59 
‘ In 
Or. t. 85) has been een to me tts Mr. J. R, bee to 
differ in so many respects from the figure and description o 
Leschenault’s true M. indica (Lesch, in A. DC 
Genév. v. 36) that it is necessary to decal it NS HS a 
separate name. As no such name has yet been published, I 
propose, with Mr. Drummond’s concurrence, to call it Miliusa 
ertocarpa, Dunn, in reference to its velvety. carpels. 
MENisPERMACEAE.—Tiliacora acuminata, Mier The first 
description of the species was published by bamistick under the 
name of Menispermum acuminatum (Encycl. iv. 101). Diels 
is, therefore, correct, under the Vienna tules: of nomenclature, 
in restoring this specific name. (Kngl. Pflanzenr.—Menisp. 60). 
He attributes the combination, however, to Hooker t¢. and 
Thomson, but it was previously used by Miers (Ann, Nat. Hist. 
ser. 2, vii. 39). 
Diploclisia glaucescens, Diels. This genus of Miers is revived 
by Diels for io ater clearly expressed in Engler’s Pflanzenreich 
(Menisp. 224) and his new combination must be used. The 
species was first ublished under the name of Cocculus glauces- 
cens by Blume (Bijdr. (1825) 25). 
For similar reasons Diels yim re-established (l.c. 236 and 
237) the oldest specific names Cocculus hirsutus, Diels 
SH aeens res Linn. Bp! Fl. ed. 1, (1753) 341) and 
C. pendulus, Diels (Epibaterium pendu lum, Forst. gen. 
cimze) fo age plants for long known as C. villosus, DC. and 
eaeb 
Bae a are two species of this genus in the Madras 
area; one with fiowers in umbellate heads, the other with solitary 
axillary heads or with condensed head-like cymes of flowers. 
The latter agrees perfectly with Arnott’s type of Clypea Wightii, 
which consists of specimens bearing male flowers and ripe fruits, 
and is obviously eauuct from Loureiro’s S. rotu with which, 
probably in co nsequence of the scantiness of the material, it 
was previously identified. The new combination of S. Wightii 
is therefore i a er for it. A slight Ey ty with Diels’s 
conclusions must be here noted: Diels 72) places Clypea 
Wightii, Arn. under S. glabra, Miers, a boca gg ee: by him 
(Diels) as having “‘ flores filiformi- Fiangeorent Wight’s 
own 8s ee (no. 2462) in the Kew herbarium, ahers is a 
Calcutta specimen (Kew iB. Wight himself describes 
the male flowers as being “ all collected into a single capitulum ”’ 
(Ill. i. 22), rnott’s species cannot therefore, I think, be so 
A? 
