Chapter XXX: Section V (2)

The imperfect state of the teeth, and the difficulty of examining them accurately without having the skull detached, forbids us to be confident as to the number of grinders in either jaw. From the most careful inspection, however, that we could make in the actual state of the specimen, we are inclined to believe that the system of dentition closely, if not exactly, resembles that of the dog. In the present state of uncertainty, whilst opinions of the highest authority are so discordant as to the genus to which this animal should be referred, we do not feel ourselves at liberty to disturb the arrangement adopted by Lacépède, Illiger, and Desmarest, but leave the ultimate decision of the question to future naturalists, who may possess more unequivocal data for its solution. One thing, indeed, is pretty obvious, namely, that if Major Denham’s animal be not the identical species described by Bruce, it certainly belongs to the same genus; for as it does not appear that Bruce himself ever possessed a detached skull of the Fennec, it is very easy to imagine that he could not accurately ascertain the number of molar teeth in the head of a living animal of such vivacity and quickness, and which was so impatient of being handled, that he could not obtain a correct measurement of its ears, or even count the number of paps on its belly. With such an animal it is not unlikely, moreover, that the two last tubercular grinders should escape the notice of any one attempting to examine the mouth under circumstances so disadvantageous, those teeth being in some measure concealed by the large projecting carnivorous tooth immediately before them. That it cannot be a _Galago_, as M. Geoffroy Saint Hilaire imagines, is sufficiently evident; and M. Desmarest has given no less than six distinct, and, we think, conclusive reasons against that opinion, through which, however, we must not follow him at present. The subject has already grown under our hands to a far greater bulk than we intended, and we conclude it by taking leave to question the validity of M. Geoffroy Saint Hilaire’s argument respecting the general veracity of Mr. Bruce, and consequently to enter our protest against his Fennec being classed with the _Quadrumana_.

We retain, provisionally, the generic name of _Fennecus_, first proposed by Lacépède, and the specific one of _Cerdo_, adopted by Gmelin; but should the animal ultimately prove to be a different species from _Canis cerdo_, M. Desmarest’s specific appellation of _Brucii_ may with propriety be assigned to it.

Genus. RYZÆNA. _Ill._

Species 2.—_Ryzæna tetradactyla_.

Viverra tetradactyla. _Gmel._ I. 85.

Suricate. _Buff._ xiii. t. 8.

This animal was found on the banks of the rivers in the neighbourhood of Lake Tchad.

Tribus. PLANTIGRADES. _Cuv._

Genus. GULO. _Storr._

Species 3.—_Gulo capensis_.

Gulo Capensis. _Desm. Mamm._ p. 176.

Viverra mellivora. _Gmel._ I. 91.

Ratel. _Sparman_.

Ratel weesel. _Penn. Quad._ II. 66.

The natives, from whom Major Denham had all the following particulars, informed him, that during the rutting season the _Ratel_ is very fierce, not hesitating to attack a man. Each male has two or three females, whom he scarcely suffers to be a moment out of his sight; if either of them escape his jealous vigilance, and leave him for a short time, she is sure to receive severe chastisement at her return. This animal is very easily killed; a single blow on the nose, which seems peculiarly sensible of the slightest injury, instantly despatches him.

Ordo. QUADRUMANES. _Cuv._

Genus. CERCOPITHECUS. _Briss._

Species 4.—_Cercopithecus ruber_.

Cercopithecus ruber. _Geoff. Ann. du Mus._ xix. 96.

Simia rubra. _Gmel._ I. 34.

Le Patas. _Buff._ xiv. pl. 25 and 26.

Red Monkey. _Penn. Quad._ I. 208.

Ordo. RUMINANS. _Cuv._

Genus. CAMELOPARDALIS. _Gmel._

Species 5.—_Camelopardalis Giraffa_.

Camelopardalis Giraffa. _Gmel._ I. 181.

Cervus Camelopardalis. _Linn._ I. 92.

Giraffe. _Buff._ XIII. p. 1.

Camelopard. _Penn. Quad._ I. 65.

The _Giraffes_ were found on the south-eastern side of Lake Tchad, generally in parties of from two to five or six. They are tolerably numerous, but not very common. The motion of these animals is not elegant; their pace is a short canter, in which they seem to drag their hind legs after them, in an awkward fashion: their speed, however, is such as to keep a horse at a pretty smart gallop. The skin brought home by Major Denham is that of a young animal, not above a year and a half or two years old; the colours are very much lighter than on the skin of an adult animal. In its wild state, the _Giraffe_ carries its head remarkably erect; a character which, Major Denham remarks, is not faithfully preserved in any figure he has seen of this animal.

