182 
ROBINSON. 
at the apex, bluish- or brownish-green on the upper surface, paler or 
glaucous beneath, 7-16 cm long, 3-6.1 cm wide, with 8-12, most fre- 
quently 9, pairs of primary veins, arched-anastomosing and forming a 
conspicuous inner and a less distinct outer marginal vein, secondary and 
tertiary venation also fairly conspicuous. 
Type collected at Sax River, District of Zamboanga, Mindanao, by R. S. 
Williams, no. 2306, in flower, February 14, 1905. Also represented by For. Bur. 
9279 Whitford & Hutchinson, from Port Banga in the same district, in flower, 
January 2, 1908. 
CAPPARIDACE2E. 
CLEOME Linn. 
Cleome gynandra Linn. Sp. PL (1753) 671. 
C. pentaphylla Linn. Sp. PI. ed. 2 (1763) 938. 
Sinapistrum pentaphy&m Medic, ex Index Ivew. 2 (1895) 914. 
Pedicellaria pentaphylla Schrank in Roemer & Usteri Bot. Mag. 3 (1790) 8, 10. 
Gynandropsis pentaphylla DC. Prodr. 1 (1824) 238. 
This was described by Linnaeus in the first edition of the Species Plantarum 
as the second species of Cleome, but in the second edition he apparently con- 
sidered that he had united three species under this name, and divided it accord- 
ingly, making C. pentaphylla the second of the three, but retaining under it 
every word of description and every reference cited under C. gynandra. The 
latter name was dropped altogether, but should be restored under the law of 
priority as now accepted. 
The generic complications are so serious that no new combination will be 
proposed for it here, the object being rather to call attention to the position in 
which the matter appears to be placed according to the codes adopted at 
Washington and Vienna. 
The only reference cited by Linnaeus in the fifth edition of the Genera Plan- 
tarum (1754) is Sinapistrum Tournef. 116. This is not cited by him in either 
edition of the Species Plantarum, but it has been universally conceded to 
represent C. gynandra. Following the American code this would seem to be the 
type of the genus Cleome and no further departure would then be necessary than 
to revert to the original Linnaean name. But it would be obligatory to change 
the generic name of all the species now known as Cleome. 
Under the Vienna code the state of affairs is even worse. In the list of 
exceptions, it is stated that Gynandropsis, although later, is to be preferred to 
the earlier Pedicellaria of Schrank. As always, it is not stated for what it is 
to be used, but that does not create any difficulty in the present case. How- 
ever, no reference is made to Sinapistrum of Medicus in Philos. Bot. 1 (1789) 
108, which antedates both Pedicellaria and Gynandropsis, and is not itself 
antedated by any genus of the same name as itself, published after the time 
of Linnaeus. The generic name Sinapistrum is accompanied by a diagnosis, 
and a single species is cited as referable to it, Cleome pentaphylla L. But 
no binomial was actually created under the new genus until and presum- 
ably inadvertently in the Kew Index. To those who consider that the absence 
of a binomial under a proposed new genus is a bar to its publication, the 
difficulty disappears, and a new combination will have to be created under 
the genus Gynandropsis. However, a description such as that of Medicus -is not 
generally so discarded, and as Sinapistrum is not rejected by the letter of the 
Vienna code, however repugnant it may be to its spirit, it would be possible 
