with Descriptions of two New Species . 747 
the gynaeceum. He also describes and figures a second cell 
containing the rudiment of an aborted ovule. But, although 
I have found a second rudimentary style in all three of the 
species described here, I have not succeeded in finding a trace 
of a second cell or cavity in any one of the three. 
Dr. Engler agrees that Corynocarpus belongs to the Sapin- 
dales, but the~absence of resin-ducts, in his opinion, excludes 
it from the Anacardiaceae, and the peculiar structure of the 
androecium from all the orders of the group ; hence, he says, 
it must be regarded as the type of an independent order, to be 
called Corynocarpaceae. 
He places it in his Subseries Celastrineae, characterized by 
having no resin-ducts. This Subseries includes the Cyrillaceae, 
Pentaphylaceae, Corynocarpaceae, Aquifoliaceae, Celastraceae, 
Hippocrateaceae, Stackhousiaceae and Staphyleaceae. 
On the whole I am in favour of giving certain isolated, 
aberrant genera ordinal rank, rather than placing them at the 
end of other orders, from which they differ as much as most 
neighbouring orders do from each other. I think the absence 
of connecting links does not justify the latter course, and the 
existence of a certain type may be overlooked in a synopsis 
of orders that does not cover the peculiarities of its structure. 
Of course it would be inconvenient to unduly increase the 
number of orders ; but how far it is desirable to go I will 
not attempt to discuss here. With regard to the genus 
Corynocarpus , I am not sure that the reasons given for separa- 
tion from the Anacardiaceae are strong enough. Apart from 
the absence of resin- ducts, there is nothing of importance, in 
my opinion, to keep it out of that order. But Engler (Naturl. 
Pflanzenf., Nachtrage, p. 217) adds : c Zudem ist die Entwicke- 
lung des Androceums bei Corynocarpus so, wie sie weder 
bei den Anacardiaceen, noch einer anderen Familie der 
Sapindales angetroffen wirdf I venture to suggest that 
Pentaspadon , Hook, f., as figured by the author (Trans. 
Linn. Soc. xxiii, t. 24) and by Engler himself (DC. Monogr. 
Phanerog. iv, t. 9, figs. 30-36), presents an analogous an- 
droecium and disk, and differs in the shape and relative 