Genus. ANTILOPE. _Pall._

Species 6.—_Antilope Senegalensis_.

Antilope Senegalensis. _Desm. Mamm._ p. 457.

Le Koba. _Buff._ xii. pl. 32. f. 2.

Senegal Antelope. _Penn. Quad._ I. 103.

Only the head and horns of this animal were brought home by Major Denham; it was found on the plains of central Africa. The natives call this species _Korrigum_.

Species 7—_Antilope bezoartica_.

Antilope gazella. _Gmel._ I. 190.

Capra bezoartica. _Linn._ I. 96.

Algazelle. _Buff._ xii. pl. 33. f. 1, 2.

Algazel Antelope. _Penn. Quad._ I. 77.

Linnæus’s description of _Capra bezoartica_ speaks of the horns as being “entirely annulated;” but Brisson, to whom Linnæus refers, says they are annulated nearly to the end. In our specimens, a considerable extent from the _apex_ is without the rings. This difference may probably arise from age. In other respects, the horns before us perfectly answer the description of those of Linnæus’s _Capra bezoartica_. M. Gmelin seems to have made some confusion between the _Capra Gazella_ and _C. bezoartica_ of Linnæus. He has changed the specific name of _Gazella_ into that of _oryx_, and he has made Linnæus’s _bezoartica_ the _Gazella_ of himself.

Only two horns of this species, and those apparently not fellows, were sent home. This animal was found on the south side of the River Shary, in central Africa.

Species 8.—_Antilope cervicapra_.

Antilope cervicapra. _Pall._

Capra cervicapra. _Linn._ I. 96.

Antilope. _Buff._ xii. pl. 35 and 36.

Common Antelope. _Penn. Quad._ I. 89.

We have only the horns of this animal. Its African name is _El Buger Abiad_, or the _White Cow_.

Genus. BOS. _Linn._

Species 9.—_Bos taurus_.

Bos taurus. _Linn._ t. I. 98.

Major Denham brought home a pair of horns of enormous size, belonging evidently, from their form, texture, and mode of insertion, to a variety of the common Ox, of which he states that two kinds exist in central Africa, one with a hump before, and very small horns; the other altogether of a larger size, also with a hump, and immense horns.

The circumference of one of the horns before us, at the largest part near the base, is twenty-three inches and a quarter; its length, following the line of curvature, three feet, six inches and a half. It has two curves; and weighs six pounds and seven ounces. Internally it is extremely cellular, or rather cavernous.

Species 10.—_Bos bubalis_.

Bos bubalis. _Linn._ I. 99.

Le Buffle. _Buff._ xi. pl. 25.

Buffalo. _Penn. Quad._ I. 28.

We possess the head, with the horns. The name by which the native Africans call this animal is _Zamouse_.

Ordo. PACHYDERMES. _Cuv._

Genus. RHINOCEROS. _Linn._

Species 11.—_Rhinoceros bicornis_.

Rhinoceros bicornis. _Gmel._ I. 57.

Rhinoceros unicornis. var. β. _bicornis._ _Linn._ I. 104.

Rhinoceros Africanus. _Cuv._

Rhinoceros d’Afrique. _Buff. Supp._ vi. pl. 6.

Two-horned Rhinoceros. _Penn. Quad._ i. 150. pl. 29.

Here again we have the horns only. The local name of this animal is Gargatan.

Ordo. RONGEURS. _Cuv._

Genus. SCIURUS. _Linn._

Species 12.—_Sciurus Dschinschicus_.

Sciurus Dschinschicus. _Gmel._ I. 151.

Sciurus albovittatus. _Desm. Mamm._ p. 338.

Our species agrees exactly with M. Desmarest’s account of his _S. albovittatus_, except that the tail is rather more decidedly distich than that of the individual he describes; but the dried state of the skin before us prevents our ascertaining its form very minutely. M. Desmarest refers to pl. 89 of Sonnerat’s Voyage, vol. ii. for a figure of his Ecurieul de Gingi, which he quotes as a variety of this species; on looking into Sonnerat, we do not find any figure at all of this animal referred to by that author. Plate 89 is a figure of the _Maquis à Bourres_.

