618/3 6 - 
1/th December, 
6 
Dear Dr van Steenis, 
Since my letter to you of ^CtY. November, I have 
gone further into the question of the peninsular specimens 
referred by Hooker to Baccaurea malayana and I have 
received much assistance from Symington. My conclusions 
are these. 
1. B accaurea malayana (Jack) Hooker F.B.I. V. Jfi*. 
= Hed yea rpus mal a yanus Jack. 
sed non quoad specimina peninsularia citata. 
2 . Cheil 08 a m alayana (Hook.f11,) nov . comb. 
* B ali osper mum malayanum Hook. fil. F.B.I. V. 
* Sco rtechinia m alay ana Ridl.FI.Mai.Pen* V. p. ^ 2 
= Cheilosa hom.aliif olia Merrill Philipp. Journ.Sci. 
3, 1913, 27? 
» Baceaupea malayana (Jack) Hook, quoad speciffiina 
% 
peninsularia atata. 
Symington has decided this by examining Kaingay*s 
specimens at Kew. 
3. I wonder if you would be so good as to compare 2 
sheets of Cheilosa malayana , which I am sending you, with 
specimens of Chei losa montane , because the differences 
between the two species seem very slight. I find the 
following differences from Smith's description (Bijdr. 
Boomsoort.Java no. 1 2). 
Dr C.G.G.J.van Steenis 
The Herbarium, 
Botanic Gardens, 
Buitenzorg, JAVA. 
F4 A« 
