184 
CHINA. 
[RosacecB. 
Candolle attributes only three nerves to each segment of the leaf. Roxburgh’s B. scandens (FI. Ind. 2. p. 
326,) has glabrous leaves and orbicular petals, and is now called B. macrostachya by Dr. WaUich, in his 
List of East Indian Plants, n. 5774. 
In addition to the above species of this Order, Mr. Millett and Mr. Vachell have detected Crotalaria 
calycina, Schrank, C. variegata. Wall., a very fine Teplirosia near T. Heyneana, Wall., Uvaria crinita, 
DC., Dicerma elegans, De Cand., Rhyncliosia virgata, Wall. Cat., Desmodium triquetrum, DC., Alysicarpus 
monilifer, DC., Lablab vidgaris, Savi, Pachyrhizus angulatus, Rich., P. trilobus, DC., Balbergia scandens, 
Roxb., and D. latifolia, Roxb., Arachis hypogea, L., Poinciana pulcherrima, L., Cassia Thora, L., 
C. bicapsularis, L., (according to Wall. Cat.,) and a new species ? and C. Fistula. 
Ord. XXX. ROSACEiE. Jiiss. 
1. Kerria Japonica. De Cand. Linn. Soc. Trans, v. 12. p. 156. 
We regret to say that the flower is double, as in all the specimens we have yet seen. 
2. Spiraea lanceolata; foliis oblongo-lanceolatis glaberrimis subtus giavicis obtusiuscule 
•serratis, corymbis umbelliformibus paucifloris glabris ad apices ramnlorum brevium lateralium, 
pedicellis gracilibus, staminibus iiniserialibiis, disco 10-partito.-^Poi>. Encycl. Meth. v. 7. 
p. 354. Cambess. in Ann. Sc. Nat. v. 1. 25. De Cand. Prodr. v. 2. p. 542. — S. Canton- 
iensis. Lour. Cochin, v. \. p. 394. — S. corymbosa. Roxb. FI. Ind. v. 2. p. 512 ? 
S. corymbosa of Roxburgh, we believe to be the cultivated state of this plant, more especially as he 
says, in his Flora Indica, that it is a native of China ; he adds, however, that it is also a native of the Moun- 
tains north of India, from which he seems to confound it with S. callosa, Thunb. (the S. Bella of Sims, 
Bot. Mag. t. 2426.) The figure among his drawings, n. 949, at the India House, is not like either, having 
neither the lateral few-flowered slender umbels of the one, nor the corymbose panicle of the other. Mr. 
Lindley has accordingly, in Wallich’s List of E. I. Plants, n. 701. p. 21 and 248, considered it as pi’obably a 
variety of S. chamcedrifolia. 
1. Rub US parvifolius ; caule prostrate tereti, ramis tomentosis, aculeis iiumerosis recurvis, 
foliis pinnato-trifoliolatis foliolis subrotundis basi cuneatis inciso-serratis impari S8epe inciso- 
lobato supra glabris viridibus subtus tomentosis, stipulis subulatis, floribus paucis laxe race- 
mosis terminalibus, laciniis calycinis ovato-lanceolatis. — Linn. Sp. PI. p. 707. Lour. Cochin. 
V. 2. p. 398. De Cand. Prodr. v. 2. p. 563. — R. tripbyllus. Thunb. FI. Jap. p. 215. 
It is singular that Seringe, in De Candolle’s Prodromus, and Mr. G. Don, in Miller’s Dictionary, both 
refer to B. parvifolius of Thunberg, when no such plant is described by him. We have, however, brought 
hither as a synonym R. tripliyllus of that Author, on the authority of a specimen from Nagasaki in Japan, in 
Mr. Arnott’s Herbarium, from Dr. Fischer of St. Petersburg, and agreeing minutely with Thunberg’s 
description. Linnieus’s plant was given him by Osbeck, and is most probably therefore from China ; but he 
and succeeding Botanists have surely erroneously referred to Rumphius, Herb. Amb. v. 5. t. 47. f. 1. This 
last species has ovato-lanceolate leaves, and seems to be what Chamisso and Schlechtendal have described as 
R. Tagallus, (Linnaea, v. 2. p. 9) : if, however, it has tomentose leaves, but Rumphius does not say so, 
it may rather form a species with what Thunberg calls R. Idceus, but which can scarcely be the same with 
the Europsean plant. 
2. Rubus reflexus; ramis teretibus rufo-tomentosis, aculeis parvis sparsis foliisque oblongo- 
cordatis 3-5-lobis infra dense tomentosis lobo terminali elongato venis reticulatis numero- 
sissirnis, stipulis bracteisque lanatis fimbriatis, racemis spiciformibus interruptis folio plus 