Genus. HYSTRIX. _Linn._

Species 13.—_Hystrix cristata_.

Hystrix cristata. _Linn._ I. 74.

Porc-épic. _Buff._ xii. pl. 51.

Crested Porcupine. _Penn. Quad._

* * * * *

Classis. AVES. _Auct._

Ordo. RAPTORES. _Ill._

Fam. VULTURIDÆ. _Vigors. in Linn. Trans._

Genus. VULTUR. _Auct._

Species 1.—_Vultur fulvus_.

Vultur fulvus. _Briss._ I. 462, sp. 7.

Gyps vulgaris. _Sav. Ois. d’Egypte_.

Le Percnoptere. _Pl. Enl._ 426.

Vautour Griffon. _Temm. Manuel d’Orn._ p. 5.

Alpine Vulture. Var. B. _Lath. Gen. Hist._ I. p. 17.

This species was observed by Major Denham in the neighbourhood of all the large towns through which he passed. It was attracted by the offal, and refuse of every description, which the inhabitants were accustomed to throw out for its use. For the services which these birds thus performed, they met with protection in return from the natives, who did not permit them to be destroyed.

Fam. FALCONIDÆ. _Leach._

Subfam. ACCIPITRINA. _V. in Linn. Trans._

Genus. ASTUR. _Auct._

Species 2.—_Astur musicus_.

Falco musicus. _Daud. Orn._ II. 116, sp. lxxxviii.

Le Faucon chanteur. _Le Vaill. Ois. d’Afr._ I. 117, pl. 27.

Chanting Falcon. _Lath. Gen. Hist._ I. p. 178.

This beautiful Hawk was met with occasionally in most parts of central Africa, but not in any abundance. It was the only species of the family which the officers of the expedition were enabled to preserve and bring home.

Ordo. INSESSORES. _V. in Linn. Trans._

Tribus. FISSIROSTRES. _Cuv._

Fam. TODIDÆ. _V. in Linn. Trans._

Genus. EURYSTOMUS. _Vieill._

Species 3.—_Eurystomus Madagascariensis_.

Coracias Madagascariensis. _Gmel._ I. 379.

Le Rolle de Madagascar. _Pl. Enl._ 501.

Madagascar Roller. _Lath. Gen. Hist._ III. p. 79.

Fam. HALCYONIDÆ. _V. in Linn. Trans._

Genus. HALCYON. _Swains._

Species 4.—_Halcyon erythrogaster_.

Alcedo erythrogaster. _Temm._

Alcedo Senegalensis, var. γ. _Lath. Ind. Orn._ 249.

Martin Pecheur du Senegal. _Pl. Enl._ 356, fig. inf.

The birds of this species were met with in abundance in those situations near rivers which form the usual resort of the species of this family. They were more particularly observed in the tamarind trees.

Tribus. CONIROSTRES. _Cuv_

Fam. CORVIDÆ. _Leach._

Genus. CORACIAS. _Linn._

Species 5.—_Coracias Senegalensis_.

Coracias Senegalensis. _Gmel._ I. 379.

Rollier du Senegal. _Pl. Enl._ 326.

Swallow-tailed Indian Roller. _Edw._ t. 327.

Senegal Roller. _Lath. Gen. Hist._ III. p. 75.

These splendid Rollers were very abundant in the thick underwoods throughout central Africa.

Tribus. SCANSORES. _Auct._

Fam. PSITTACIDÆ. _Leach._

Genus. PSITTACUS. _Auct._

Species 6.—_Psittacus erythacus_.

Psittacus erythacus. _Linn._ i. 144.

Perroquet cendrée de Guinée. _Pl. Enl._ 311.

Ash-coloured Parrot. _Alb._ i. t. 12.

Several specimens of this species were brought over alive to this country, which are now honoured with a place in His Majesty’s collection.

Genus. PALÆORNIS. _V. in Zool. Journ._

Species 7—_Palæornis torquatus_.

Palæornis torquatus. _V. in Zool. Journ._ vol. II. p. 50.

Psittaca torquata. _Briss._ IV. 323.

La perruche à collier. _Pl. Enl._ 551.

Perruche à collier rose. _Le Vaill. Hist. des Perr._ pl. 22, 23.

