ROSACEA. 429 



and Anierican botanists, who, from 1822 to 1867, established the 

 thirteen genera Nuttallia, Exochorda, Frinsepia, Jdenosfoma, Cowania, 

 Bencomia, Stranvasia, Maddenia, Canotia, Coleogyne, Chamabatia, 

 Neviiisia and Strephouema. During nearly the same period the 

 Grermans established the genera Eiiphronia,' Fterostemon; FaUugia' and 

 Leucosidea.^ Siebold & Zuccarini, in their investigations of the 

 flora of Japan, discovered the two genera StcplmnandrcC and Bhodo- 

 typos^ A. DE Candolle described the genus Farastemon in 1842, 

 and MiQUEL has recently given a more detailed account" than 

 KoRTHALS of Biemenia and Angelesia, united by others under the 

 generic name of Tnchocarya.^ 



It will be asked, does the order Rosacea, of which the genera 

 here retained include from nine hundred to a thousand species, 

 possess any common absolute characters ? We think not. The 

 flowers, for instance, are no doubt very often regular ; Ijut this is 

 not constant, for a large number of ChrysobalanecB have a unilateral 

 androceum, an excentrically inserted gynccceum, a receptacle with 

 a one-sided tubular cavity. Again, the receptacle is very often 

 concave, with the perianth and androceum perigynous ; so that, 

 generally speaking, we may consider Rosacea a perigynous Ranim- 

 culacece. But the stamens are hypogynous not only in CanoHa, 

 which is a genus of doubtful affinities, but also in Stylobasmm, which 

 cannot be removed to any distance from Lecostemo7i. The gynasceum 

 is often polycarpous ; but the ovary is syncarpous and many-celled 

 in a fair number of the QiiiUajcce, such as Exochorda, Lindleya, 

 Eicphronia, Eucrypliia, &c. Albumen is usually wanting in the 

 seeds ; but it is found to a variable amount in Neillia, Gillenia, 

 Neviusia^ Eucrypliia, Euphronia, Canotia, Furshia, ChamiEhatia, Cotoa- 

 nia, &c. The leaves are almost always alternate ; yet they become 

 opposite in RJtodofypos, which presents in all other respects the vege- 



' Mart., Nov. Gen. et Spec, i. (1824), 121. ^ Fl. Ind.-BaL, i. p. i. (1855), 357. As a 



2 ScHAUEE, Linncea, xx. (1817), 736. doubtful genus of Bosacece, has been described 



3 Endl., Oen. (1836-1840), 1246. S/aphjlor/iodo.t (Tukcz., Hull. Jl/o.io. (1S62), 

 ■* ECKL. & Zeys., JSnum. PL Cap. (1834- ii. 231), a genus said to come from New Zealand, 



1837), 265. but wrongly, say Hentham & Hooker {Gen. 



^ Ahh. Milnch. A7cad.,m. (I8i3), 739. 606), who consider this type altogether un- 



6 FL Jap., 187, t. 90 (1835). certain. 



7 Ann. Mus. Lugcl. Bat., iii. (1867), 236. 



