366 Pram. — A Review of the genera 
Maximowicz in 1876 when he described a Chinese Poppy as Cathcartia 
integrifolia (Mel. Biol., ix. 713). So far as the colour of the petals and the 
shape of the stigma are concerned, this plant, of which Maximowicz had not 
seen ripe fruits, is very like Hooker’s original C. villosa. Subsequently 
further material with ripe capsules reached Paris, and in 1886 Franchet was 
able to show (Bull. Soc. Bot. Fr., xxxiii. 389) that Maximowicz’s C. inte- 
grifolia is a genuine Meconopsis , the capsules opening as in other members 
of that genus by small apical chinks, and not, as in C. villosa , by valves that 
separate from the placental ribs to the base of the fruit. But in the place 
and at the time that Franchet made this rectification he himself published 
as Cathcartiae two species, C. lancifolia and C. Delavayi , which have proved 
to be species of Meconopsis. On the other hand, in 1889 Franchet published 
(PL Delavay., 42, t. 13), as Meconopsis betonicifolia , a species which the 
writer suspects may be a Cathcartia. 
The writer was able in 1894 to study at Paris the abundant Chinese 
material of the natural family Papaveraceae in the Museum at the Jardin 
des Plantes, and owed much to the kindness with which Franchet put at 
his disposal the minute and extraordinary knowledge of the flora of south- 
western China which that generous and erudite botanist possessed. 
Franchet then pointed out that his original view as to the position of 
C. lancifolia and C. Delavayi required modification, and honoured the writer 
by permitting him to publish in 1895 (Journ. As. Soc. Beng., lxiv. 3. 31 1) 
the corrected determinations. As regards Meconopsis (or Cathcartia) beto- 
nicifolia, Franchet did not, however, think it advisable to modify his 
original view. This fact should be kept in mind by those who may here- 
after have occasion to examine the plant in question. The actual position 
of this Chinese species, and of another from the eastern Himalaya which 
the writer has treated as a Cathcartia , C. polygonoidcs , can only be definitely 
settled when ripe fruits of both have been communicated. In the meantime 
it is certain that Meconopsis betonicifolia and Cathcartia polygonoidcs are 
very closely allied, and it is almost certain that both are very nearly related 
to yet another Himalayan species, Cathcartia lyrata , where the ripe capsules 
are known. In this last species the valves separate, as in C. villosa , from 
apex to base. For this reason the writer prefers, so long as the question 
as regards the other two is an open one, to place them beside C. lyrata 
and enumerate them in the genus Cathcartia rather than in the genus 
Meconopsis. 
The genus Cathcartia is closely allied to the genus Meconopsis ; the 
differential characters originally relied on were mainly the practical absence 
of a style in Cathcartia and the complete, in place of partial, separation of 
the valves from the placental ribs. But the character derived from the 
absence of a style is no longer differential, because there are at least three 
species of Meconopsis— M. Oliver iana in the group Chctidonifoliae , with 