This species, whose chief _habitat_ is said to be in India, which is the main resort of the group to which it belongs, appears to have a very wide geographical distribution. It has been found on the coast of Senegal, as well as by the officers of the present expedition in central Africa. The specimen before us is very much mutilated, but enough of the bird remains to enable us to identify the species.

Ordo. RASORES. _Ill._

Fam. TETRAONIDÆ. _Leach._

Genus. PTEROCLES. _Temm._

Species 8.—_Pterocles exustus_.

Pterocles exustus. _Temm. Pl. Col._ ♂ 354. ♀ 360.

These birds were found in great numbers in the neighbourhood of Bornou. They frequented the low sand hills which were scantily covered with shrubs. Like most of the family, they were found to be excellent eating.

Genus. FRANCOLINUS. _Steph._

Species 9.—_Francolinus Clappertoni_.

_Franc. supra brunneus fulvo-variegatus; subtus fulvo-albidus, maculis longitudinalibus brunneis aspersus; strigâ superciliari subocularique, gulâ, genisque albis, his brunneo-lineatis._

_Pileus_ brunneus, ad frontem nigrescens. Striga nigra interrupta extendit a rictu ad genas. _Genarum_ plumæ, anteriores lineis gracilibus, posteriores maculis ovalibus brunneis in medio notatæ. _Colli, pectoris, abdominis_que plumæ in medio brunneæ marginibus fulvo-albidis, rhachibus pallidis. _Dorsi_ superioris, _scapularium, tectricum_que plumæ pallido-fulvo marginatæ partimque fasciatæ. _Dorsi_ inferioris _uropygii_que plumæ pallidè brunneæ in medio fusco-brunneo leviter notatæ. _Remiges_ exteriores pogonio externo ad basin fulvo-fasciato, pogonio interno ad basin brunneo, versus apicem rufo-fulvo; interiores utrinque fulvo-fasciatæ. _Ptila_ inferiora in medio brunnea, fulvo ad margines notata. _Pteromata_ inferiora in medio fusca, marginibus fulvis. _Femorum_ plumæ fulvæ in medio brunneæ. _Rectrices_ brunneæ fasciis plurimis fulvis undulatæ. _Rostrum_ superné nigrum, infra ad basin rubro tinctum. _Pedes_, ad frontem nigri, poné rubescentes: _tarsis_ bicalcaratis, calcare superiore obtuso, inferiore acuto. Longitudo _corporis_, 14 unc.; _alæ_ a carpo ad remigem 5tam, 7⅕; _caudæ_, 3⅘; _rostri_, 1¹⁄₂₈; _tarsi_, 2³⁄₁₀.

This species of _Francolin_, which appears to us to be hitherto undescribed, was met with in tolerable abundance. It frequented sand hills, covered with low shrubs; and was very difficult to be procured in consequence of the great speed with which it ran. We have named the species after Captain Clapperton, R. N. the intrepid and intelligent companion of Major Denham.

Fam. STRUTHIONIDÆ. _V. in Linn. Trans._

Genus. STRUTHIO. _Auct._

Species 10.—_Struthio camelus_.

Struthio camelus. _Linn._ I. 265.

L’Autruche. _Pl. Enl._ 457. ♀

The Black Ostrich. _Brown’s Illust. of Zool._ pl. 16.

Major Denham succeeded in bringing alive to this country four of these noble birds, which are at present in His Majesty’s menagerie at Windsor.

Genus. OTIS. _Linn._

Species 11.—_Otis Denhami_.

_O. fusco-brunneo et pallido-fulvo undulatim punctulata, capite brunnescenti-nigro, superciliis genis gulâque albidis, collo rufo, pectore cinereo; pteromatibus remigibus rectricibusque nigris, istis albo-maculatis, his albo-fasciatis; corpore subtus rufescenti-albo._

_Capitis_ pileus parsque superior _nuchæ_ brunnescenti-nigri. _Regionis auricularis_ plumæ elongatæ, decompositæ, cinerascenti-albæ. _Colli_ inferioris plumæ frontales elongatæ. _Dorsi, uropygii, scapularium, ptilorum_que plumæ fusco-brunneæ, pallido-fusco undulatim punctulatæ. _Pteromata_ nigra maculis albis grandibus irregulariter notata. _Tectrices_ inferiores albæ ad marginem alarum fusco-variegatæ. _Rectrices_ nigræ; duæ exteriores pogonio interno fasciis duabus albis, externo tribus, notatæ; cæteræ tribus fasciis ejusdem coloris utrinque notatæ, fasciâ sub-apicali nigro sparsâ: duæ mediæ ad apicem fusco-brunneæ, pallido-fusco undulatim punctulatæ. _Irides_ flavæ. _Rostrum_ corneum. _Pedes_ nigri. Longitudo _corporis_, 3 ped. 9 unc.; _caudæ_, 1 pes, 4 unc.; _rostri_, ad frontem, 3¾ unc., ad rictum, 4½ unc.; _tarsi_, 7 unc.; _digiti_ medii, ungue incluso, 2¾ unc.; exterioris, 1⁷⁄₀ unc.

