318 
CONTRIBUTIONS TO BOTANY. 
racemose panicles, of various lengths, but mostly 8 inehes long, 
are fasciculated in the cicatrices of the axils of the older aphyl- 
lous branches; but in the younger branches they are axillary 
and solitary, 7 or 8 inches long, with a very slender rachis, 
having branehes at intervals of ^-1 ineh apart, and 2 inehes 
long, each with shorter branchlets, 4 lines long, bearing from 
three to five pedicellated flowers. The flowers are alike in both 
the specimens above quoted, except in that from Bahia, wherein 
the petals are more lanceolate ; in other respects there is little 
difFerence. 
7. Chondrodendron ovatum, nob. ; — Cocculus ovatus. Veil. FI. 
Flum. X. tab. 141 ; — Cocculus platyphyllus, var. Ildefonsianus, 
St. HU. et Tul. Ann. Sc. Nat. ser. 2. xvii. p. 134 ; — Cocculus 
paniculigera. Mart. FI. Beibl. ii. 43 ; Walp. Rep. ii. 348 ; — 
Botryopsis platyphylla, Eichl. {in parte) 1. c. 200 ; — scandens, 
ramulis teretibus, glabris, junioribus tomentosis ; foliis rhom- 
boideo-ovatis, imo subcuneatis et bisinuatis, lobo basali an- 
guste rotundato, ultra medium gradatim subacutis, marginibus 
integris, undulatis, e basi 5-nerviis, supra Isete viridibus, om- 
nino glabris, nisi junioribus ad junctionem nervorum pilo- 
sulis, nervis tenuissimis venisque prominulis, subtus opacis, 
cinereo- vel fulvidulo-glaucis, nervis venisque transversis valde 
prominentibus, glabris, in junioribus puberulis; petiolo imo 
apiceque incrassato, striato, pubescente, demum glaberrimo, 
limbo paulo breviore : panicula in ramulis junioribus axil- 
lari, petiolo paulo longiore, pubescente, rachi ultra medium 
ramosa, bracteolata ; ramis subdivaricatis ; ramulis corymbu- 
losis, paueifloris. — In Brasilia, prov. Rio de Janeiro et Minas 
Geraes (in sylvis Japorensibus, Mart.) ; v. s. in herb. Mus. 
Brit. (Claussen). 
The diagnoses given, as above cited, of Coc. Ildefonsianus and 
Coc. paniculigera both agree with Velloz^s figure; and the latter 
gives a faithful representation of the speeies, which I have seen 
in Claussen’s specimen, and which is certainly very distinct from 
all others. It may be well to observe that we have here a proof 
of the general accuracy of the illustrations of the celebrated 
Brazilian botanist, upon which much reliance should be placed ; 
for I possess several of his original drawings from which the 
plates of the ‘ Flora Fluminensis ^ were copied ; they are pen- 
and-Indian-ink drawings, are evidently sketched by an expe- 
rienced eye, with well-drawn very fine lines ; but the lithogra- 
phic plates executed in Paris are elumsy and coarse copies made 
by unskilled draughtsmen, wholly ignorant of botany. It is 
owing to this circumstance that botanists have not placed that 
amount of faith in Velloz’s great work which is justly due to it. 
