, 
192 
nerves and inconspicuous veins, characters which enable it to be 
easily distinguished from S$. Nua-vomica. With these characters 
and the fairly thick sharp-edged seeds, irregular in shape and 
furnished with a felt-like covering—quite unlike the satiny coat 
of the round, flattened, button-like seeds of S. Nua-vomica*—it is . 
surprising that ‘ Khabaung ’ should so long have been confused ° 
with the well-known species. It does not appear that the seeds 
have ever been commercially exported as ‘ Vuz-vomica,’ and had 
this been attempted it seems hardly likely they would have been 
accepted by the dealers since their appearance is so different 
from the commercial product. 
As to the present uses of the tree, Burkill notes on his 
eee from Bhamo that ‘‘ Shans eat the pulp but not the 
seed,’ d Scott on his specimen 29509, from the §. Shan 
States, aus that it is ‘‘ used only as a + vegetable by the natives 
here,’’ but he does not indicate the pa 
the assay process of the British Pharmacopeia. The amount 
of residue (which would contain the strychnine, brucine or other 
* The seeds of S$. Nus-vomica from Burma referred to by Dunstan and 
Short) see Pharm. Journ. xiii. ser. 3, p. 1053), were evidently one from 
Griffith’s specimen 3722, and therefore elon to S. Nuw-blanda, A. ill. 
+ Since the above fi written seeds have been sent to ia: bites rial 
Hentcation, as Nu«-vomica, and were forwarded to Kew for 
{The ot specimens under 1593 referred to S. acuminata, Wall, are 
1598 Os. lasueine., Wall. ; 1508 (2) = S. rufa, var. Candollei, C. B. Clarke, 
—_ doubtful affinity and possibly not nearly allied to 9. rufa, O. B. 
———— 
