that I can only distinguish it by its monoecious 

 inflorescence, by the young leaves (which I have alone seen) being 

 more downy beneath and with a less marked reticulation, and by 

 the rather smaller heads of flowers, the male ones refracted and 

 rounder. Can it be a lusus of this ? 



62. PiLEA (intef/rifolia) crassifolia, sp. nov. — Herbacea, glaber- 

 rima, monoica, caulibus prostratis longe repentibus filiformibus 

 ramos erectos edentibus, foliis sequimagnis orbicularibus subenerviis 

 in vivo (Dischidiarum adinstar) crassis carnosis lenticularibus 

 siccatis planis crustaceis cystolithis magnis linearibus intricatis 

 conspicuis farctis 3-4 lin. diametro petiolo lineali, cymulis sessili- 

 bus petiolum parum superantibus. 



In rupestribus prov. Cantonensis, secus fl. Lien-chau, m. Martio 

 1881, coll. rev. B. C. Henry. (Herb, propr. n. 21712.) 



Quite distinct in habit and the consistence of the foliage from 

 P. peploides, Hook. & Arn., and P. peltata, Hance, the only other 

 South Chinese species hitherto known. 



63. Quercus Fabri, Hance. — Secus fl. Lien-chau, in collibus 

 juxta pagum Ma-po-shui, 340 m. p. a Cantone, d. 26 Oct. 1881, 

 leg. rev. B. C. Henry. I have never before seen specimens of this 

 from any locality south of the northern portion of Kiang-si. In 

 Kwang-tung it is a low scrubby bush. 



64. Quercus annuJata, Sm. — In silvula juxta fl. Lien-chau, 309 

 m. p. a Cantone, d. 19 Oct. 1881, leg. rev. B. C. Henry. Fo-kien 

 and Che-kiang are the only Chinese provinces from which I had 

 hitherto received this beautiful oak. 



65. Quercus sclerophyJla, Lindl. — Juxta pagum Ma-po-shui, ad 

 ripas fl. Lien-chau, coll. rev. B. C. Henry, d. 26 Oct. 1881. Like 

 the preceding, only previously known to me from the two provinces 

 just mentioned. 



QG. Salix cYANOLiMENiEA, sp. nov. — Kaiiiulis cinerascenti- 

 brunneis striatulis, foliis brevissime petiolatis linearibus calloso- 



