^''l8'Jo'."'] PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL MUSEUM. 17 



cordate at base, usually tbree-lobed, the middle lobe broad and eiuar- 

 giuately truncate " Darlington ; ^ " leaves tliree-lobed, the middle lobe 

 truncate, glabrous" Darby ;^ " the leaves are divided into three lobes, 

 of which the middle one is horizontally notched at its summit and the 

 two lower ones are rounded at the base" F. A. Michaux;^ "leaves 

 angled, truncated, mostly rounded at the base, somewhat three lobed, 

 the middle lobe appearing as if cut off, leaving a shallow notch" Chap- 

 man.^ The leaf has also, as mentioned above, been described as four- 

 lobed by following authors and in this manner: "Foliis abscisso-trnu- 

 catis, quadri-lobatis " Michaux;^ the same diagnosis has been given 

 by Pursh. " " Folia apice truncata, acute quadri-loba, lobis utriuquedno- 

 bus sinu obtuso lato distinctis" de Candolle;'' "leaves cut truncate, 

 four-lobed " Barton ; ^ " leaves four lobed, truncate " Torrey ; ^ " leaves 

 divided into four, pointed lobes, and terminated by a shallow notch, the 

 extremity being nearly square and the middle rib ending abruptly as 

 if cut off" Bigelow;'" "leaves truncate at the top, four-lobed, resem- 

 bling a saddle in shape" Loudon;" " folia truncata, sinuata, qua<1ri- 

 loba" Bentham and Hooker; '^ " leaves with two lateral lobes near the 

 base, and two at the apex, which appears as if cut off' abruptly by a 

 broad shallow notch " Gray. ^^ 



There is no doubt that the diagnosis given by A. Michaux [l. c.) is the 

 only correct manner of describing this pecaliar leaf, and, as has been 

 shown above, it has been accepted by such authorities as Bentham, 

 Hooker, and Gray. It is. however, to be remarked that Michaux's four- 

 lobed leaf is properly to be understood as a lobed leaf with the summit 

 wanting, or what he called " abscisso truncatis (foliis)," while it is not 

 correctly described by other authors, who have called the leaf three- 

 lobed with the middle lobe " cut off'." We have no leaf, as far as 1 

 know, either fossil or recent, of this genus in which we can find any com- 

 plete middle lobe or anything like the entire leaf of the genus Magnolia, 

 so closely allied to our Uriodendron; because I do not take the cotyle- 

 dons into consideration. These are certainly entire, oblong, and taper- 

 ing at both ends, distinctly but not sharply pointed at their summit, 



'William Darlington: Flora Cestrica, 1853, p. 9. 

 "Joliu Darby: Botany of the Southern States, 1855, p. 212. 

 ■' F. A. Michaux : North American Sylva, vol. ii, 1865, p. 35. 

 •'A. \V. Chapman: Flora of the Southern United States, 1883, p. 14. 

 ^A. Michaux: Flora Boreali-Araericana, 1803, i>. 326. 

 "Fr. Pursh: Flora Americte septeutrioualis, vol. ii, 1816, p. 382. 

 'A. P. tie Candolle: Prodromus sysl. nat. regni. vegetab., vol. i, 1818, p. 461. 

 ''William Barton: Compendium Floras Philadelphica^,, 1818, p. 18. 

 ^John Torrey: Compendium of the flora of the Northern and Middle States, 1826, 

 p. 221. 

 1" J. Bigelow : Plants of Boston, 1840, p. 245. 

 " I. C. Loudon : Trees and shrubs of Britain, 1875, p. 36. 

 •* Bentham and Hooker : Genera plantarum, vol. i, 1867, p. 19. 

 '^ Asa Gray : Manual of Botany of the Northern United States, 5th ed., p. 50. 

 Proc. N. M. 90 2 ^ 



