6 5 
this plant to another part of the garden after it had finished 
flowering and, unfortunately, it did not survive the operation. 
Note on Nomenclature. — As some botanists are inclined to 
regard the plant here dealt with as M. pictus, I.indh, I think it 
well to state my reasons for calling it M. lineatus. Except 
perhaps in inflorescence, which, as a rule, is not dense, the plant 
agrees perfectly with Bentham’s description of M. lineatus in 
FI. Aust. In vigorous plants in good seasons the inflorescence 
is decidedly dense. Specimens I sent to England several years 
ago were compared with the specimens at the Natural History 
Museum, and at Kew, and were declared to agree perfectly 
with the specimens of M . lineatus there, but not with those of 
M. pictus. Material of the latter species is, however, scarce 
and somewhat unsatisfactory. Judging from Bentham’s de- 
scriptions, the most decided difference between the two species 
seems to lie in the seeds, which are stated to be “ nearly globular 
or angular ” in M. pictus, and “ closely packed and much flatten- 
ed ” in M. lineatus. In all my specimens the seeds (and even the 
ovules) are much flattened, except the uppermost and lowermost, 
which are rounded on one side so as to fill up the available space 
at the apex and base of the ovary. 
