22, MATERIALS FOR A FLORA OF THE MALAYAN PENINSULA. 
-speak of varieties. At St. Bernard, where the two Ranunculi grow 
together by thousands, no hybrid has been observed, though some 
-large forms of ~ pyreneus with laciniated vonez have been found 
there. M. Bus Conservator of the Herbarium DC., says in 
Gremli’s Beitr. FL Schweiz. fasc. 4, p. 7, that eee! varieties of R. 
In , 
written a long article to prove that the hybrid does not exist. 
‘None of the varieties mentioned by these authors appear to agree 
with the figure given by Bellardi. M. Burnat has written a paper 
on the eae Nese is now in the printer’s hands. It would be 
interesting to why this plant of Bellardi, now re-discovered 
after . years, should have been found only in three or four sites 
Wi es of each other, seeing that its ged are so 
eiiiay dsibued, and so common bce und together.—C. Bic i 
New Srations or Intsh Pranrs. — Under this title Mr.  beadl 
gai (Journ. ae 1890, 362) eo, Atriple« arenaria Woods, 
m ‘‘sea-shore near Neweastle, o. Down his plant was 
re there by 7 ohn Tampon: in es as ona in Stewart and 
Corry’s Flora of the North-east of Ireland, and Ne onele. is still a 
well-known station for it among local trae ts.—. oyD PRAEGER. 
NOTICES OF BOOKS. 
Materials for a Flora of the Malayan Peninsula. 1 [1889]; 
No. 2 [1890]. By Groree Kina, F.R.S., Supermntettient of 
the Royal Basie Garden, Calcutta. [Reprinted from the 
Journ. Asiat. Soc., Bengal, v. 58, part 2, n. 4; and vy. 59, 
part 2, n. 2]. 
Arter the ea ra ee Signa of the local Floras of 
England, France, Germany, &c., we have lately seen a Flora of 
Europe compiled (in the aa out of hers local Picran) by Nyman. 
ifferent circumstances have necessitated a reversed procedure in 
the case of the Flora of PREC India. This Flora, which (im- 
perfectly known) may run to 17,000 sie " S gon (in number 
of species) than the Flora “of Kurope: but s, both as regards 
economic value and difficulty of working = co aueh larger, 
owing to ar larger percentage of trees, large shrubs and woody 
climbers in 
Sir J. D Hooker, in 1872, commenced his Flora of British 
India with the modest statement that he put it ees only as a 
handbook to what was already known, and a pioneer to more com- 
plete works. It is true that there were ened local Floras, 
such as aces Enum. Pl. Ls peeener: s Catal. Pl. Kumaon, 
& Gibson’s Bombay Fl., Wight & Arnott’s Prodr. Fl. 
Peninsula (a fragment); but it were lists without descriptions 
(except of species described for the first =. or otherwise (as to 
synonymy, geographical distribution, &c.), so imperfect, that t the 
Flora of British India has not been compiled to any considerable 
