224 BULLETIN DE L'HERBIER BülSSIER (2 me SÉR.). 1905 (61) 



715. Paracelastrus bivalvis Miq. — Ruins at Angkor, 1875 (Lebeuf). 



As to the identity of this plant, the following note by Sir George King is of 

 importance {Mat. Fl. Malay Penins. p. 627) : « The plant here described is that 

 « issued by Wallich doubtfully as Microtropis under the name M. f bivalvis. 

 « This is not, as Wallich apparently supposed, the plant published by Jack in 

 « 1820 (Malayan Miscellanies, n. 5) as Celastrus ? bivalvis ; for Jack describes 

 « his plant as apetalous. I hâve seen no authentic spécimen of Jack's plant; but 

 « I have little doubt that it is, as Miquel believed, the same as the species to 

 « receive which that botanist founded in 1859 the genus Paracelastrus. Wallich 

 « issued under his catalogue-number 7270, and the name « Euonymus capilla- 

 « eeus », a Penang plant with solitary capillary extra-axillary pedicels; but his 

 « spécimens have neither flower nor fruit. It is possible that this may be the 

 « lost Celastrus? bivalvis of Jack. » 



As to the status of Wallich 's generic and specific names, and their claim to 

 récognition, the following remark of Mr. C. B. Clarke (Fl. of Koh Chang, VII, 

 p. 172, in Bot, Tidsskrift, XXVI [June, 1904], p. 324) is much to the point : 

 — « Wallich's List of bare names was not printed; a few lithographed copies 

 « were made. The plants were (largely) sorted by hand and eye only, so that 

 « the number of mixed species in the type-set (omitting the issued duplicates) is 

 « large and of mixed gênera considérable; on thèse facts botanists now hesitate 

 « to accept Wallich's List as published species. » So many errors and so much 

 confusion have arisen in acceptiug or in attempting to défend the stability of 

 Wallich's names, that in the présent Enumeration his names are taken up as 

 little as possible; and only then when no alternative names are available for 

 use. W T allich appears to have founded the genus Microtropis (which, by the 

 way, he never defined in printed characters) ou his n. 4340; and it was so taken 

 up (in part) by Lawson in Hooker's FI. Brit. fnd. I, p. 614. By keeping up and 

 by recognizing Miquel's genus Paracelastrus, ail this confusion and ambiguity is 

 avoided. 



Five other species of Microtropis have been enumerated, ail figured by Wight 

 in his le. FI. Indice Orientalis, and thèse I now lake the opportun! ty of trans- 

 l'erring under the same specific names to Paracelastrus ; and there would thus 

 come under this genus the following — P. densiflorus, P. microcarpus, P. ovali- 

 folius, P. ramiflorus, and P. Wallichianus. Sir George King himself admits 

 the feasibility of the claims of Paracelastrus to considération. Microtropis 

 E. Meyer (1835), a S. African genus of Leguminaceae, need not now therefore 

 give way to Euchlora Eckl. et Zeyh. (1836). 



Trib. EuCELASTREiE 



716. Celastrus paniculatus W. — Siam (Pierre, n. 4069). 



717. Gymnosporia Curtisii King, Mat. FI. Malay Penins. p. 639, ex Joum. 

 Asiat. Soc. Bengal, 1896. — Kedah (Curtis, n. 2500). 



