144 THE JOURNAL OF BOTANY 



copy from the collection of Indian drawings formed by Dr. John 

 Fleming (t. 1815) acquired in 1882, to which reference was made 

 in this Jom-nal for 1906, p. 238. On the preceding page is printed 

 a letter from Hunter concerning Hardwick's drawings. The paper 

 is reprinted, without plate, in Nicholson's Journal, xxii, 336 (1809). 



The second paper, dealing mainly wdth the cultivation of 

 pepper {Piper nigrum), published in Asiatick Besearches, ix, 383-93 

 (1807) is also, as Mr. Eidley says, " very much the same" as the 

 account in the MS. ; it is indeed practically identical with it, save 

 for an introductory note and synonymy. But it contains descrip- 

 tions of four other species, one of which presents matter of some 

 botanical interest. This is named " P. LatifoUum?" and is very 

 briefly characterised, the sign of doubt being explained by Hunter 

 in a note : — " Having seen only a small specimen without fructi- 

 fication, which I know merely by description, I cannot speak 

 with certainty of this species." In a subsequent communication, 

 printed as an " Appendix" to vol. xi (1810), Hunter says that he 

 sent live specimens of this to Eoxburgh, who, when they flowered, 

 found them to represent an undescribed species which he named 

 P. sarnicntosum, sending Hunter a description which the latter 

 published (/. c). This description, so far as I can ascertain, has 

 been entirely overlooked ; the Kew Index refers for P. sarmentosum 

 Eotb. to Hort. Benglmlensis 4 (1814 : nomen) and Eoxb. Fl. Ind. 

 (ed. Carey) i. 160 [162] , (1820). In Fl. Brit. Ind. v, 83, Sir Joseph 

 Hooker shows that the name has been variously applied ; he 

 makes no reference to Eoxburgh in connection with it, but cites 

 WalHch's List 6641 as " perhaps the true plant," adding that 

 " he [Wallich] is the authority for referring Hunter's P. latifolium 

 to it " — a statement which consultation of the List does not 

 support. P. sarmentosum Eoxb. is retained as a species by C. De 

 Candolle (Prodr. xvi, 1, 352) and in the Kew Index, where, 

 however, P. latifolium Hunter, on which it was founded, is referred 

 to P. longum. Hooker, as has been shown, takes no cognizance 

 of Eoxburgh's plant ; Mr. Eidley's reference of Hunter's plant to 

 P. longum is of course based on the reference in Fl. Br. Ind. 

 already cited. If the species be maintained as distinct the proper 

 reference for it is 



PiPEE SARMENTOSUM Eoxb. cx Huutor in Asiat. Ees. xi. 565 

 (1810). 



The transcript from which the Flora was printed was carefully 

 done, but in certain matters of minor interest it will be desirable 

 to refer to the original for the purposes of accurate quotation. 

 The substitution of " Ayer Hitam " for " Ayer Etam " may 

 doubtless be justified on the ground of accuracy, but the student 

 of vernacular names must not trust implicitly to the transcription 

 of these — e.g. the name for '' Amonum globosum?", printed 

 " Boonga Chungkenam," stands in the MS. as " Boonga Ghung 

 Kenam." It would perhaps have been better had the editorial 

 notes and identifications been placed in accordance with usual 

 practice in [ ] instead of in ( ), and it may be regretted that 

 Mr. Eidley did not add an index. James Britten. 