African Bustard? _Lath. Gen. Hist._ Vol. VIII. p. 361.

We have hitherto seen no description that exactly accords with the bird before us. The _African Bustard_ described by Dr. Latham, in the second edition of his “Synopsis,” lately published under the title of “A General History of Birds,” appears to be the most allied to it. But the head of that bird is described as being bare; and such a marked difference prevents us from referring our bird to that species, with which it generally agrees in other points, without some note of doubt. Our specimen is unfortunately very defective: in the quill feathers, and fore parts of the neck, more particularly. These latter are described by Major Denham as singularly beautiful, being elongated and swelling out into a kind of ruff. We are happy to have the opportunity of distinguishing this bird by the name of the enterprising traveller to whose zeal we are indebted for the species itself, and many other valuable acquisitions to science.

This species was met with, in the rainy season, near the larger towns, but not in any great abundance. It frequented moist places, where the herbage was pure and fresh. In such places it was taken in snares by the natives, who used it for food. It was almost invariably met with singly, Major Denham never having observed a pair together more than once. It is singular, also, that it was always found in company with _Gazelles_ whenever a _Bustard_ was observed, it was certain that the _Gazelles_ were not far distant. Major Denham describes the eye of this bird as large and brilliant. In like manner as is recorded of the _Gazelle_, with which this bird seems to have so close a sympathy, the Arabs are accustomed to compare the eyes of their most beautiful women to those of the _Oubara_[86].

Ordo. GRALLATORES. _Ill._

Fam. GRUIDÆ. _V. in Linn. Trans._

Genus. BALEARICA. _Briss._

Species 12. _Balearica pavonina_.

Ardea pavonina. _Linn._ I. 233.

Balearica. _Briss._ v. 511.

Oiseau royal. ♀ _Id. Ib._ pl. 41.

L’oiseau royal. ♂ _Pl. Enl._ 265.

Crowned African Crane. _Edw._ t. 192.

Crowned Heron. _Lath. Gen. Hist._ IX. p. 26.

These birds were found in the neighbourhood of the smaller lakes. They were generally observed in flocks of six or eight. A single pair was sometimes met with, but a single bird scarcely ever.

Genus. PLATALEA. _Linn._

Species 13.—_Platalea leucorodia_.

Platalea leucorodia. _Linn._ I. 231.

La Spatule. _Pl. Enl._ 405.

Spatule blanche. _Temm. Manuel d’Orn._ p. 595.

White Spoonbill. _Penn. Brit. Zool. App._ t. 9.

These birds were found in the smaller lakes, and in grounds which were overflowed. They were met with in tolerable plenty.

Fam. ARDEIDÆ. _Leach._

Genus. ARDEA. _Auct._

Species 14.—_Ardea Coromandelensis_.

Ardea Coromandelensis. Steph, in Sharts Gen. Zool. XI. p. 577.

Ardea russata. _Temm. Manuel d’Orn._ p. 506.

Ardea affinis? _Horsf. Linn. Trans._ Vol. XIII. p. 189.

Ardea comata. var. β. _Lath. Ind. Orn._ 687.

Crabier de la côté de Coromandel. _Pl. Enl._ 910.

This bird was shot in the neighbourhood of Alph, a town situated in the middle of a swamp, described at page 233 of these travels. They were seen in some abundance in that neighbourhood, and were noticed by Major Denham as remarkable for their beauty and gracefulness.

Species 15.—_Ardea melanocephala_.

