2 



E. drupifera, Stapf. Arhor ad l-lm alia ; iruneuB iiionuis, cuirreus ; 

 rami crassi, junioros succulenti, prlnio 4-G-an^Lilati. Folia o\)Q\iiU >- 

 vel iuterduvn obcordato-cuueata, G-20 cm. louga, 4-7'5 cm. lata, 

 nervis lateralibus panels obseuris perobliquis ; petiulus brevissimus vol 

 ad 10 liu. longus, validus. rednnciili 2-5— t cm. longi. Cynthium 

 viride, 8-12 mm, diam. Driipa forma et magnitudine admodum varia, 

 cerasum vel olivam vel nucem juglandis referees, viridis, ad 5 cm. 

 longa, obtusissima vel acuta ; putamen globosum vel globoso- 

 elllpsoideura, sectione transversa orbicnlari vel subtrigona, ad 14 mm. 

 longum, ad 10 mm. diam. Se.mina fiisca vel fusco-giisea, laevia, baud 

 nitida. — En.phorbia drupifera, Thonn , in Schum. and Thonn, Beskr, 

 Guin. PI. p. 250 ; Pax in Engl. Bot. Jalirl>. vol. xxxiv. p. 68, ^^ 

 Renoiiayvli^ Pax in Bull, Mus. Hist. Nat. Paris, vol. viii. p. Gl. 



Uppkr Guinea : Gold Coast ; common in the Accra plains, W, If. 

 Johnson. 605, 10-53 ; Kpong, Farinai\ 480 ; without preciHe locality, 

 Thonning, Dahomey ; near Porto Novo, and in other h>calities, 

 E, Poisson. 



According to a kind communication by Dr.^Ostenfeld, there are no 

 specimens of E, dntjn/era from Thonning's collection at Copenhagen, 

 nor, so far as I know, do any occur elsewhere. Yet Thonnings descrip- 

 tion is — as usually his descriptions are —so complete that there can bo 

 no doubt about the identity of his and Johnson's plants. True, he 

 describes the stone as dehiscent, which seems to be rarely the case, 

 except in the sense that it often breaks up loculicidally into three valves 

 when crushed or under the influence of the germinating and expandim^ 

 seeds. I found even this ' dehiscence ' sometimes so imperfect that a 

 stone would break in any other direction rather than in that of tlu/ 

 theoretical lines of dehiscence, and Johnson liimself writes that the 

 stones are iudehiscent. Of Euphorbia Berufitardii I have, thanlis to 

 M. J. Poisson's courtesy, had an opportunity of examining a couple of 

 perfect fruits and cyatbia, preserved in spirit, and I cannot discover 

 any difference between his and Johnson's specimens. Air. Johnson was 

 so kind as to send, beside dried and spirit specimen?, a large tin full of 

 fresh fruits, which give a goi>d idea of the great variability of the fruit 

 so far as size and shape are concerned. 



Pax (I.e.) and Boissier (in DC. Prodr. xv. ii. p. 80) quote Enphorhia 

 graadifoHa, Haw. {Syn. PL Siiec. p. 130), and tlie latter also Evphorhid 

 toxicaria, Afz. (ex Loud, IIorL Brit., ed. 1830, p. 190), as synonyuis 

 of Euphorbia dntpi/olia. Both names refer probably to tlie .same 

 species, a Sierra Leone plant, which was introduced into England 

 about 1793 or 1796. Afzelius' name remained, however, a *nomen 

 nudum,' and liaworth's descriptiun is too meagre for the recognition 

 of the plant which lie meant. 



The generic differences between Enphf^rbia and ElaeojJwrhia lie 

 entirely in their fruits, the fruit ul Euphorbia being a capsule which 

 breaks up into 3 cocci, eacli coccus dehiscing loculicidully and ela&tically 

 from below, wliilst the fruit of EI(trophi>rlnn is a drupe with a hard stone 

 which under presnue, possibly also by excrriive drying, Uiay break up 



