OF CENTRAL AFllICA. 299 



into liis ' Species Plaiitarum/ and referred to Ilvpoxis, 

 solely on the authority of the figure published iu Dr. 

 Russell's 'History of Aleppo.' In the ]]anksian Herbarium 

 I have examined part of the original si)ecimen of this species, 

 found by Dr. Alexander llusselb and figured l)y Ehret in 

 the work referred to, as well as more perfect speciuiens 

 collected by Dr. Patrick Russell ; and am satisfied that its 

 ovarium is not in any degree adherent to the tube of the 

 pcrianthium. I find also that Hypoxis fascicularis differs 

 from Colchicum merely in having a simple unilocular 

 ovarium, with a single parietal placenta and an undivided 

 style, instead of the compound trilocular ovarium, with dis- 

 tinct or partially united styles, common to all the other 

 sections of that genus. 



A reduction, as in this case, to the solitary simple pistil- 

 lum,' though existing in all Graminea) and in certain 

 genera of several other families of ^lonocotyledones, is yet 

 comparatively rare in that primary division of phaenogamous 

 plants, and in the great class Liliacea3, the present species 

 of Colchicum oft'ers, I believe, the only known example. [213 

 Yet this remarkable character is here so little influential, 

 if I may so speak, that Hypoxis fascicularis very closely 

 resembles some states of Colchicum Ritchii, and in the 

 Banksian herbarium has actually been confounded with 

 another species of the first or trigynous section of the 

 genus. 



To the first section, which includes Colchicum BitcJtii, 



^ The late celebrated M, Ricliard, i 11 his excellent 'Analyse du Fruit/ in 

 pointing out the distinctions between a simple and compound periearpium, 

 produces that of Mclanthacccc as an example of the compound, in opposition 

 to that of Commelinea3 or of Juncere, Avhich, though erpially multilocular, lie 

 considers as simple, A knowledge of the structure of Colchicum Monocarynm 

 would, no doubt, have confirmed him in his opinion respecting Mclantiiaccaj. 



It has always appeared to nic surprising that a carpologist so ])rofonnd as 

 !M, llichard, and whose notions of the comi)Osition of true dissepiments, and 

 even of the analogy in placcntation between multilocular and unilocular pcri- 

 carpia, were, in a great degree, erpially correct and original, should never have 

 arrived at the knowledge of the common type of the organ or simple pistillum, 

 to which all fruits, whether unilocular or multilocular, were reducible; and 

 that he should, in the instance now cited, liavc attempted to distinguish into 

 simple anil compound two modifications of the latter so manifestly analogous, 

 and which dilfer from each other only in the degree of coalescence of their 

 component parts. 



