274 
ON A NEW 4ARALIACEA OF UNCERTAIN ORIGIN. 
By H. F. Hance, Pa.D., &c. 
Some thirty and odd years ago a West of England journalist, in 
chronic warfare with an energetic prelate, emphatically one of the 
church militant, wrote of his adversary that, ‘‘ though always in 
hot water, he never came out of it any the cleaner.” There is 
a 
brushings- whi 
resulted in reducing it to suc s its manipu- 
lators might have hoped for. ws vo a in  banie — 
Ia 
Latimer’ s dictum will bey to ie present hie quite as fully as 
id to his ecclesiastical antagonist. And this is owing to the fact 
that it seems well nigh impossible to form clearly defined groups in 
it. Almost every newly discovered species has something or other 
peculiar* which, in the eyes of many botanists, entitles it to 
generic rank ; and, on the other hand, those aienice who hold 
to synthetic views are puzzled how to fix the limits of area) so as 
to include Br we differing in a variety of minor points floral 
taken as the best examples,—most of the conse —— have been 
proposed consist of groups of a disagreeing in a number of 
but he himself expressed oo dissatisfaction saith the scheme . 
had elaborated,} and Baillon has since greatly cut down the number 
of genera, and also reduced Araliacee to a tribe of dais in 
which view I certainly feel strongly disposed to concur. M. 
chal, of Brussels, is, * believe, at present engaged in the study of 
the order: his task will be a very difficult one, wie it is abundantly 
evident that all the genera require a thorough recasting. 
My attention was directed Be We group by presen from 
* See the Fenearky. of Dr. Boooari on. wine Segngome 28 i, eareh which 
invalidates the claim of Plerandree to be maintained as aillon had 
previously denied that of Méchialayien (‘ Mamta xii. 13 31). 
+ Gen. Plant. i. 932, 
