95 



the characteristic hairs having been rubbed off. Again in 

 December the contents of the crop of a Pigeon (a bird of the year), 

 shot close to Pembroke, were received at Kevv through the Board' 

 of Agriculture and Fisheries, and in this case also the crop 

 contained a large quantity of the common spangle-gall. 



Hymenanthera novae-zelandiae, Hemsl. — The Norfolk Island 

 Hymenanthera latifolia, Eadl., was founded (Prod/: Fl. Ins. Norf. 

 1833, p. 70) on specimens collected by Ferdinand Bauer. In 1863 

 Mr. Henry H. Travers visited the Chatham Inlands and made a 

 collection of dried plants, published by Baron Mueller in 18(31 

 under the title of The Vegetation of the Chatham Islands. Among 

 these plants was a species of Hymenanthera, which Mueller 

 named H. latijolia var. chathamica, remarking that "the 

 specimens brought by Mr. Travers are fruit-bearing and correspond 

 fully to Endlicher's description and Hauer's illustration (Endlicher 



lconographia Genera Plantarum, 1838, 1. 108), with the exception 



of the margin of the leaf which is toothed by short regular 

 notches." A portion of Travers's material was sent to Kew and 

 unfortunately the name was erroneously transcribed H. latifolia 

 var. tasmanica. In 1868 the late Mr. Thomas Kirk transmitted to 

 Kew specimens of a Hymenanthera collected in Flat Island, one 

 of the numerous islands east of Auckland, for the purpose of 

 having it compared. From the manuscript records of that date it 

 appears that he was furnished with the name H. latifolia var. 

 tasmanica for the Flat Island plant, which means that it was 

 identified with the Chatham Islands specimen bearing the 

 erroneous name. Not finding any publication of this name, Kirk 

 accepted it and described his plant (Trans. N. Zeal. Inst. 

 1871, vol. iii., p. 1(53) without any remark respecting its inappro- 

 priateness. As to affinities, he says : " var. chathamica appears to 

 differ from our plant only in the leaves being much narrower at 

 the base and more deeply serrated, and in the larger fruit." 



The point of importance here is that whoever made the 

 comparison at Kew was of opinion that the Chatham and Flat 

 Island specimens were specifically the same, and the differences 

 are so slight that we should regard them as individual rather than 

 varietal. However, both Kirk (The Student's Flora of New 

 Zealand, 1899, p. 45) and Cheeseman (Manual of the New Zealand 

 Flora, 1906, p. 50) deal with them as independent species, and 

 both agree in stating that there is little to separate them. 



Both authors also agree in casting some doubt on the correctness 

 of the identification of the New Zealand plant with H. latifolia, 

 Lndl., from Norfolk Island, Cheeseman observing that "it must 

 not be considered as proved until specimens from both localities 

 have been compared." 



In connection with the Illustrations of New Zealand Plants 

 announced, p. 92, such a comparison has been made. Kew 

 possesses ample material of the Norfolk Island plant, including a 

 specimen collected by Bauer, on whose specimens and drawings 

 Endlicher founded his species. 



a plant 



H. fat if 



