on the Hortus Malabaricus, Part IV. 247 



Drupa nigra, sicca, magnitudine grani Piperis, ovalis vel orbiculata, compressa. 

 Nux compressa, rugosa. 



In the Mathasura the leaves have often a sharp point, as represented in 

 Plukenet ; but I see no other ditference, and doubt of this being a circum- 

 stance suflBcient to distinguish them as species. 



POUTALETSJE, p. 117. tuh. b7 • 



Conimeline considered this as a species of Ligustrum. 



Plukenet compared to it a plant, which he called " Poutaletsice Malabararum 

 similis Arbuscula Moderaspatana" {Alm.^Ob.; Phyt. t. h\. f. 1.), which seems 

 to me very different even as to genus, the corolla in Plukenet's figure being 

 divided into five. 



The elder Burman proposed as a query, whether or not the Poufaletsje was 

 the Manlthonda of the Ceylonese, which he calls Ligustrum indicum s. Alcanna 

 (Thes. Zeyl. 142.). This Linnaeus in the Flora Zeylanica (135.) called Law- 

 sonia ranils inermihus, concerning which error I had already had occasion fully 

 to explain myself {Linn. Trans, xiii. 509.). 



M. Poiret {Enc. Mdth. Suppl. iii. 39.) having given iip the Poutaletsje as a 

 Lawsonia, has been obliged to return to the opinion of Jussieu (Gen. Plant. 

 222.), and adopts without reserve [Enc. Mdth. Suppl. iv. 374. 546.) what the 

 most distinguished botanist of France proposed merely as a query. lie has not, 

 however, given it a specific name nor character ; and indeed seems to think 

 that the genus Petesia (to which Jussieu referred it) should be altogether 

 abandoned. With all due deference to the opinion of so great a botanist, I 

 doubt of this plant belonging to the order of Rubiacea^. I see no appearance 

 whatever in the figure, nor the smallest hint in tiie description, of stipulse ; and 

 if these are wanting, we may safely consider the Poutaletsje as a Callicarpa. 



MoDAGAM, p. 119. tab. 58. 



This and the following belong to one Malabar genus, and have a consider- 

 able general resemblance ; but, as Commeline remarks, they have no affinity 

 in the view of European botanists. Both the vulgar and Brahmans consider 

 this as the prototype of the genus, called by the latter Corotha. I cannot find 

 this plant mentioned in any subsequent author. Rheede mentions a resem- 



