HARDWICKE'S BOTANICAL DRAWINGS 239 
the idea of a more diffuse shrub than is represented in Thomson’s 
plate, but the two are evidently identical. 
he identity of Catamixis with the ‘‘Prenanthes”’ of As. Res. has 
not, I think, been suspected; nor is this remarkable, as = printed 
‘ : M 
ion :— 
‘Found (April 7th 1796) growing out of the indurated clay 
banks of the Ganges on the east side the River one mile below the 
ds. Seeds five, crown’d with a hairy pappus. Receptacle 
naked.” The description is dated ‘‘ Futtehgurh, June 1797, T. H.” 
82. Encetuarptia spicata Bl. * Ca 1s doubtful,’’ As. Res. 
vi. 374. ‘‘ Between Belkate and Nataana, April 1796. T.H.” 
‘* Moha, country name.” 
83. Tecoma unputata G. Don. Not in As. Res. 
g r i 
to the right of the Road leading to Anophsheer.” The description 
is dated “‘ March 17th 1796,” and must have been written in the 
