THE PLOEA HONGKONGENSIS. 23 



*Statice. 



S. hicolor, Bunge, to which Mr. Bentham suspected S. amends 

 to be referable, seems to me to differ in many respects. A plant 

 also from Loochoo, gathered by Mr. Charles Wright, is, I think, 

 a distinct species, iatermediate between /S. sinensis, Q-ir., and S. 

 japonica f, S. & Z., which I have described (Ann. Sc. Nat. Par. 

 ser. 5, V. 236) under the name of 8. WrigJitii. 



20. Plumbago zeylanica, lAnn. ; Boiss. in DC. Prod. xii. 692. 



Not uncommon, in waste places and hedges, on the south side 

 of the island, and abundant in the neighbourhood of Stanley. 

 A common weed in many places on the mainland, extending 

 throughout the tropical regions of Asia and Africa, the Cape- 

 Verdes, Northern and Eastern Australia, and several of the Po- 

 lynesian islands. 



*Maesa Dorsna, Blume, j3. coriacea, Hance in Ann. Sc. Nat. Par, ser. 

 5, V. 226. (=M8esa coriacea. Champ.; Benth. Fl. Hongk. 204.) 

 Not in any way distinguishable as a species from the Japanese 

 type, which is found in Fokien province. 



*Ardisia punctata, Lindl., 



though not differing from A. crispa, A. DC, as stated in the 

 ' Elora Hongkongensis,' by obtuse calyx-lobes (for they are often 

 quite acute), is very different in habit and especially in inflores- 

 cence. I believe the Hongkong plant named A. crispa to belong 

 to A. DeCandolle's variety /3. elegant ; and I do not think A. 

 divergens, Eoxb., is specifically different. Cfr. 'Ann. Sc. Nat. 

 Par.' ser. 5, v. 226. 



*Symplocos microcarpa, Champ. 



I have little doubt that this, of which I have only seen a single 

 specimen, is referable to 8. lancifolia, S. & Z. Beyond leaves 



neither the Azaleas of modern writers, Wwdora, nor Osmothamnus, can be 

 maintained as genera,'_hut he still retains the name of Loiseleuria for the Euro- 

 pean plant. The identification of Azalea sguamata with Rhododendron FarreriB, 

 which I have taken from this memoir, I had myself arrived at, from the cha- 

 racters given in the ' Prodromus,' as far back as 1845, and written on my own 

 herbarium ticket ; but I subsequently supposed it impossible that Prof. Lindley, 

 who was so intimately connected with horticulture, could have described as 

 new a species which he must have seen in cultivation years before, and which 

 had been figured by Sweet. 



t This, Mr. Bentham (PI. Austr. iv. 267) reduces to S. australis, Spr., and 

 he does not think 8. sinensis will prove distinct. 



