26 NEW PUBLICATIONS. 
Platycarpum were Bignoniacee, and Mr. Miers endorsed the opinion ; 
whilst Dr. Seemann maintained that these two genera formed a trans- 
ition between Rubiacee and Loganiacee. In the paper before us M. 
Bureau goes deeply into the subject, and believes with Dr. Seemann 
that Henriquezia and Platycarpum are really the connecting links be- 
tween Rubiacee and Loganiacea, as are also Mitreola and Mitra- 
sacme, all four of which M. Bureau would place in Rubiacee rather than 
in Loganiacee. 
M. Bureau also objects to the tribe Platycarpeze which Mr. Miers forms 
out of the genera Platycarpum, Henriquezia, Orycladus, Monttea, and 
Reyesia, and would incorporate with Bignoniacee. Reyesia, from C. Gay’s 
authentic specimens, he finds to be a Serophularinea, closely allied to Du- 
boisia and Schwenkia ; but Monttea and Oxycladus he would form into a 
new tribe of Scrophularinee. M. Bureau has not seen specimens of Ozy- 
cladus aphyllus, and the botanists of this country only knew Monttea 
Chilensis from the plate and description in C. Gay’s * Flora Chilena ;’ 
but it has long ago been suspected by Dr. Seemann that the two 
genera were one, and the excellent description which M. Bureau has 
just published leaves little doubt ou that point. The two plants may 
even be specifically identical, — Ozxycladus, though named aphyllus, hav- 
ing certainly leaves probably deciduous, if not caducous ones. How- 
ever, even if waiving the point of identity, there can be no doubt that 
the two are sufficiently close together to make the question about their 
true position in the natural system an inseparable one. We do not 
think that botanists will follow M. Bureau in placing Monttea and 
Oxycladus amongst Scrophularinee. M. Bureau seems to have over- 
looked the discussion on Oxycladus, which took place ten years ago at 
the meetings of the Linnean Society between Mr. Miers and Dr. Sce- 
mann (Proceedings Linn. Soc. 1853 and 1854, p. 269-273), where 
the former advocated the claims of Oxycladus as a Bignoniacea, and 
the latter as a Myoporinea. The whole is thus summed up in the pub- 
lication alluded to :— : 
“Mr. Miers states that he sees no reason to alter his conviction as to the 
proper position of the genus in question. Dr. Seemann contends that Ozycladus 
is too anomalous in form to be admitted among Bignoniac 
fruit, which is a hard monospermous nut, with the seed suspended from near 
the summit of the cell, and of its embryo, which has large fleshy cotyledons, 
while there are no wings developed on the testa ; and maintains that on these 
grounds it rather belongs to Myoporacee, with which family it agrees better 
