1897.] D. Praia — Some additional Leg umi noses. 479 



A tree, leaflets thinly subcoriaceous, glabrous, oblique obovate-oblong, the lowest 

 pair the smallest 2-3 in. long. Flowers in rather lax, few-fld. racemes, 1 in. long, 

 outer bracts ovate-acute '25 in. long, pedicels faintly puberulous '5 in. long. Sepals 

 '2 in. long, reflexed. Filaments twice the calyx. Ovary puberulous except along the 

 side whence the style arises, which is quite glabrous. Ripe pods not seen. 



This species is mentioned by Col. Beddome under t. 316 of the Flora Sylvatica 

 and again by Mr. Baker under G. inaequalifolia in the Flora of British India ii. 268, 

 apropos of S. Kanara specimens which the writer has not seen. In 1880 Col. 

 Beddome sent to Dr. King from the Wynaad two specimens with the note : — " Cyno- 

 metra n. sp. This is mentioned at tab. 316, Fl. Sylvatica." They are in flower 

 and in very young fruit, and the above diagnosis is made from them. The plant, as 

 Mr. Baker suggests, is nearest C. inaequalifolia but is abundantly distinct from that 

 species. 



4. Cynometra cauliflora Linn. 



The expanded filaments of this species make its flowers very readily distinguish- 

 able from those of C. ramijlora L. subsp. genuina which it much resembles in leaves. 



It is a purely garden species without the slightest right to be considered indi- 

 genous in India. 



5. Cynometra polyandra Roxb. 



Var ? Kurzii Pram, Joum. As. Soc. Beng. Ixvi. 2. 200 ; leaflets 

 large, pods very rugose. C. cauliflora Wall, Gat. 5816 (E only). 



Penang ; Jack ( Wall. Oat. 5816 B) ! Kurz ! on Govt. Hill " Apl 

 1890 " and " May 1893, " Curtis ! Perak ; Scortechim / 



This has the puberulous leaf-rachis of typical C. polyandra but its very different 

 pod makes the writer believe that it may be necessary to recognise in it a distinct 

 species, C. Kurzii. Up till now only leaf specimens of this have been obtained by 

 Jack, Curtis and Scortechini, with a solitary fruiting specimen obtained by Kurz. 

 There are no specimens of C. polyandra proper from Penang or from Malacca in the 

 Calcutta Herbarium. 



305. SINDORA Miq. 



This genus has been long known but apparently usually little understood. First 

 described by Rumphius under the name " Caju Galedupa " and quite unmistakeably 

 depicted in Herb. Amboin. ii. t. 13, it thus forms as to citation a part of the genus 

 Galedupa Lamk. (Encycl. Meth. ii. 594 [1786]) ; the description there given applies, 

 however, only to the " Pungam " of Rheede (Hort. Malab. vi. t. 3) which is the basis 

 of the genus named Pongam by Adanson (Fam. ii. 322 [1763]) and which is still 

 known under a less barbarous form of this name (Pongamia) proposed in 1803 by 

 Ventenat; the form Pungamia proposed by Lamarck in 1797 on his discovery of the 

 error of his identification of 1786, has not, for some reason, been generally 

 accepted. 



Willdenow (Sp. PI. iii. 902 [1799]) in pointing out that his Dalbergia arborea is 

 the plant described by Lamarck as Galedupa indica has been careful to exclude the 

 Rumphian synonym. And Buchanan- Hamilton, one of the ablest critical botanists 

 of his day, suggested the affinity of Rumphius' plant with Copaifera, to which it is 

 indeed exceedingly closely allied. But in opposition to the sound judgment of 

 Willdenow and in spite of the very happy suggestion of Hamilton, Wight and Arnott 



