354 



that the account of Linnaeus does not agree with that by Bergius, 

 and explained that he had no authentic specimen, adding — " Nous 

 avons dans notre Herbier une plante de ce genre que nous paroit 

 pouvoir se rapporter a cette espece " ; G. linoides, as to which he 

 has remarked — " on en trouve une variete beaucoup plus petite " ; 



in 



The 



courteous assistance of Professor Lecomte has made it possible to 

 learn what the specimens thus alluded to actually are. The sheet 

 with the specimen of G. lychnoides, Lamk, not of Berg., has a 

 label with the legend written by Lamarck, " C. lychnoides ? " ; 

 immediately above this label is another, on which Lamarck has 

 written " C. melampyrifolia, lam. ill." The specimen doubtfully 

 referred to G. lychnoides in 1783 is thus the actual specimen on 

 which Lamarck based his diagnosis of C. melampyrifolia published 

 (111. Gen., i., p. 479) in 1791. This species was more fully 

 characterised by Poiret {Encyc. Meth. Supply ii., p. 233) in 1811. 

 It is one of the most distinct and one of the most widely spread 

 in South Africa. It is the species which Thunberg described as 

 G. jasminoides in 1804, though it is not the only plant which 

 Thunberg issued under this name. It has besides been fully 

 characterised on three subsequent occasions ; by Ecklon in 1830 

 as C. perfoliata ; by Meyer in 1837 as G. speciosa ; by Paxton in 

 1849 as G. glutinosa. 



The specimen which Lamarck has named G. linoides occupies a 

 special sheet ; it is the well-known garden-plant, G. linoides, Linn. 

 Another sheet which bears the legend in Lamarck's handwriting— 

 "paroit n'etre qu'une variete du Chironia linoides," has two 

 specimens ; the smaller of these is G. linoides, Thunb., not of Linn. 

 (C. gracilis, Salisb.) ; the larger is G. linoides, Berg., not of Linn. 

 (C. emarginata, Jarosz). 



The sheet on which Lamarck has written " Chironia uniflora. 



Meth., i., p. 737), 

 [flora, Lamk. This 



enc." 



specimen represents the form of G. tetragona, Linn, f., described 

 by Grisebach in 1839 as var. brevifolia, and is one of the two 

 torms included by E. Meyer in 1837 in his G. tetragona, var. 

 linearis In 1839 and again in 1845 Grisebach has described 

 J.amarck s figure as bad ; the figure, however, represents with 

 noeiity the specimen from which it was drawn ; Grisebach's 

 adverse criticism has probably been a result of the fact that he 



represent. \ 



hich, 



« ni!- e re . ma jning sheet in Lamarck's herbarium bears the legend 

 omronia jasminoides." This W*n<1 rafo™ + ft i™ sm^imfms. 



This legend refers to two specimens 



™^ c i_- i --*v. w . .m±» itjgeuu. rerers to xwo BueuiuicuD, 



nn?W \ w WaS ™ figured b y Lamarck (El. Gen., t. 108, fig. 2) 



Iha, ii name * The two specimens belong to the same form ; 

 .nnLffiK ng t 5 m0reover t0 the form represented by the plant 

 U !!1J rmanD ' to which ever y botanist, prior to Thunberg, 

 bmp&TSLT? na T c - Mminoides, and they represent the only 

 £'! n accords .\ n all respects with Linnaeus's original descrip- 

 fi Xp rp;^ Sm r^? es ' Grisebach has suggested that Lamarck's 

 'niJnui* nt f. that Particular variety of the species named 



LiTS' L + lnn / f : This is not the ^se , the specimen 

 toured belongs to typical G. jasminoides, Linn. It is, however, 



