264 ON THREE NEW CHINESE CALAMI. 
deficiency of authentic specimens in my own herbarium. i 
Amongst the older writers, Rumphius,* in his noble ** Herbarium 
i ear 
Palmarum” ; but it is almost needless to say that this costly work 18 
inaccessible to me where I am writing. Many Calami are elaborately 
escribed, and roughly though no doubt correctly figured, in Griffith’s 
“Palms of British India,” a work which, in common with his ot 
scientific religuia, has greatly suffered from discreditably careless 
Miquel, in the third volume of his «Flora Indi ” which 18 
certainly the most useful manual for the study of the Asiatic species. 
Sin n, Dr. Thwaites has characterised three new 
f which is unfortunately still unknown ; ant 
result I huve arrived at is that they are distinct from all the Indian oF 
* Herb. Amboin., v. 97—119., t. 51—58. 
Tt Fi. Cochinchin., ed, Willd., i., 260. sqq- 
} Fl. Indica, iii., 773. sqq. 
+ ? : 1 refers 
i rs pl. Zeyl, 431, Amongst the indigenous species, Dr. Thwaites 
alists, Loureiro’s is equally unknown, and the i 
the two is altogether problematical gee tye brogag ohne 
C. rudentus (sic !) belongs to either.’ whilst there is no 
| Journ, Linn. Soc, Bot., vi,, 9—11. 
