VOL. L.] PHILOSOPHICAL TRANSACTIONS. IJQ 



great many of the plants, which were distributed, and some of them are now 

 growing in the Chelsea garden. And that this shrub grows naturally in Carolina, 

 I can have no doubt, having received the seeds of it 2 or 3 times from the late 

 Dr. Dale, who gathered them in the woods of that country. 



In my paper above-mentioned I likewise observed, that the seeds which were 

 sent to the Royal Society by Father D'Incarville, for those of the true varnish- 

 tree, did not prove to be so ; but the plants raised from them were taken to be 

 referred to the spurious varnish-tree of Kcempfer ; which I believed to be the 

 same, and own that it is yet my opinion, notwithstanding what Mr. Ellis has 

 said to the contrary : for the number of lobes or pinnee, on each leaf, with their 

 manner of arrangement on the midrib, are the same. And here we must ob- 

 serve that the figure of this given by Koempfer is from a flowering branch; 

 and every gardener or botanist must know, that the leaves which are situated im- 

 mediately below the flowers, of most winged-leaved plants, have fewer lobes or 

 pinnae, than those on the lower branches: therefore I must suppose it to be the 

 case in this plant; and from thence, with some other observations which I made 

 on the seeds, I have asserted it to be the wild or spurious varnish tree of Koemp- 

 fer. But Mr. Ellis is of a contrary opinion, because the base of the lobes of 

 those plants, which were raised from Father D'Incarville's seeds, are rounded and 

 indented like 2 ears. In Dr. Koempfer's figure and description of the fasi-no-ki, 

 the leaves are entire, and come to a point at their base. 



Here I think Mr. Ellis is a little too hasty in giving his opinion, as he has not 

 seen this plant in the state that the branch was, from which Koempfer's figure 

 was taken. For as there are often such apparent differences between the leaves 

 on the lower branches of trees, and those which are at their extremities, as that 

 in the descriptive titles of the species Dr. Linneus frequently uses them to distin- 

 guish one from another; so in making the same allowance for the plant in ques- 

 tion, I cannot help thinking that I am in the right, and must abide by my opi- 

 nion, till the plants raised from Father D'Incarville's seeds have flowered, to con- 

 vince me of the contrary. 



However, I cannot help observing, that Mr. Ellis has> given a title to this 

 shrub before he had seen any of the characters, which are necessary to determine 

 the genus. And I have pretty good reason to believe it should not be joined to 

 the rhus ; for the 3 seeds which I received from the Royal Society, were shaped 

 like a wedge, being thicker on one edge than the other, and not unlike those of 

 the beech-tree, as I noted in my catalogue when I sowed them ; and by their 

 structure seemed as if the 3 seeds had been inclosed in the same capsule. If it 

 proves so, this will by no means agree with the characters of rhus: especially if 

 the male flowers should grow on different plants from the fruit, which is what 

 I suspect. Nor can I agree with Dr. Linneus in this particular of joining all 



A a2 



