48 
A NOTE ON TEE HIMALAYAN 
taken from dried material and appears to us to be D. odora Don; 
this is partly confirmed by t( Flores nivei inodori. Calyx pilis subad- 
pressis vestitus, " though evidently there is a disagreement regarding the 
perfume. Brandis in the Forest Flora of North-West and Central India, 
p. 386 makes but the one species, “ Flowers scented, white yellowish 
or purple, sessile perianth tube in. long pubescent outside, 
segments ovate acute. FI. March-April also in autumn. Attains 7-*-8 
ft Set baruwa." This is close to Don's If, odora , Hooker in 
the Flora of British India, Vol. Y, p. 193 includes all under Daphne 
cannabina Wdll. but suggests that “ possibly two species are included 
here Also * u perianth ^ in., tube rather slender ; lobes broad or narrow, 
ovate, acute." Gamble Manual of Indian Timbers, ed. 1902, p. 578— 
adds: ct The flowers of the Sikkim plant are pink, very sweet scented ; 
those of the West Himalayan plant white and often hardly scented at 
all." Finally in “ Indian Trees ” p. 545, Brandis recurs to Don's view 
and considers that D. cannabina is possibly a local variety of D. odora 
Thunb. It may be of interest to add that the late Sir George King to 
judge from a note on the species cover in the Calcutta Herbarium leant 
to the re-establishment of D. BUolua Ham. 
Unfortunately the suite of specimens in the Calcutta Herbarium 
from the North-West Himalaya do not furnish much information regard- 
ing the habit, colour of flower and fruit of the species of that area and 
we felt at one period of our survey that it was useless attempting to clear 
up the question of the relationship of the East Himalayan species with 
the Western without better acquaintance with the latter. However 
later we were fortunate in having the opinion of Mr. J. S. ; Gamble, 
F.R.S., on our notes and the loan of his suite of Himalayan sheets 
which include both Western and Eastern types. Subsequently we had 
the valued criticism of Dr. Otto Stapf, F.R.S., who has pointed out to 
us that the question of the North-West Himalayan species appears to 
have been already settled by Decaisne in 1844, when he described and also 
figured.it as D. papyracea in Jacquemont, Voy. dans 1 Tnde, Vol. IV. 
(Bot.) p. 143, t. 148. Afterwards it was confused and amalgamated 
with D. cannabina Wall, in spite of Wallich's figure of the latter. 
D. papyracea Decne. and D. Sureil are at once distinguished from 
D. cannabina Wall, by the pointed lobes of the corolla and fruits 
reddish at maturity. D. Sureil differs from D. papyracea in the leaves 
being less coriaceous and njore pointed, in the bracts being very early 
deciduous forming no collar round the inflorescence, and in the longer 
and narrower flewers. The range of these three species is approximately 
as follows : — Daphne papyracea Decne., N. W. Himalaya and Western 
Nepal, 7 — $,000 ft. ; Daphne cannabina Wall., Nepal, Sikkim, 
