80 
(1861) non A. Juss. But Miiller did not accept the conclusion of 
Schwerntuith that this African Chrozophora is absent from India, 
or accept the opinion of Schweinfurth that both of the prostrate 
Indian forms of this genus in which the capsules are stellate- 
pubescent belong to the same variety of Croton plicatum, Vahl. 
The former decision was less, the latter was more satisfactory than 
the conclusions of Schw einfurth, which they respectively contra~ 
dict. What, however, is most perplexing in Miiller’s action is 
that, of the two prostrate forms of OR recognised by 
him, the specimens cited show that it is the one which Dalzell 
described as C. prostrata that Miller a referred to his variety 
Se Aiea’ 
Vahl, whieh is Cheskenhirs pes Klotzsch ex Schw ein 
Ha tg, . genuina ‘By some inadvertence the cate: on which C. 
parvifolia, Klotzsch, was based has been attributed to Malacca, 
whence no Chrozophora has yet been reported, although Klein 
really collected it at Tiruvalur, near Madras. A corollary to 
the reduction to his var. y. prostrata of Croton plicatum Roxb., 
has been Miiller’s impossible reference to this particular form of 
‘roton tinctorium, Burm. f., which was raised in a Java garden 
from. Surat seed. 
2. C. sabulosa (\.c. p. 748) is the plant described under this 
name by Karelin and Kirilow in 1842 and again by Bunge in 
1851. The existence of C. gracilis, named but not described by 
Fischer and Meyer in 1839, and described as distinct from C. 
sabulosa by Ledebour in 1850, was not alluded to by Miiller. 
3. C. tinctoria a. verbascifolia (l.c. p. 748) is naturally de- 
limited end includes Croton Sinctene Willd. vere ; 
3b. C. ae ene ( €. p. ere is bein on the 
specimen which is the type equally of Croton oblongifolium, Sieb. 
(1821) non Del., of Phrcsaihons A ne Spr. (1826), and 
of C rozophora Siebert, Pres] (1844). There is no confusion 
between this plant and a. verbascifolia; indeed it is difficult, not- 
Cairn 4 what ms been said and done by later Wuthors. to 
think of such a confusion as possible. But there was some con- 
fusion between 23. hierosolymitana and y. genuina, to which latter 
