1839] 



Bern arks 07i Lanrus Cassia. 



13S 



oLher respects considerable, he had not the means of detecliwg the discre- 

 pancy, and unsuspectingly adopted Biirman's figure and name as a syno- 

 nym to his plant.In Rheedes Hortus Malabaricus (1 tab. 57) he found the 

 figure of another cinnamon, even more closely resembling his plant in 

 its general aspect than Burman's figure, this he also associated as a sy- 

 nonym ; and Rheedes' plant being lauded on account of the aromatic pro- 

 perties of its bark and leaves, which resemble the true ciimamonj 

 though it is not the genuine cinnamon tree, he seems to have consider- 

 ed himself quite safe in associating this also, and called the three speciesj 

 this tria juncta in uno plant, Laurus Cassia, and assigned it as the 

 source of the officinal " Cassia Lignea cortex.^' 



After this exposition of the origin of the species Laurus Cassia, it can 

 scarcely be a matter of surprise that no two botanists have ever agreed 

 as to the plant which ought to bear the name : nor, that not one of them 

 should ever have surmised what plant Linnaeus had constituted the type 

 of his species. It is not my intention on the present occasion to extend 

 these remarks, by tracing the various conjectures that have been promul- 

 gated on the subject ; suffice it to say that no one, so far as I am aware, 

 has taken a similar view as that now explained. It only further remains 

 for me to give some account of the three species thus erroneously 

 associated. 



The first mentioned, Dawalkurundu, Linnseus' own plant and the 

 type of the species is, I believe, the ZrawrMs involucrafa of Vahl, and of 

 Lamark in the Encyclopedie Methodique, and has in Professor Neesj 

 monograph of the Indian Laurinse (Wall. Plant. As. rariores), received 

 the name of Tetradenia Zeylanica, but is the L'ltsea Zeylanica of a for- 

 mer work of his, a name, which I presume must be restored, owing to 

 the other being preoccupied. The slight difference of structure does not 

 seem to render a new genus necessary. 



The second and third have both been referred, by the same eminent 

 botanist, to his variety of the true cinnamon, the Cinnamomum 

 Zeylanicum, a decision to w^hich I cannot subscribe, as I cannot per- 

 ceive that either of these figures are referable to any form of that spe- 

 cies, and they besides differ specifically from each other. 



The Cinnamomum perpetuo florens appears to me a perfectly distinct 

 species, very nearly allied to, if not actually identical with, Nees' own 

 species C. Sulphur aUm, of which I have now got specimens from 

 Ceylon. This I infer from the appearance of the plant as repvesented 

 in the figure, for if any dependence is to be placed on the description, it 

 is impossible to admit it into the genus. On this however, I do not feel 

 disposed to place much reliance, as it was not the practice a century ago, 



