62 
Wight, Kew Distrib. No. 68; Mangalor, Hohenacker 420; Coorg 
Hook. f. § Thoms. Madras Coll. 72. 4 
Distinguished from its nearest ally C. Roxburghii, DC. by 
its tomentose flower buds and divaricate leaf-veins. 
C. grandis, Linn. f. This species was described from a Ceylon 
specimen with nearly glabrous leaves, but the usual form in 
S. India has a covering of close olive-green tomentum over all 
the young parts. ; 
C. tomentella, Dunn sp. nov.—C. parviflora, Bedd. l.c. Pl. 
Ind. Or. i. 65 t. 176 (not of Hook. f. & Thoms.). 
Travancore, Beddome 61, 243. 
is species may be distinguished from C. parviflora, Hook. f. 
& Thoms. by its densely shortly pubescent (not glabrous) 
twigs and by, its fully grown flower buds being -2 in. instead 
of -l in. lon 
C. rotundifolia, Rottl. Rottler first described ithis species 
(Gesellsch. Nat. Fr. Neue Schr. iv. (1803) 185) and after com- 
paring this type, which is still extant in the Kew Herbarium, 
there seems no doubt that his plant was the one subsequently 
labelled C. pedunculosa by Wallich (n. 6999), described and 
figured in Hooker’s Icones (t. 128), and quoted by most later 
writers. : 
Linnaeus as ‘ in forma atlantica”? (atlas folio) in the preface to 
the flora, and the specimens are his types. Specimens of the 
Arnott and all recent 
gore Linnaeus 
ut not only did the early botanists of S. Indi I . 
‘ : J . India fail to appY | 
— S name to the common plant intended ‘by him, they — 
= <i to indicate a perfectly distinct species. ‘The mistake — 
was tollowed by Willdenow, Wallich and most modern author - 
