on ee 
LS I LL 
I have not had an opportunity of seeing the figure above 
quoted, of SwEEt’s Cuscuta verrucosa; but my friend Dr 
GrauaM, from whose accurate notes I have extracted most of 
the above description, informs me, that, although differing in 
some respects from our plant, he yet believes them to be the same. 
That came from Nepaul. The present individual flowered in 
the Botanic Garden at Edinburgh, in November 1824, having 
been raised from a lot of various seeds‘ gathered in the low 
grounds about Madras, in the Mysore, and on the Coromandel 
coast, by Dr SHortr. But from which of these three places 
the seeds of the Cuscuta came, is not determined. It grows 
with great luxuriance upon the stems of Scevola Taccada, 
when plunged in the tan-pit. Other plants, which were placed 
in situations more exposed to the sun, and which had attached 
themselves to neighbouring individuals of a more woody nature, 
did not attain to so large asize, and had their stems and 
branches less succulent, and more purple. 
Our Cuscuta coincides in so many points with the C. re eflema 
of Dr Roxsureu, that, except the presence of the warts on 
the calyx and pedicels, I know of no difference *. Hence, I am 
led to make it a variety of that plant, an opinion in which I 
believe Dr GraHam is disposed to agree. 
For the principal figures of the drawing from which the 
engraving was made, I am indebted to Dr GREVILLE. 
Fig. 1. Corolla laid open. Fig. 2. Calyx, with the advanced germen. 
Fig. 3. Section of a young capsule. Fig. 4. Capsule opening. Fig. 5. 
The same, from which the lid is removed. Fig. 6. Seed. Fig. 7. Sec- 
tion of the seed, shewing portions of the Embryo, the rest being imbed- 
ded and hid in the Albumen.—All more or less magnified. 
* I speak, however, from the description in the Flora Indica only.. The figure in 
the “ Plants of Coromandel,” which I have not seen, Dr GraHaMm assures me has the 
flowers scpceas smaller than in our plant. 
