146 
PACIFIC SCIENCE, Vol. Ill, April, 1949 
published: "Where a new epithet is required, 
an author may, if he wishes, adopt an epithet 
previously given to the group in an illegitimate 
combination, if there is no obstacle to its em- 
ployment in the new position or sense/’ The 
example given is as follows: Talinum polyan- 
drum Hook. (1855) is illegitimate, being a 
later homonym of T. polyandrum Ruiz and 
Pav. (1798). Calandrinia polyandra Benth. 
(1863), not as a new combination, but as a 
new name, is legitimate. Bentham’s name given 
as an example by the Rules was published in 
Flora Australiensis 1: 172, where a description 
of the plant was given followed by "Talinum 
polyandrum Hook. Bot. Mag. t. 4833” in syn- 
onymy. Clearly, this example is almost identical 
with that of Winchia glaucescens, inasmuch as 
in both instances the name was accompanied by 
a description and the specific epithet was bor- 
rowed from an illegitimate name with the in- 
tention of forming a new combination. There- 
fore, Winchia glaucescens was a legitimate new 
name and as such is the earliest binomial having 
a specific epithet which must be used for the 
present plant. 
There is one difference between the case of 
Winchia glaucescens and that of Calandrinia 
polyandra. There is good reason to believe that 
Schumann was not aware that Don’s Alyxia 
glaucescens was illegitimate; he was motivated 
not by choice but entirely by his understanding 
of the requirements of priority. Likewise, Bent- 
ham most probably was not aware that Talinum 
polyandrum Hook, was a later homonym, but 
the evidence for believing this is not as direct 
as in Schumann’s case. It is conceivable that 
had Schumann understood the poor position of 
Don’s name he would not have adopted Don’s 
inadequate specific epithet. In such a case, by 
attributing Winchia glaucescens to him we 
would be forcing him, perhaps against his 
"wish,” to be responsible for a name he would 
have abjured had he known that choice was 
left to him. Adding the phrase, "if he wishes,” 
to the author’s prerogative, does not help to 
clarify the meaning of Art. 69. 
Type of A. ro strata. — "Thaton, Yatheytaung, 
2500 ft., flowers Mar., P. Chin per C. E. Parkin- 
son 6536 (type), vernacular name Taung-ma- 
yo; Mergui, Victoria Point, 75 ft., flowers Jan., 
Sukoe per C. E. Parkinson 6295; fr. Mar., Sukoe 
per C. E. Parkinson 7684 (type for fruit.) 
(Burma).” The collector’s number appearing 
on the type collection is 6563 . 
Type of A. pachycarpa. — "Hainan: Ting-on, 
Mocheung Ling, N. K. Chun and C. L. Tso 
44317. Nov. 22, 1932; a large tree up to 25 m. 
high, the trunk 80 cm. in diam., in forests, alt. 
600 m.” 
§ PALA 
Leaves almost always glabrous, the marginal 
nerve usually clear; corolla tube about 1 cm. 
or less long; anthers about 0.7-1. 6 mm. long, 
usually not dehiscing to extreme base; style long 
and slender; ovary usually superior; follicles 
long; seeds about 8 mm. or less long, 1-2 mm. 
broad. 
Common throughout the range of the genus 
except in the far eastern Pacific. 
2. Alstonia scholaris (L.) R. Br., in Mem. 
Wern. Soc. 1: 76. 1811. 
"Pala” Rheede, Hort. Malab. 1: 81, t. 45. 
1678. 
"Nerium lactescens malab aricus platyphyllus 
...” Breyn., Prod. 2: 86. 1739. 
"Lignum scholar e” Rumph., Amb. 2: 246 
[t. 82?]. 1741. 
T abernaemontana citrifolia L., Sp. PI. 1: 210. 
1753; as to cit. "Pala Rheede.” Hill ed., 
Hort. Mai. 1: t. 46 [non diagnosis}. 1774. 
Echites scholaris L., Mant. 53 [non cit. t. ?]. 
1767. 
T abernaemontana alternifolia Burm., FI. Ind. 
69. 1768; as to cit. pro part. 
Aeschynomene laevis Noronha, Verh. Batav. 
Genootsch. 5: 68. 1790; nom. nud. [Syn. 
fide Miquel.] 
Echites ? Pala Ham., in Trans. Linn. Soc. 13: 
518. 1822. 
A. scholaris (3 Blumii A. DC, Prod. 8: 409. 
1844. 
