132 
filifolia Hook. in Mitch. Trop. Austr. 241 (1848), Proc. 
Linn. Soc. N.S.W. xxii, 147 Sra and xxix, 738 
(1904) = B.FI. i, 478 
lobulata F.v.M.in Linnea xxy, 372 0358), Figd. in 
Turner, Forage Pls. p. 20 (1891), and J. E, Brown, , 
Forest Flora, South Australia t. 17 (1882) ne ABRIL 2A) 
Section ii, Platyptere. 
calycina A. Cunn. in A. ‘Gray Bot. .of Wilk. Expl. 
Exped. i, 262 (1854) (D. truncatiales Fiv.M. 
Fragm. ii, 143 [1861]}) ee B.Fl. i, 479 
var. heterophylla Maiden & Betche in Proc. Linn. 
Soc. N.S. W. xxix, 738 (1904), 
Section iii, Apteree. 
‘triangularis Lindl. in Mitch. Trop. Austr. 219 (1848)... BFL. i, . 481 
bursarifolia Behr. & F.v.M. in Trans. Phil. Soc. ae 
i,8 (1855). Figd. tit Hwart Pl. Viet.ii, 5 Ba 
F.v.M. Pl. Vict. i, t. 5 (1860-62)... B.Fl. i, 482 
Baueri Endl. in Hueg. Enum. 13 (1837) es na BEE, BS 
Section iv, Pinnate. : 
megazyga F.v.M. in BEL i, 483 (1863) 6190 fg AsyAE ah 253K} 
pinnata Sm. in Rees’ Cycl. xii (1809) ... : .. BEL i, 484 
boronivfolia G. Don Gen. Syst. i, 674 (1831) , He eBaldli ea, 485 
multijuga G. Don le. ... B.FI. i, 485 
tenuifolia Lind]. in Mitch. Trop. Austr, 248 "(1848), 
Proc, Linn. Soc. N.S.W. xxiv, 641 ae 
stenozyga H.v.M. Fragm. i, 98 (1859) .. jk «. BEL 4a, 486 
Tribe vi, Harpullies, 
16. Harpullia Roxb. Fl. Ind. ed., or Carey i, 645 Oe. 
alata Tv.M, Pragm. li, 103 (1861) hn IBeHy a, 47,0 
, Hillii F.v,M. in Trans. Phil. Soc. Vict. iii, 26 (1859)... B.Fl. i, 470 
pendula Planch. in Trans. Phil. Soc. Vict. iii, 26 (1859) B.FI. i, 471 
7. Family AKANIACEE. 
(New Family, O. Stapf.) 
Akania Hook. £ in Benth. & Took. Gen. Plant. ~s 
409 (1862). 
Hillii Hook. f. l.c et oF) ws 4 permnsalaliemay © 4:7: 
We wrote as follows in the MS of this Cyne, the note being dated 
17th July, 1912 :— 
“The systematic position of the:genus Akania is very difficult. Bentham 
and Hooker, also Mueller, place it with Sapindacew, but Prof. Radlkofer 
refuses to admit it into that family and removes it tentatively to the 
Staphyleacew. Prof. Pax, the specialist on Staphyleacew, again refuses 
_to admit it into that family, so that the genus is at present an outcast in 
Engler’s system, and it may probably have to be placed into a small family 
‘by itself.” 
This Dr. O. Stapf fies done in a paper in the Kew Bulletin (No. 9 of 1912, 
p. 378), entitled “ Akaniacew: a new Family of Sapindales,” which appears 
to be a CMY arrangement, 
