xsxii Apj)endix. 



part the aiitlior writes : " P. longissimwn, referred to Pseudopanax crassifoliiim 

 by Seeman (Journ. Bot., 1864). * -■" * Mr. Logan lias sent me 

 specimens clearly showing that it is the yoimg state of Panax crassifolium." 

 With the opinion thus expressed by Seeman, and confirmed by the author 

 of the " species," I entirely agree. 



Mr. Buchanan, however, does not accept this opinion, but in Trans. 

 N.Z. Inst., vol. IX., p. 529, has applied the name " longissimum " to the 

 tyx^ical P. crassifolmm, and under the name " cmssifolium " has, in part at 

 least, described a totally distinct plant. While I fully agree with him in 

 considering that more than one sx^ecies has been confused under P. " cras- 

 sifoliiim " (Den. and Planch.), it is with regret that I find myself unable to 

 adopt either of his conclusions — 1st, because Hooker's P. hnyissimiim is, as 

 stated by him, clearly identical with P. crassifoliiim (Den. and Planch.) ; 2nd, 

 Buchanan's P. crassifuliiim consists of two species — the trifoliolate state of 

 the true plant mixed with a totally different plant, one, moreover, quite 

 unknown to Banks and Solander, 



1st. That Hooker's P. lonijissimiun is identical with the true P. crassi- 

 foliiim might be taken for granted on his own statement already quoted, but 

 as confirming it, I may point out that, although in Fl. Nov.-Zel. (I., p. 96), 

 the leaves of the young plant of Aralia crassifuUa are correctly described as 

 simple and remotely toothed, in the Handbook all description of leaves of 

 this form is omitted under P. crassifolimn, and the simple linear form of 

 leaf is transferred bodily to P. longissimum , so that the description of the 

 leaves of P. crassifolimn commences with the second or trifoliolate stage. 

 Further, both plants are expressly said to be common throughout the 

 colony. 



2nd. It is still more easy to shoAV that Mr. Buchanan's P. crassifoliiim 

 is not the plant of Banks and Solander (except with regard to the trifoliolate 

 leaves which have no connection with the young, simple leaves, and the 

 mature fruited state with which he has associated them). 



The young leaves of his plant are as shown by his drawing (Plate XX.) 

 UTegularly lobulate-dentate, with stout hooked teeth capable of inflicting a 

 nasty wound if incautiously handled ; a peculiar character, differing widely 

 from the true plant, and which would not have escaped the notice of Banks 

 and Solander. Moreover, they are never succeeded by trifoliolate leaves ; 

 those described by him, and preserved in the Colonial Herbarium, belong to 

 the true jalant (his P. longissimum), and to that alone, as is evident from 

 their texture. Again, the umbels of P. crassifoliiim are described by Hooker 

 as " composed of several very spreading rays." In Mr. Buchanan's plate 

 (XX.), which represents the staminate plant, the umbel consists of nearly 

 simple racemes, and in the pistillate plant is remarkably compact, consist- 

 ing of simple 1-3-flowered rays. 



