47 
Hippocratea Cumingii and H. Maingayi._An enquiry as to 
the original specimen of Hippocratea Cumingii reveals an amount 
of confusion that can bid be dealt with in a short note. Hippo- 
cratea Cumingu, Laws., was described in 1875, being based upon 
flowering specimens collected i Pe Malacca by Griffith, and in the 
Philippines by Cuming (no. 1725), the ‘specific name being 
derived from the latter. Sir George ruck afterwards enumerated 
it as an imperfectly known species. It proves on comparison to 
be identical with the earlier H. heiptig ha Korth., based upon 
a specimen collected at Banjermassing, Borneo. The latter name 
was untortunately transferred by Sir George King to another 
plant, with the remark, ‘‘ flowers of Chittagong and Assam speci- 
mens of this which I have dissected agree perfectly with 
Korthals’ figure.”” This figure, however, shows villous petals, 
and the other characters are also not in agreement. He also cites 
as synonymous, H. lanceolata, Ham., H. “grandiflora, Wall., and 
H. obtusifolia, Laws. (in part, not of Roxburgh), with the addi- 
tional localities, Sikkim, Burma, South Andaman and Pera 
These, unfortunately, do not represent the plant of Korthals, and, 
further, the Perak plant is distinct from the others cited, an nd 
been described under the name of H. nigricaulis, Ridl. It also 
includes a specimen from Malacca, Griffith, which is written up 
as H. obtustfolia, Roxb., though not cited by Lawson, so that it 
is uncertain whether he intended to include it. There is also the 
difficulty that both Wallich and Lawson included under H. obtusi- 
folia, Roxb., materials which do not belong to it, as pointed out 
by Sir George King. This point, however, has not yet been fully 
cleared up. The Perak specimen just mentioned, however, 
belongs to ok laiamiat Ridl. The synonomy and distribution 
are as follow 
H. scala Korth. in Temminck, Verh. Nat. Gesch. (1839- 
42), z. ane t. 7 ie King). H. Cumin ingit, Laws. in Hook. f. 
Fl. Ind. i. p. 624 (1875).—Ceylon, Walker; Malay Penin- 
rier "Malaves ‘Griffith; Kew Distrib. 906; Johore, Ridley 4183, 
11139, 13446; Borneo: Banjermassing, Korthals; Kuching, 
Haviland 2859 ; Kulong, Haviland 2876; Sarawak, Beccari 4063 ; 
Philippines : Island of Samar, Cuming 1725. 
H. nigricaulis, Ridl. ined., H. macrantha, King, Mat. FI. 
Malay Penins. i. (1896) p 643, in part, (excl. syn.; non Korth.). 
—Malay Pensa: Matus, Griffith; Perak, Kite Collector 
5118, 7570, Wray 631; Siostechiné 1047. 
The two plants are readily distinguished. H. macrantha has 
Stacy acuminate leaves, and fetals densely glandular- 
villous on the inner surface, while H. nigricaulis has obtuse, or 
very er and abruptly acuminate leaves, and the petals are 
labro 
gs 
Hippocratea Maingayi, Laws., was based on a fruiting speci- 
men collected at Malacca pe Ae egy dee see the eed 
“* ? Borneo’’, the source of w o. 3005. 
Both, however belong to Lapoeaben sinc eam piney ‘which 
