ULMACEAE. — CELTIS 277 



Western Hupeh: Ichang, A. Henry (No. 2262, type; with ripe fruits); 

 same locality, glens in gorges, August 1901 (Veitch Exped. No. 176P in Herb. New 

 York Bot. Gard.; with almost ripe fruits). 



This species looks very distinct on account of its leaves, which in shape resemble 

 those of a Cercis, but, as 1 have stated under C. labilis Schneider, on p. 267, 

 Wilson's No. 176P seems to be somewhat intermediate between these two species. 

 According to Wilson C. labilis is a tree, while No. 176P forms only a low shrub. 

 The stone of the only fruit of the type I have seen is very smooth, like that of C. 

 Bungeana Blume, while in the tyjiical C. labilis the stones are more or less finely 

 pitted and ribbed; but the stones of the almost ripe fruits of No. 176P are some- 

 what intermediate between these two conditions. 



6. Celtis sinensis Persoon, Syn. I. 292 (1805), descriptio valde manca, sed fide 

 Blume.i — Willdenow, Bed. Baumz. ed. 2, 81 (1811); Enum. PI. Hort. Berol. 

 Suppl. 68 (1813). — Schultes in Roemer & Schultes, Syst. VI. 306 (1820). — Lou- 

 don, Arb. Brit. 111. 1416 (an pro parte?) (1838). — Spach in Ann. Sci. Nat. s6r. 2, 

 XV. 37 (1841); Hist. Veg. XI. 126 (1842). — Blume, Mus. Bot. Lugd.-Bat. II. 

 70 (1852). — Bentham, Fl. Hongk. 324 (1861). — Miquel in Ann. Mus. Lugd- 

 Bat. II. 197 (1865-6); Prol. Fl. Jap. 129 (1866-7). — K. Koch, Dendr. II. pt. 1, 

 431 (1872). — Maximowicz in Bull. Acad. Sci. St. Petersbourg,X\Ul. 293 (1873); 

 in Mel. Biol. IX. 27 (1873), exclud. specim. e China boreali. — Planchon in De 

 Candolle, Prodr. XVII. 172 (1873). — Franchet & Savatier, Enum. PI. Jap. I. 431 

 (1875). — Dippel, Handb. Laubholzk. II. 46 (1892), exclud. icone. — Hemsley in 

 Jour. Linn. Soc. XXVI. 450 (pro parte) (1894). — Henry in Trans. As. Soc. Jap. 

 XXIV. Suppl. 85 {List PI. Formosa) (1896), exclud. No. 1616. — Mouillefert, 

 Traite Arb. Arbriss. II. 1209 (1898). — Pahbin in Act. Hort. Petrop. XVIII. 190 

 {Consp. Fl. Kor. II.) (1900). — Schneider, III. Handb. Laubholzk. I. 229, fig. 147 r-r^, 

 148 r (1904). — Matsumura & Hayata in Jour. Coll. Sd. Tokyo, XXII, 370 

 (Enum. PI. Formes.) (1906). — Nakai in Jour. Coll. Sci. Tokyo, XXXI. 192 {Fl. 

 Kor. II.) (1911); Icon. PI. Koisik. I. 3, t. 2, fig. II. (1911). — Matsumura, Ind. 

 PI. Jap. II. pt. 2, 32 (1912). — Dunn & Tutcher in Kew Bull. Misc. Inform, add. 

 ser. X. 243 {Fl. Kwangtung & Hongk.) (1912). 



Celtis orientalis Thunberg, Fl. Jap. 114 (non Linnaeus) (1784). 



Celtis Willdenowiana Schultes in Roemer & Schultes, Syst. VI. 306 (1820).— 

 Loudon, Arb. Brit. III. 1416 (1838). — Siebold & Zuccarini in Abh. Akad. Munch. 

 IV. pt. 3, 222 {Fl. Jap. Fam. Nat. II. 98) (1846). — Planchon in Ann. Sci. Nat. 

 s6r. 3, X. 287 (1848). 



Celtis japonica Planchon in De Candolle, Prodr. XVII. 172 (1873). 



CHINA. Kwangtung: Soo-kun-po, March 8, 1893, C. Ford (flowering 

 branchlets). Hongkong: 1853-Q, C. Wright (No. 4:57; with very young fruits) ; 

 same locality (No. 1068 Herb. Hance; sub nom. C. serotina Planch, distributa; vix 

 indigena; with young fruits); same locality, planted, C. Wilford (with flowers and 

 with very young fruits). Kiangsu: " S'un Ss'on Chi," temple of the God of 

 War, June 2, 1913, J. Bailie (No. 6; with unripe fruits). Formosa: without 

 precise locahty, 1864, R. Oldham (Nos. 512, 513; both with unripe fruits). 



1 The description runs: " fol. lato-ovatis crenatis glaberrimis, venis prominen- 

 tibus. Hab. in Sina. Ex. hort. Celsii. Fol. majuscula, obtusa." According to the 

 phrase " fol. glaberrimis," one might be inclined to refer Persoon's name to what is 

 now called C. Bungeana, but Blume had seen Persoon's type, and says: ''Specimen 

 genuininn Hcrbarii Person exacte congruit cum aliis arborum juniorum ex Japonia." 

 It is on the authority of Blume's statements that I accept Persoon's name for 

 this species. 



