ii PREFACE. 



the habit and other easily perceived characters, while fuller 

 details, useful to the student, are added in smaller type. In 

 some genera herbs have been described which have no known 

 economic value. Such descriptions of the plants closely allied 

 to a useful species often more effectively prevent its mis- 

 identification than a more particular account of the species 

 itself, while they add to the botanical interest of the book. 

 A few plants have been described in virtue of their beauty 

 alone. 



The economic uses are generally restricted to tho£3 to 

 which the plants are put in Chota Nagpur. An exception has 

 been made in the case of some trees, the value of which 

 appears to have been overlooked on account of their rarity, 

 and in order to claim their protection. A description of the 

 timbers has also been omitted, as nothing could have been 

 added by the writer to Gamble's account of them. 



In regard to the limitation and multiplication of species 

 the writer has adopted generally the views expressed by Sir 

 D. Brandis on p. x of his introduction to " Forest Trees," 

 but it is to be remembered that those views include the 

 impossibility of a consensus of opinion in detail, and the limi- 

 tation of particular species does not always coincide with tha£ 

 of " Indian Trees." Such differences of opinion are specially 

 inevitable where the material on which conclusions have 

 been based is different. 1 Where generic and ' specific names 

 are given without explanation, or synonomy, they are 

 believed to represent the plant or group of plants described 

 tinder these names in the Flora of British India. Synonyms 

 are given where the name employed differs from that for the 

 same species in the Flora of British India, Brandis's Forest 

 Trees, or Prain's Bengal Plants. 



It is held that in attempting to completely describe the 

 Forest Flora of any locality, the existence of those trees 



1 "It is moreover not to be forgotten that all taxonomic distinc- 

 tions, which have not been confirmed by physiologic tests, are only pro- 

 visional * * * * it is absolutely impossible to reach definite conclu- 

 eions on purely morphologio evidence " De Vries, Origin of Species by 

 Mut&tionc., English Edition, p. 248. 



