198 
closely, in its leaves especially, to that spe- 
cimen in Hermann's Herbarium, which 
may be considered as the type of Linnzus’ 
Cambogia Gutta. A loose fruit, pasted 
on the sheet with Konig's plant, probably 
belongs to the larger portion, and resem- 
bles Gertner’s Morella.” 
It appears then that the generic name of 
Xanthochymus must be dropped, and that 
the species which belonged to this genus 
must receive the appellation of Stalagmitis. 
It seems too, that the generic character of 
Stalagmitis by Murray, so far as regards 
the flower and inflorescence, was not taken 
from the plant he meant to describe, but 
from the flowers of Xanthochymus (Sta- 
lagmitis) ovalifolius, which Konig had in- no 
advertently fastened to it; and lastly, that 
it is not known that any specimens of the 
flowers of the plant which Murray meant 
to describe, at least not any sufficiently 
perfect for examination, had been received 
in Europe, till those arrived which I owe 
to Mrs. Walker. The examination of these, 
proves that the plant is no Stalagmitis. It 
differs wholly in the number of the parts 
of the flower and cells of the fruit, in the 
structure of the calyx, corolla, and sta- 
mens ; in the absence of intervening glands 
between the stamens, in the structure of 
the leaves, in the appearance of the fruit, 
and in the structure of the persistent 
stigma. While I remain quite certain 
that this plant is the Garcinia Morella of 
Gertner, an opinion which was first formed 
from an inspection of the specimen in fruit 
from Mr. Blair, the examination of Mrs. 
Walker’s specimens has induced me to re- 
move the plant from the genus Garcinia. 
The structure of the stamens is quite pecu- 
liar, and quite unlike that of any species of 
Garcinia with which I am acquainted, in 
which the free portion of the filament is 
thread-like,and the anther bilocular,opening 
longitudinally. In Mrs. Walker’s flowers, 
on the contrary, the free part of the sta- 
mens is thick and clavate, and the anthers 
Open by the complete circumcision of a 
singular umbilicate, flat, and terminal lid, 
the elliptical pollen-granules being im- 
mersed in cellular substance. 
For these reasons, I cannot hesitate in 
REMARKS ON THE GAMBOGE TREE OF CEYLON. 
believing that the Gamboge plant of 
lon belongs to a nondescript genus, ch 
Having communicated this opinion to Mr. 
Brown, he replied, “In your plant, the 
markable, and might well induce you to 
consider it as forming a distinct genus; but 
it is right to add, that approaches to his 
analogy with the ordinary structure of the 
family, exist in Garcinia, with which I | 
suppose your plant would agree in its i 
male flower, as well as in fruit." 
probability which is given to this conjec- 
ture by Mr. Brown having formed it, 
cept by stating, that there are within 
persistent calyces of the fruit, abortive it 
form stamens, very much resembling those 
which are found similarly attached to 
fruit of Garcinia. 
The resemblance to the Ceylon plant, of 
the inflorescence and form of the flowet- 
bud, of Garcinia elliptica ( Wallich’s Last, 
No. 4869), led me to examine its — 
in connexion with this subject, and I | 
it also to have male blossoms, with stamens 
precisely similar. Sir W. J. i 
also struck with the resemblance, : 
obligingly forwarded to me his pesos 
for examination. His flowers were further 
advanced than mine, and on my requesting 
him to steep one, he sent me drawing? 
which it is impossible to dis 
those taken from the Ceylon plant. 
— 
mn 
T 
flowers in either species; 
not misunderstand Mrs. Walker, 
is not mistaken, which is less likely, : 
Ceylon plant is monecious. uc 
it is us certain that the tree of Ot. 
yields a Gamboge, fit for all the purpose? : 
of that from Siam, and equal to 1t m Q7 — 
t, however, 
the 
rocess is improved. At presen A: 
we have no direct testimony a$ 
