330 THE JOURNAL OF BOTANY 



this evidently was not carried out, at least fully ; otherwise the 

 type of the original G. oppositifolia (i. e. G. eviarginata Wight & 

 Arnott) would not be, as it is now, at the British Museum. 

 Whether the erroneous identification rests with Smith or with 

 Buchanan, we need not enquire ; it is very possible that Buchanan 

 sent the name with the seeds, but there is nothing to show that 

 he did, and it may have reached Koxburgh through a quite 

 different channel. 



In this instance Koxburgh's editor was justified, according to 

 his knowledge, in following the text ; but under the next species 

 he has piously embalmed what was manifestly a mere error of 

 transcription. From the Hortus Bengalensis and the unpublished 

 drawing (tab. 1859), it is evident that Eoxburgh meant to write 

 " sclero2:)hylla" and not " scabro2)hylla," a,nd the due citation is 

 Grewia sclerophylla Eoxburgh ex G. Don, Gen. Syst. i. p. 550 

 (1831), where the name, though taken from the Hortus Bengalensis, 

 is supported by a description. These instances will serve to show 

 that it is vital, in the case of large genera, when dealing with 

 Roxburghian names and accounts of plants, to get at the basis of 

 his work as far as possible ; they will subserve another end later 

 on — but the present purpose is to emphasize certain points 

 already outlined by the late C. B. Clarke in the preface to his 

 reprint of the 1832 edition of the Flora Indica (Calcutta, 1874), 

 which may be thus summarized : — 



(1) We should always assume that Roxburgh had a good 

 knowledge, so far as his material went, of the species he included 

 in his original notes and illustrations, though he may have only 

 known the living plant from a garden example. 



(2) The names which appear in the 1832 edition of the Flora 

 Indica are not necessarily those that he would have ultimately 

 published. 



(3) These were often given tentatively, subject to revision by 

 some correspondent, whose determination was possibly never 

 received, or is now irrecoverable. 



(4) Where names communicated by his friends or correspon- 

 dents were adopted by Roxburgh, it does not follow that their 

 determinations were correct in themselves, or that Roxburgh 

 always personally agreed with them. 



It is not possible within the limits of the present paper to deal 

 with the Indian species of Greivia exhaustively ; the immediate 

 aim is to place on record certain matter that can usefidly be 

 published without waiting for the fruits of further study, while 

 the writer still has at his disposal important collections which 

 must shortly be returned to those who have most kindly made 

 them available, particularly sets belonging to Mr. J. S. Gamble, 

 F.R.S., and the fine material lent from the Madras Herbarium 

 through the good offices of Mr. Barber. 



With the third species of the Flora Indica — G. pedicellata — 

 we need not now concern ourselves, as it was admittedly an exotic. 

 Further, No. 4, lanceafolia, can be left until we arrive at No. 16, 

 didyma. The fifth species was identified with G. excelsa Vahl 



