*5^ il!
I U
r e i ..If
f '
i: li
: 'É I
i ' i l*
M il
ì
‘Ili *'
i!* I
Leguminosa/]
nimiata, U im a cum impari ■. Micia majmimla, petioMata, oblougo-obmiala, coriacea, nitida, glaberrima,
mirmtc reticulaia, obtusa, emarginata. Stipulai obsoleta, vel decidua. Pauicute axittares, terrmnalesgue.
1. Layiii emarginata. { T a b . X X X V I I I .)
Captain Bocchey's Collection contains only the foliage and ripe fruit of this plant j but we hare tho good
fortune to possess from Mr. MiUett, specimens lu flower, and are thus enabled to desonbe the plant as a
genus hitherto unknown to authors. It is indeed probable that the flfaeroiroj»« of De CandoUe, (Anagyms
fa tid a , and A . inodora ot Loureiro), may have affinity with this plant; but the rounded many-seeded fruit,
and the “ folia multijugata” of the former, forbid tbe two to be united.
T a b , XXXVIII. Layia emarginata. Fig. 1, Flower; flg . 2, Calyx and Pistil:—mayni^eii. Fig. 3, Legume:
f g . i , Seed; f g . 5, Embryo -.—natural size.
1. Bauhinia variegata. L in n .
In the specimen before us. the leaves are puberulous beneath, aud not glabrous, as deseribcd by De
CandoUe ■ at the same time we think it must be his var 0. CAinensis. Koxburgh, m his Indian Flora, vol.
2 p. 319, says, that the leaves are “ somewhat villous underneath,” so that they appear to vary considerably
in that respect. B . candida seems a very closely allied species, if, indeed, it be really specifically distinct.
De Candolle places the two in very different sections, but perhaps the only discrepane.cs are m the colour
of the fiowers, and the presence or absence of sterile filaments betiveen the five fertile siemens.
2. Bauhinia retusa. Roxb. Hort. Bengh. p . 31. (non Poir.) Plor. Ind. 2. p . 322. De
Cand. Prodr. v. 2. p . 515.—B. emarginata. Roxb. M S S . et Icon, in Mus. E . I . C. n. 1237.
Wall. Cat. o f E . Ind. Plants, n. 5792.
Only two leaves have been coUccted, but wc trust there is no doubt as to the identity of tho plant.
From Roxburgh's description, it seems to belong to De CandoUe’s section, Phanera.
3 Bauhinia corymbosa ; scandens, ramis teretibus cinhiferis, foliis basi cordatis subtus
in nervis petiolis ramulis c.alycibusque rufo-pilosis, foliolis semiovalibus obtusis parallelis ad
mediuai concretis 2-3-nervibus, corymbis terminalibus sessilibus, staminibus tribus fertilibus
petala ovata stipitata margine crispa subaiqu.aiitibus, germine stipitato, stipite tubo calycis
adnato, le<riiminibiis linearibus 6-12-spermis.—2io.r6. Hort. Bengh. p . 31. Fl. Ind. 2. p .
329. De hand. Prodr. v. 2. p . 515. Leg. Mém. p . 487. t. 7 0 . - B . scandens. Burm. Fl.
Ind. p . 94. (non L in n .)
One of the most elegant and delicate of the genns. Roxburgh says of it, “ Stem scarcely any thing
that deserves the uame, but mauy long slender branches and branchlets cUmb and-spread in evcrydircction,
to an extent of m,any fathoms, running over high trees,” &c. De CandoUe’s figure and description represents
the fertile stamens shorter than the petals : in our specimens, they are sometimes longer, but usuaUy about
the same length.
4. Bimliiiiia L in n . (excl. syn. R h e e d e .) - ^ . Lingua. De Cand. Prodr. v. 2. p .
516. Rnmph. Herb. Amb. 5. t. 1.
Of this, only a fragment exists in the CoUection, and wc have referred it to the B . scandem, chiefly on
account of the rusty coloured pubescence ou the under side of the leaves, notw.thstod.ng that each segment
has only three nerves. Much confusion prevails about this spec.es. and we shall therefore make no
aoolovy for transcribing tbe foiloiving description from Rumphins: “ Tenera folia complicata suut mstar libn,
iite rue peuitus viridia et glabra exlerne quodvis segmenlum per sex virides cosl.as lougitudinales d.stingu.tur,
atque r.iffum, ct ad taclnm instar serici molle est, sine uotabiU tame., lanugine, et quodammcdo spleudens:
seniora Mia scse aperiimt seu cxplicaut, suutqiic superne viridia, inferne gilva: eadeui raffi, lauugo m
petiolis ct ramulis supremis observntur. quoque Mia siut vetustio.-a, eo magis mferne glauca sunt. De