194 Dr. B. Seemann on the Bignoniacez. 
2-valvular.” The fruit, when fully ripe, simply enters upon a 
state of putrefaction. I must therefore object to the opinion 
that “the genus ought at once to be consigned to Bignoniacez.” 
Mr. Miers is doubtful what part of the fruit is eaten by cattle. 
I stated that cattle, if fed with the fruit, soon get fat, and of 
course meant not a certain part, but the entire fruit. 
If, then, all Crescentiaceze have an indehiscent fruit, they must 
also have apterous seeds; for, as Lindley has justly remarked, 
no instance is known of the existence of winged seeds in inde« 
hiscent pericarps, as that would neutralize the object for which 
winged seeds seem to have been created. Yet Mr. Miers, again 
relying upon the correctness of figures when they are partly 
erroneous, assigns winged seeds to the Crescentiaceous genus 
Colea. “The several details,” he says, “ of C. Mauritiana (Bot. 
Mag. t. 2817), of C. Telfairia (ib. tab. 2976, and of C. floribunda 
(Bot. Reg. vol. xxvii. t. 19) all prove most distinctly the presence 
of a broad membranaceous wing around the seeds, as in Bignonia;” 
and “if,” he continues in a foot-note, “ the presence of a wing 
on the seed of C. Telfairia be questioned, there can no be doubt of 
its existence in C. floribunda.” Neither the figure nor the de- 
scription of C. floribunda in ‘Bot. Reg,’ vol. xxvii. t. 19 indicate 
the presence of a membranaceous wing; on the contrary, in that 
place, Lindley endorses the opinion that the division of Bigno- 
niacee and Crescentiacese is founded upon important physio- 
logical and anatomical characters. With regard to the figure of 
C. Mauritiana in the ‘ Bot. Mag.,’ it was taken from a drawing 
made abroad, by hands evidently not excelling in analyses; and 
in copying it again on stone, the lithographer, perhaps wishing 
to give greater distinctness to an obscurely drawn figure, may 
have made the seed appear almost winged. Bojer, who quotes this 
plate, and who had the plant growing in the Mauritius Garden, 
says most distinctly that, in common with C. floribunda and Tel- 
fairia, it has apterous seeds. It was also a positive mistake when, 
in a drawing of Colea Telfairia, transmitted to Sir W. J. Hooker 
and published in the ‘Bot. Mag.,’ a winged seed was introduced. 
This has been subsequently corrected ; and in quoting t. 2976 of 
the ‘ Bot. Mag.’ in my ‘ Synopsis Crescentiacearum,’ I excluded 
fig.2, as DeCandolle had done before me. Colea Telfairi@ has a 
fleshy indehiscent edible fruit, and is extensively cultivated in 
Madagascar, on account of its nutritious qualities and agreeable 
flavour. If it had a dry woody fruit like the Bignoniacez, how 
could it possibly be eaten? I therefore claim the genus Colea, 
on account of its indehiscent fruit and wingless seeds, as a 
genuine member of Crescentiaceze. Besides, in most Culeas the 
flowers grow out of the trunk and old wood, which to my mind — 
is perfectly convincing that the fruit is of more considerable 
