





256 



STEXO STOMA. 





This table shows that in 1828 Dr. Wallich issued 



gatherings of G. parviflt 



to Heyne's Herbarium and one obtained by his Collector, DeSilva, in Silhet 



n. 2158/1 in the Catalog 



of necessity the true type of G 



ifl 



rum, one belonging 

 The former, being 

 Its exact locality, it 



ought to be observed, is unknown. If it had, like nearly all Heyne's other specimens, been collected 

 in Southern India, it is extremely strange that it should never have been 



met with by subsequent 



opinion that it is from Nepal is undoubtedly unfounded ; 



Wallich does not state that Heyne's plant came from Nepal, indeed Heyne had no means of obtain- 



collector 



And Mr. Bentham 



ing Nepalese plants ; Wallich does not himself appear to have obtained any form of G 



m 



Nepal 



found 



nor 



Nepal 



he anywhere say that he did; finally, if any form of G. 



is reasonable to 



iVK 



W 



be met with there, since th 



that it will be vab. ft 



parviflorum 



ultimately 



(Bentham's G. muftiflorum) that 



Eastern II 



So far as is known, var. 



the only form that has hitherto been reported from Sikkim or the 



Brahmaputra; all the gatherings up to 

 gong, the Chindwin valley, Lower Burn 

 peninsulas, it is almost certain that his 



confined to Indo-China — to the 



1890 



from 



yf the 



and Siam 



Lower Assam, Manipur, the Lushai hills, Chitt 



Heyne obtained 



from both the Indian 



came from some part of the area indicated above 



Th 



gathering forms only part of Cat. n. 2158/2; it is the part marked " SiUet " in the type Herbarium 



is the same as 2158/D 



and, though conspecifio with n. 2158/1, it constitutes a distinct variety and 



farinosus Ham. Mss.) described above as G, 



ifl 



by Mr. Bentham (1835) accorded specific rank under the 



Cat 



var. farinosa. This 

 G. mitltifli 



the plant that 

 The remainder of 



OB 



Cat 



2158/2, marked in the type Herbarium « Gentea Mts.," agrees exactly with the plant issued 



n. 



2159/1 (1828) 



In the same year (1828) Dr. W r allich issued two gatherings of G. crinitum, 



one collected by 



himself in Penang in 1822, the other obtained by his Collector, Gomez, in Tavoy. These were publ 



and 



But in 1829 Dr. Wallich had noticed that 



the " Gentea Mts." portion of his n. 2158/2. He therefore 



n. 2159/1 



the 



Lith. Cat. p. 92) as G. parviflorum Cat 



8/C. So that in 1829 



that year (as he 



in 



if G. crinitum. But 



diff 



horls— a cha 



of 



from 2159/1 (converted into 2158/C) 



2159/2 



in 



left as the type 

 having condensed 



all 



fior\ 

 nnd 



the two are certainly conspecifio 



and in having glabrous calyces— an accident and not a character at 



there is no room f 

 must be here r 



If, therefore, Dr. Wallich rightly referred 2159/1 



the species G. crinitum at all. But if there be 



G. parii- 



room for the 



peated that 2159/1 and 



9/2 



are 



undoubtedly 



a species G. crinitum 



then there 



the 



of part of that species as G. parviflorum because it happens to agree exactly with 



Gentea Mts." portion of n. 2158/2. For this very "Gentea Mts 



•8/1, which is the type of G. parviflorum, and 



plant agrees badly with 



hich 



agrees 



less with the rest of 2158/2, along 



At the time that Dr. Wallich made this change in the des 



of 2159/1, he issued three more gatherings as G 



were collected by the same botanist (Buchanan-Hamilt 



though at different seasons of the year. Dr. Buchanan-Hamilt 

 and as a matter of fact they are identical, and' are 



gnation and number 

 onim. Two of these appear as 2158/D, both 



at the same place (Goalpara in Assam), 



named both "Leonurus farinosus 



Th 



are specimens of G. parvifl* 



moreover the same as the "SiUet 



»> 



farinosa, and therefore of true 



of 2158/2 



gathering belonged to Herb. Finlays 



multiflorum Benth 



The 



is typical G.parvifl* 



from Siam; it is the same as 2158/1, and therefore 



In 

 of 1829 



As. Ear. ii (1831)— Table XIII, column 



that 



remark is called for 



again in DC 



gardi 



» 



Mr. Bentham followed Dr. Wallich's disposition 



xii (1848)— Table XIII, column 4 



this work. But iu Lab. G 



Dr. Wallich into Cat. n. 2158/2, and 



Mr. Bentham 



et Sp. (1835) and 



the eonfus: 



itroduced 



that gathering as G, multifl 



though 



2158/D, which exactly agrees with the type of his G 



tify it raises to specific rank the "Sillet" portion of 

 ather strangely he does not mention the Goalpara 



itiflorum, Bentham therefore confines 



multifli 



to be Nepalese, but which in reality came from Heyne 

 wo cannot now ascertain), n. 2158/C (which 



iflorum three gatherings 



was 



Mts 



» 



port 



of 



n. 



Drs. W 



2158/2 



which is conspecifio with 



m. Having separated off G. 



; n. 2158/1 (which he supposed 



Herbarium and the exact locality of which 

 ginally issued as n. 2159/1), and the " Gentea 



n. 



teid Miquel have both followed his arrangement— Bentham has advanced to 



2158/C. In these works therefore — and 



specific 



