ILLUSTRATIONS OF INDIAN BOTANY. ] 17 



) 



c 



usual 



Endlicher seems 



division, and stations them next Umbelliferae, the first of his polypetalous orders. The ad- 

 vantage of this disposal I cannot trace, as he seems thereby to separate them from all those 

 families to which all other Botanists consider them most nearly related. 



Ericacece. 



DilleniacecB 



EscalloniacecB 



Geographical Distribution. As already stated, this is an extra-tropical family, and 

 most abounds in Europe and North America, also in Northern Asia. Many, however, are natives 

 of the Andes of Peru, and it is probable some few extend southwards to those of Chili, but up 

 to the present time, it is said, none have been found bevond the trnnir^ nf Hanrirorn ~ 



Ne 



Two, 



In Southern Asia, they extend from the Northern tropic to Ceylon, and I have pubUshed one 



(Icones 1186) 



On the slopes of the Himalayas, and the off-shoots of that range, 



extending through Khassya and Bootan, they are numerous, but always occupying stations at a 



considerable elevation above the sea. A truly tropical species has not yet, so far as I am aware, 

 been found. 



Properties and Uses. Even in those countries where they abound, these are of no great 

 value. The bark and leaves are astringent and tonic. The berries of several are agreeably 

 acid, and in Northern Europe and America are much used as tart-fruit, and those found on the 

 Neilgherries form no bad substitute, except in so far as a considerable dash of bitterness is 

 combined with the acid. The people of Pasta in Peru make wine from the fruit of Thibaudia 

 (Vaccinum) macrophytla, t^-c. Nothing is known regarding the properties of the Indian species 

 beyond the fact of their being, on their native mountains, exceedingly ornamental trees and 

 shrubs, which will not thrive on the plains on account of the high temperature. 



Remarks on Genera and Species. Under this head much might be said, as it appears 

 to me the genera have been either most unduly multiplied or so loosely constructed, as regards 

 characters, that it seems, as they now stand in De Candolle's Prodromus, impossible to determine 

 whether a new species should be referred to Gaylussacia^ Thibaudia^ Agapetes, Caratostoma or 

 Vacciniinn. I was led to this conclusion from the examination of about SO species, derived 

 from Europe, Asia and America, which I was under the necessity of entering upon, to enable me 

 to refer about 20 Indian species, of several of which I had prepared drawmgs for publication, 

 to their proper genera. The flowers and ovary of every species were caretully dissected and 

 compared with the characters of the several genera named above, and the only conclusion at 

 which I could arrive was, that they all belonged to one genus, unless it might be considered 

 desirable to divide them into more, tvoxa characters taken from the 



the flower, the horns of the anthers, &c. These last, however, 1 only aeem ot specinc or at 

 best sectional value. Representations of several of them will be found in plate 141, D. 



Having concluded this examination, I ventured to reconstruct the generic character of 

 Vaccinium^ which I published, with some general remarks on the genera of the order, in my 

 xcones, and which, as I have not since found occasion to alter, I shall introduce here, only slight- 

 ly modified in the arrangement. It may, however, be well to suggest, for the consideration of 

 those who have tetramerous species, to inquire whether they might not be separated, to form 

 the type of a genus, or at all events a sub-genus. The only one I have examined, Gaylussada 

 dependens^ seems sufficiently distinct to justify the latter, if not the former proceeding. 



number 