_Ard. cinerea; capite cristato, colli parte posteriore lateribusque, regione interhumerali, remigibus, rectricibusque nigris, gulâ collique parte anteriore albis._

_Colli_ inferioris plumæ elongatæ cinerascentes. _Dorsi_ pars anterior inter humeros nigra, posterior saturatè cinerea. _Ptila_ pallidè cinerea. _Tectrices_ inferiores albæ. _Rostrum_ nigrum, _mandibulâ_ inferiore flavescente, apicem versus nigro marginatâ. _Pedes_ nigri. Longitudo _corporis_, 2 ped. 9 unc.; _alæ_, 15 unc.; _rostri_, 4; _tarsi_, 6.

We feel much hesitation in characterizing the bird before us as a distinct species. In a family like the present, where there is so much variation both in age and sex in the same species, it is almost impossible to decide upon the identity or distinction of species, unless by actual observation of the birds themselves in their native haunts, and in their different ages and states of plumage. On the whole, however, it is perhaps the most eligible plan to keep those species separate which show evident marks of distinction; leaving it to more accurate observation to ascertain whether they may be identical with described species, and differing merely by age, sex, or the variations of plumage according to the different seasons of the year.

The bird before us might, at first sight, be supposed to be the common _Ardea cinerea_, Linn. But that bird, as far as we have observed, never possesses the entirely black head which distinguishes the specimen before us; nor has it the black on the hind part of the neck, nor on the back between the shoulders. The younger bird of our common species has those parts cinereous which are black in the adult: and the crest and lower feathers of the neck are never so much elongated as in the old bird. The strength of the black markings in Major Denham’s species, moreover, and the developement of the crest, neck, and scapular feathers, prevent us from concluding it to be an immature bird. If we allow it to be adult, it is decidedly distinct from the adult of _A. cinerea_. We know no other allied species to which we might consider it referable.

These birds were found in great abundance in all the lakes and marshes throughout the route of our travellers. They were met with in company with numberless other species of the family, specimens of which our officers were prevented from preserving, or bringing home, in consequence of the difficulties attending the expedition, to which we have before alluded.

Genus. SCOPUS. _Briss._

Species 16.—_Scopus umbretta_.

Scopus umbretta. _Gmel._ I. 618.

L’Ombrette du Senegal. _Pl. Enl._ 796.

The Umbre. _Brown’s Illust. of Zool._ pl. 35.

Tufted Umbre. _Lath. Gen. Hist._ Vol. IX. p. 23.

Major Denham informs us, that this bird was very rarely seen. The few he observed were met with in the _Mimosa_ trees.

Genus. IBIS. _Lacep._

Species 17—_Ibis Æthiopicus_.

Tantalus Æthiopicus. _Lath. Ind. Orn._ 706.

Ibis religiosa. _Cuv. Regne Anim._ I. 483.

Abou Hannez. _Bruce’s Trav. Append._ pl. p. 172.

This bird, which is of exceeding interest as being one of the two species of _Ibis_ which were the objects of sacred worship among the Egyptians, was met with by Major Denham on the west borders of the Lake Tchad. He observed them in flocks, and in considerable numbers. Hitherto they have been sparingly seen by travellers, and few specimens have reached our collections.

Genus. CICONIA. _Briss._

Species 18.—_Ciconia Marabou_.

Ciconia Argala. _Temm. Pl. Col._ 301.

This bird was met with rather plentifully in the neighbourhood of large towns, in company with the _Vultures_, to the manners of which we have already referred, page 195. Like them, they were protected by the natives, in consideration of the services they performed in clearing away all the offensive substances which were thrown out to them from the towns. In India, we find that the corresponding species, _Ardea Argala_, Lath., is held in equal estimation for similar services. Major Denham mentions his having frequently been a witness of their voracious and omnivorous habits.

M. Temminck first figured and characterized this African species as distinct from that of India. He has given it the name of _Argala_, while for the Indian bird, which had already received that name from Dr. Latham, he proposes the name of _Marabou_. We have ventured to reverse the order of these names; and while we retain for the Indian species the original name conferred on it by Dr. Latham, which, it is to be recollected, is an Indian word, we have assigned the African species the title of _Marabou_, which, it is equally to be observed, is a word peculiar to Africa.

The specimen brought home by the present expedition appears to be a young bird, and answers to the description given of the young of this species by M. Temminck. The colours are nearly black in the bird before us, which are grey in the adult bird figured by that gentleman. Major Denham mentions his having noticed some birds nearly allied to this species, which were larger, and different in colour, and which he conceived to be distinct. They probably were the adult birds of this species.

