65 
in the Kew Herbarium, collected there by him on April 16th, 
1800; var. 8 founded on Wallich n. 1884 f. is M. parviflora, 
Linn., having glabrous petal-claws and interlocking carpel- 
teeth. As ‘Wight and Arnott appear not to have appreciated 
the differences between these species the descriptions in the 
Prodromus should not be cited. 
Sida veronicaefolia, Lam. The spelling veronicifolia is not 
that of Lamarck which is as above and although the Vienna 
Rules recommend the use of “i” in such cases the recom- 
mendation is only for future use and does not enjoin retrospective 
correction. 
Sida Schimperiana, Hochst.  Melochia truncata, Willd., 
both as described by Willdenow and as exemplified by a plant 
in the Kew Herbarium determined by him, is clearly referable to 
this species and if the binominal Sida truncata were not already 
preoccupied by a Brazilian plant this species would be correctly 
designated by that name. t has no claim to identification 
with the entirely different plant Melochia corchorifolia, Willd. 
Abutilon polyandrum, Wight & Arn. Cooke points out (FI. 
Bomb. i. 95) that the A. polyandrum of G. Don is a misprint 
for A. polyanthum, quite a different species originally named, by 
Schlechtendal, Sida polyantha. Wight and Arnott should there- 
fore be cited as the authors of the first-mentioned binominal and 
not G. Don who published it earlier but by accident. 
A. hirtum, G. Don founded upon Lamarck’s Sida hirta (1785) 
has precedence of A. graveolens, Wight & Arn. founded upon 
Roxburgh’s Sida graveolens (1805). 
Abutilon glaucum Cav. Cavanilles’s Sida glauca, upon which 
this is founded, has priority over Sida mutica, Delile, the proto- 
type of G. Don’s Abutilon muticum. 
Decaschistia crotonifolia, Wight & Arn. Prodr. (1834) 52 is 
the first publication of this binominal and the reference to ight’s 
specimen No. 215 identifies it with the shrub with short white 
tomentum on the branches as distinct from Craib’s D. rufa (Kew 
Bull. 1912, 35) which has rough reddish spreading hairs. It 
is important that the first named should not be confused with 
Wallich’s Hibiscus crotonifolius (Wall. Herb. 1901 A) which is 
referable to Craib’s species. 
_ Hibiscus moschatus, Wight & Arn. being founded on Wight 
no. 203 (H. Abelmoschus, Linn.) and Wallich no. 2699 (H. 
esculentus, Linn.) must be omitted from synonymy as a mixture 
ot two species. — 
Bombax scopulorum, Dunn. ‘This tree is fully described in 
Bourdillon’s Forest Trees of Travancore (p. 45) where it is 
doubtfully identified with Wallich’s B. insigne and attributed 
to Malabar, Burmah, and the Andamans in addition to Travan- 
ore. Perhaps the distinctions between it and Prain’s var. 
© Wightii of B. insigne, Wall. were not observed b Bourdillon 
: ‘ings confused it in consequence with that more widely distributed 
ree, 
