FLORA OF THE SUNDRIBUNS. 255 
extent to which these species are confined to the northern forests only, 
and the number of them that have been only once reported — often 
only in the old collections from 1796 to 1856. The latter fact suggests 
naturally the question whether some of them deserve to be considered 
truly Sundribun species and whether, though now and again one of 
them has been met with, all or any of them are capable of persisting 
in the Sundribuns. The only one that is plentiful throughout the 
forests is Derris scandens ; the only one for which the agency is 
doubtful is the Cryptocoryne : not one of them, it will be observed, is 
a tree of any size. 
The rest of the swamp-forest species, 58 in number, are probably 
all sea-introduced species. For the majority this agency is unequi- 
vocal ; the case of Paramignya longispina appears doubtful, yet it is 
difficult to imagine any other agency as responsible for its presence. 
Another equivocal case is that of Kleinhovia hospita. This is one 
of Ellis’ discoveries and, next to his rediscovery of Orysa coarctatay 
is the most interesting. Ellis only collected it once and has given 
no exact locality for his specimens, so that it might be suggested 
that this is not a swamp-forest species but one of the trees charac- 
teristic of the sites of abandoned settlements or even a tree planted in 
some recent clearing. The vernacular name connoting it is given 
as Bhola, a name usually applied to Hibiscus tiliaceus which, in 
the shape and venation of its leaves, Kleinhovia somewhat resembles. 
The fact that the vernacular name used should be that properly 
belonging to one of the most plentiful and familiar of Sundribun species, 
hardly suggests that Kleinhovia is an introduced species ; had it been 
so, some qualifying epithet would almost certainly have been employed 
by a native wood-cutter or forest official. The indication rather is 
that the tree is a Sundribun species, but that it is so rare as not to 
have a name of its own. This use of the vernacular name, coupled 
with the fact that none of Ellis’ other specimens are from existing 
settlements, practically disposes of the suggestion that his Kleinhovia 
was a planted tree. It was carefully looked for in all the settlements 
visited by the writer, but was nowhere seen ; it has never been sent 
from any settlement by Heinig ; the tree is, moreover, of little economic 
importance and is not at all a likely species for settlers to introduce. 
The date of the introduction of the species to Bengal by Roxburgh, 
who received it from the Moluccas, was 1796, by which time the old 
settlements of pirates and salt-smugglers in the Sundribuns had either 
been abandoned or their inhabitants had ceased to hold such inter- 
course with Calcutta as the introduction of new and rare trees would 
involve. The suggestion that Ellis’ specimens are from some place 
like Mandabari or Jatta may therefore be ignored. The fruits of 
