£ 
I 
l/'th December, 
6 
Dear Dr Quisumbing, 
I wonder if you would be so kind as to lend me 
specimens of Cheilosa homaliifol ia Merrill (Euphorbiaeeae). 
I find |hat specimens from Malaya, described as Balios permum 
malayanum Hook., are really Cheilosa and I cannot see 
how to distinguish them from Merrill's description of 
C.homaliifolia , We have only one specimen of C.homaliifolia 
in Singapore, namely Ramos 1 GGj: it is identical with the 
Malayan species except for the edge of the leaf. If my 
surmise is correct, it means that Merrill's name becomes 
a synonym, which will be unfortunate, Dut I suppose such 
is the rathless advance of science and better now than 
later. I have written to Dr van Steenis to ask him about 
Cheilosa montana , because I verily believe Cheilosa mala./ana 
will have to be reduced to C.mont ana and we shall again 
have Cheilosa as a monotypie genus. 
I apologise for the long delay in returning the 
specimens of Ficus subgen. Synoecia which you so kindly lent 
me. I shall do so early next year. I have been delayed 
because I have been trying to locate the type of Ficus 
* 
scratbhleyana , and I have also been trying to get specimens 
of the Formosan F .terasoensis for comparison with your 
F.megacarpa . In both objects, I have been unsuccessful. 
However, King's description of F»seratehleyana is very 
good, and relying on that, I determine your Philippine 
Dr. E. Quisumbing, 
Bureau of Science, 
Manila, PHILIPPINES. 
