50 
CANDOLLEA tetrandra. 
Tetrandrous Candollea. 
MONADELPHIA TETRANRRIA. 
Nat. ord. Dilleniace^e. 
CANDOLLEA, Labillard. Calyx pentapliyllus, foliolis ovalibus, mu- 
cronatis, persistentibus. Corolla petala 5, hypogyna, obovata v. obcordata. 
Stamina hypogyna, polyadelpha ; filamenta brevia, filiformia, basibus fasci- 
culatim connata, apicibus distincta ; antherce biloculares, loculis oblongis, 
adnatis. Ovaria 3-6, libera, unilocularia, ovulis 2, e basi erectis. Styli ter- 
minates, subulati ; stigmata simplicia. Capsulce coriacese, uniloculares, intus 
longitudinaliter dehiscentes, mono-dispermse. Semina erecta, arillo membra- 
naceo, lacero. Suffrutices Novce-Hollandia Austro-occidentalis ; foliis 
alternis , ad apices ramulorum subconfertis, linearibus v. cuneatis, integerrimis 
v. apice dentatis , scepius supra basim persistentem transversim secedentibus, 
floribus ad apices ramorum solitariis v./asciculatim racemosis. Endl. Genera, 
4755. 
C. tetrandra ; ramis junioribus pilosis, foliis oblongis cuneatis dentatis basi 
angustatis integerrimis, floribus solitariis inter folia sessilibus, petalis 
obovatis planis emarginatis sepalis mucronatis glabris multo longioribus, 
phalangibus tetrandris. Lindl. in Dot. Reg. 1842. misc. 39. 
The plant which is called Candollea cuneiformis in gardens 
is a species with leaves and flowers not half* the size of the 
subject of the present plate, and stamens placed from six to 
nine in a parcel ; otherwise it has much the same appearance. 
This species is manifestly quite distinct. The former comes, 
or is said to come, from King George’s Sound ; this has been 
raised from Swan River seeds. In country therefore they 
are not very different. 
Relying upon the traditionary application of the name C. 
cuneiformis , I separated the present plant under the name of 
C. tetrandra , in a notice published in this work in June, 1842 . 
But upon looking into prior authorities I begin to doubt whether 
this or the small one has the best claim to the former name. 
DeCandolle says nothing about the number of stamens in the 
phalanges of C. cuneiformis ; but Sir W. Hooker, in his figure 
in the Botanical Magazine, t. 2711 , of what purports to be 
