232 H. F. Wernhani. 
not leave altogether without notice; such are the affinities of the 
tribe Galieae of Ruhiaceae, of Sambucus, and of Adoxa. 
Galiece. Special attention has naturally been devoted to 
Galieae as the sole representatives of Ruhiaceae in our own latitudes; 
and it is to be feared that much of the significance underlying the 
typical features of this extensive family has been overlooked in the 
stress which has been laid on this very untypical tribe. The Galieae 
represent approximately one-tenth of the Ruhiaceae as arranged in 
our modern systems of classification ; and their floral characters, 
which are remarkably constant, entitle them without doubt to a 
place in that family. Their weakly herbaceous habit, insignificant 
flowers with reduced calyx and regulary bicarpellary ovary, the 
frequent reduction in the number of flowers in the primary umbelli- 
floral inflorescence, and the specialized fruit, point to the con¬ 
clusion that the Galieae form a specialized and rather retrograde 
section of Ruhiaceae. In vegetative characters, however, they are 
distinct from the rest of the family, and the practical test of 
interpetiolar stipules breaks down ; for the shoot consists of whorls 
of foliar organs arranged at intervals along the weak stems, and 
there is no trace of structures which can be designated stipules 
without hesitation. The gulf between this condition and that 
which is typical of Ruhiaceae has been bridged in modern systems 
by the supposition, not altogether unwarranted, that some of the 
foliar organs in a whorl represent stipules. This supposition, 
however, is still far from complete justification; an excellent 
discussion upon the matter is contained in Lindley’s Vegetable 
Kingdom (3rd edition, pp. 768-771). In any case the question 
concerns for the most part the vegetative organs; and whatever 
be the true homology of the foliar appendages, the general 
facies of the Galieae seems to entitle them to separate family 
rank,—at any rate if vegetative features alone may rank as critical 
family characters. Their reduced calyx (Sheravdia excepted), 
divergent styles, and didymous fruit would go to support this rank; 
and the distinction between “ Galiaceae ” and “ Ruhiaceae” 1 would at 
least be as satisfactory as that between Ruhiaceae and Caprifoliaceae. 
1 If Galieae be separated from the rest of the Ruhiaceae, the name 
Ruhiaceae would have to go with it, as it includes the genus 
Rubia. The nomenclature would need to be some such as 
Lindley’s—Galiaceae andCinchonaceae—or better, as retaining 
the long-established name, Ruhiaceae and Cinchonaceae. This 
would at least have the merit of making the European 
“ Ruhiaceae” representative of the family ! 
