320 



CASSIA MOSCHATA. 



Botanical 

 characters. 



1863. however, Mr. Sutton Hayes, of Panama (to whose kindness I 

 Mr.~Suttoii am indebted for many interesting communications), sent me 

 ~ Hay6 /' d severa l P oc ^ s lnai 'ked Canafistola de purgar, which I recognised 

 purgar. as the small variety of Cassia of Messrs. Guibourt and Morson. 

 In reply to my remark that they were derived from Cassia 

 Fistula, L , Mr. Hayes observed, " I think you are wrong as to 

 the tree which produces the pods I sent you being a form of 

 the true C. Fistula. I have often seen both trees ; and the 

 true C. Fistula is much less like the Canafistola de purgar than 

 many other species of Cassia. The flowers of C. Fistula, L., are 

 of light yellow and in very long racemes, and the leaflets are 

 different in shape and much larger. The flowers of the Cafia- 

 fistola de purgar are yellow, becoming brick-red with age ; the 

 racemes are much shorter than those of Cassia Fistula; and 

 ^] ie i ea fl e t s are altogether different, being much smaller and 

 quite like those of C. brasiliana ; in fact the Canafistola de 

 purgar is much nearer C. Irasiliana than it is to C. Fistula. 

 The wood of the tree is very dark-coloured, heavy, and compact, 

 and is considered one of the best on the Isthmus: it makes 

 excellent fuel. The tree is very common in open woods on 

 hills, and is perfectly indigenous ; whereas C. Fistula is to be 

 found only about towns and in old cleared places, as if intro- 

 duced. I have never seen C. Fistula in the virgin forests. C. 

 brasiliana is very common about Panama." 



Upon examining Mr. Hayes's plant and comparing it with the 

 species of Cassia already described. I have found it to agree 

 Cassia mcs- with the Cassia moschata of Humboldt, Bonpland, and Kunth, 

 so far as the characters of that plant have been recorded ; and 

 M. Triana, who is now engaged on the Flora of New Granada, 

 and has compared Mr. Hayes's specimens with the type speci- 

 mens in Paris, has arrived at the same conclusion. As the 

 notices of this plant hitherto published are quoted entirely 

 from the Nova Genera ct Species, the authors of which have 

 not- seen the flowers, I have thought it desirable to draw up a 

 complete description, which I have now tFie honour of laying 

 before the Society. 



chata. 



