172 
CHINA, 
[Hypericinea. 
Ord. XIII. AURANTIACE^. Corr. 
1. trifoliata. De Cand. Prodr. v. \.p. 536. — T. aurantiola. Zowr. Cochin. \. p. 
189. — Limonia trifoliata. Linn. 
1, Cookia punctata ; foliolis ovato-lanceolatis basi vix iiiEequalibus, floi'ibus paniculatis. — 
Retz. Obs. 6. p. 29. Lam. III. t. 354. — Qiiinaria Lansiiim. Lour. Cochin, p. 272. — Rumph. 
Amb. 1. t. 55. 
“ The fresh leaves, when rubbed, smell like anise-seed.” — Collie, MSS. 
1. Mui’i’aya exotica ; foliolis cuneato-oblongis obtusis coriaceis, pedunculis multifloris 
corymbosis, baccis submonosperinis. — Linn. Mant. p. 393. Lam. III. t. 352. — Cbalcas 
Japonensis. Lour. Cochin, p. 332. Rumph. Amb. 5. t. 18. 2. 
This must not be confounded with the M. exotica of some Botanists, particularly of Roxburgh, Flora 
Indica, v. 2. p. 374., and n. 48 of his drawings, in the East India Company’s Museum, and apparently of 
Dr. Wallich’s List, n. 6368, which appears to be the Chalcas paniculata of Loureiro, the Murraya pani- 
culata of Smith’s Herbarium, and Rumphius’ Herb. Amb. 5. t. 17, a species which is too closely allied to 
M. Sumatrana. Roxb. Hort. Bengh. p. 32, and FI. Ind. v. 2. p. 375. With this last, is identical BI. pani- 
culata, Jack, and Hook. Exot. FI. t. 79; it has the flowers terminal, and not nearly so panicled, if indeed 
they can be said to be so at all, as in the other species, hence, as Jack observed, the name given by him 
ought to be changed to M. Sumatrana, even although he had not given it upon the supposition that his 
and Loureiro’s plants were the same. The true JM. paniculata may be characterised, “ foliis ovatis, floribus 
paniculatis;” while M. Sumatrana is distinguished shortly by “ foliis ovatis acuminatis, floribus terminali- 
bus subsolitariis.” 
1. Glycosmis citri folia ; foliolis 4-5-alternis oblongo-lanceolatis basi insequalibus utrinqiie 
acuminatis integerrimis, panicula contracta racemosa, corolla campanulata, fructibus ovato- 
sphseroideis obliquis. Lindl. in Hort. Soc. Trans, v. 6. p. 72. — Limonia citrifolia. Willd. 
Enum. p. 448. De Cand. Prodr. v. 1. p. 536. L. parviflora. Sims, in Rot. Mag. t. 2416. 
De Cand. Prodr. v. \. p. 536. 
The genus Glycosmis is perhaps only distinguishable from Limonia by the structure of the fruit. In 
Limonia, the pericarp is tough, and resembling the rind of an orange, and the seeds are covered with pulp. 
In Glycosmis, the pericarp is fleshy, like the eatable parts of a cherry, and the seeds are destitute of pulp. 
— We possess Clansena excavata, Burm., and AtaZawtm DC., of this Order, from near Macao, 
gathered by Mr. Millett. 
Ord. XIV. HYPERICINE^E. Juss. 
1. HjqDcricum Chinense ; /3. caule tereti, foliis ellipticis obtusis paullo nigro-punctatis, 
pedunculis bibracteatis, calyce oblongo obtuso nigro-punctato, stylis coadunatis. Chois. — 
Linn. Amce7i. v. 8. p. 323. Chois, in De Ca7id. Prodr. v. 1. p. 545. — H. monogynum. Linn. 
Spec. p. 1101. Rot. Mag. t. 334. — H. aureum. Lour. Cochin. 2. p. 578. 
Sent also by Mr. Millett. 
2. Hjq)ericum (Tridesmos) biflonmi; caule glabro subtereti griseo, foliis ovato-ellipticis 
glabris acutis vix acuminatis, sepalis aequalibus integris ovatis obtusis, glandulis tribus carnosis 
majusculis cum staminum phalangibus tribus alternantibus, stylis tribits stamina aequantibus. 
Lam. Encijcl. Meth. v. 4. p. 170. De Cand. Prodr. v. 1. p. 546. — H. Chinense. Retz. Obs. 
