Macbride — Notes on certain Leguminosae 23 
Bauhinia Horsfieldii (Miq.), comb. nov. Lasiobema map 
Mig. FI. Ind. Bot. i. pt. 1, 71 (1855). B. anguina Roxb., var. 
fieldit Watt ex Prain, Journ. As. is Beng. lxvi. pt. 2. 194 neon): 
Craib, Contrib. FI. Siam, 75 (1912). 
This plant is closely related it is true to B. anguina Roxb. to 
which species Baker in Hook. Fl. Brit. Ind. ii. 284 (1878) reduces 
it outright but the characters Prain and Craib find and regard as 
signifying varietal rank appear to be constant and therefore the 
plant is better treated it seems to me as specifically distinct. These 
characters moreover are of no slight moment, — the difference in 
the size of the pods of B. Horsfieldii and B. anguina is marked and 
equally so is the contrast between the definitely pilose inflorescence 
of the former and the faintly puberulous inflorescence of the latter. 
Then, too, B. anguina, except for the inflorescence, is glabrous; 
the leaves of B. Horsfieldii, even in age, are more or less puberu- 
lent beneath. 
Ba Wallichii ov. B. macrostachya Wall. ex Baker 
in Hook. FI. Brit. tdi a P81 (1878), no B. macrostachya Benth. in 
Hook. Journ. Bot. ii. 96 (1840 
Taubert in Engl. & Prantl. Natirl. Pflanzenf. iii. Abt. 3. 149 
(1892), renamed the plant of Bentham but it is rather that of 
Wallich that requires a new name. B. macrostachya Wall. Cat. 
5774 (1831-1832) is a name only, not published with description 
until after the appearance of B. macrostachya Benth. 
BAUHINIA DIPTERA Blume ex Miq. Anal. Ind. i. 12 (1850). 
glabrifolia Baker in Hook. Fl. Brit. Ind. ii 281 (1878). 
Prain, Journ. As. Soc. Beng. Ixvi. pt. 2. 193 (1897), would tit 
press Blume’s name and substitute that of Baker because the’ 
term diptera “ is quite inappropriate when used in connection with 
flowering branches of adult plants’ and accordingly “it seems 
much better to neglect it.” However, the species must be known 
by Blume’s name since it is the earlier. It is interesting to note 
that Prain’s choice of name, glabrifolia, is as inappropriate during 
a portion of the species’ history as diptera since young plants and 
leafy shoots are distinctly silky-pubescent! 
Apuleja | (Vogel), comb. eee Leptolobium ? leiocarpum 
Vogel, Littecs, 2 i. 393 (June-July, 1837). A.praecox Mart. Flora, 
Xx. vol. ii. Beiblatter 8. 123 (Nov., 1837). 
Although it has not been possible to determine the exact date of 
the publication of Vogel’s name it seems evident without reason- 
