DIOECIA. 365 



3. Triandria. Elegia and Restio, hard rushy plants, 

 chiefly of the Cape of Good Hope and New Hol- 

 land, appear to be without any difference in the 

 accessory parts of their flowers, which is certainly 

 the case with Empetrum, Engl. Bot. t. 526, Ruscus, 

 t. 560, brought hither from Dioecia Syngenes'ia, 

 Osyris, Exccecaria and Maba ; Caturus only seem- 

 ing differently constructed in this particular ; but I 

 have not been able to examine the three last. 



4. Tetrandria. Trophis, Bat is, and Hippophae, t. 425, 

 are good examples of this, though Mr. Viborg is 

 recorded by Schreber to have occasionally found 



/ 



united flowers, intermixed with the barren ones, in 

 the last-mentioned genus. If this be usual, Hip- 

 pophae must be removed to Polygamia Dioecia. 

 The rest of the Order appear to have the accessory 

 parts alike in both flowers, as Viscum, 1. 1470. 



5. Pentandria. Humulus, t. 427, is almost the only 

 certain instance here. Spinacia, Acnida and Can- 

 nabis would be unexceptionable, but they are less 

 absolutely dioecious, being sometimes monoecious; 

 see p. 252. The rest of the Order is at best doubt- 

 ful ; nor can the pretended amentum of the barren- 

 flowered Pistacia entitle it to a permanent place in 

 this Class, for its fructification is truly a panicle. 

 Clutfa, more properly Cluytia, may possibly remain 

 here. It has no right to a place in the Order 

 Gynandrla. 