Ordo. NATATORES. _Ill._

Fam. ANATIDÆ. _Leach._

Subfam. ANSERINA. _V. in Zool. Journ._

Genus. PLECTROPTERUS. _Leach._

Species 19.—_Plectropterus Gambensis_.

Plectropterus Gambensis. _Steph. in Shaw’s Zool._ XII. Part 2. p. 7.
pl. 36.

Anas Gambensis. _Linn._ I. 195.

Spur-winged Goose. _Lath. Gen. Hist._ X. 241.

This bird was found in flocks of great numbers on all the lakes. The flesh was very coarse, and of a fishy taste, and afforded very bad eating.

Species 20.—_Plectropterus melanonotus_.

Plectropterus melanotos. _Steph. in Shaw’s Zool._ XII. Part 2. p. 8.

Anser melanonotus. _Forst. Zool. Ind._ p. 21. t. 11.

Anas melanonotus. _Lath. Ind. Orn._ 839.

Oye de la côté de Coromandel. _Pl. Enl._ 937.

Black-backed Goose. _Penn. Ind. Zool._ p. 12. t. 11.

This species, of which fine specimens of the male and female are preserved in the collection, was met with on the lake Tchad. It was not seen in any abundance, and was found in company with other species of the family. The protuberance on the bill of the male is much more enlarged and prominent than is represented in the “Planches Enluminées.”

Subfam. ANATINA. _V. in Zool. Journ._

Genus. ANAS. _Auct._

Species 21.—_Anas viduata_.

Anas viduata. _Linn._ I. 205.

Canard du Maragnan. _Pl. Enl._ 808.

Spanish Duck. _Penn. Gen. of Birds_, p. 65. t. 13.

This species was very common, both on Lake Tchad and on all the smaller lakes. It was excellent eating. Mr. Pennant has described the species as an inhabitant of America and Africa. Linnæus says only, that it is found in the lakes of Carthagena; those, it is supposed, of New Spain. Our bird accords very accurately with his description of the species, and also with the figure quoted above from the “Planches Enluminées.” We have every reason to conclude with Mr. Pennant, that the species inhabits both the Old and New Continent. The bend of the wing exhibits the rudiments of a spur.

Fam. PELECANIDÆ. _Leach_

Genus. ONOCROTALUS. _Briss._

Species 22.—_Onocrotalus Brissonii_.

Pelicanus Onocrotalus. _Linn._ I. 215.

Le Pelican. _Pl. Enl._ 87.

White Pelican. _Edw._ t. 92.

This well known species has been described to us by Major Denham as very abundant on the borders of Lake Tchad. The genus _Onocrotalus_ was first instituted by M. Brisson; but, according to his custom, he left the present species without any specific name. M. Cuvier, in his “Regne Animal,” acknowledges the genus; but neither has he specifically distinguished the bird. We feel much pleasure in now assigning it a name, in memory of the first characterizer of the group; an ornithologist, whose works cannot be studied without the highest advantage, but whose labours have never as yet been sufficiently appreciated.

Genus. PHALACROCORAX. _Briss._

Species 23.—_Phalacrocorax pygmæus_.

Pelecanus pygmæus. _Pall. Reise._ II. 712. t. G.

Dwarf Shag. _Lath. Gen. Hist._ X. 431.

Cormoran pygmée, jun. _Temm. Man. d’Orn._ p. 901.

This bird, which agrees very accurately with M. Temminck’s description of the young of his _Cormoran pygmée_, was met with by Major Denham on one of the smaller lakes in central Africa. He describes the species as very rarely occurring.

Genus. PLOTUS. _Linn._

Species 24.—_Plotus melanogaster_.

Plotus melanogaster. _Gmel._ I. 580.

Anhinga melanogaster. _Forst. Zool. Ind._ p. 22. t. 12.

Anhinga de Cayenne. _Pl. Enl._ 959.

Black-bellied Anhinga. _Penn. Ind. Zool._ p. 13. t. 12.

Black-bellied Darter. _Lath. Gen. Hist._ X. 451.

This bird was seen but once or twice during the course of the expedition. It was met with on one of the smaller lakes. It seems to have a very extensive geographical distribution, being found in the New World, in the islands of Java and Ceylon, and now in the interior of Africa.

There are remnants of several other species of birds in the collection, consisting chiefly of bills, legs, and wings. Among them we can trace the apparent remains of the _Ciconia alba_, Briss.; _Ardea garzetta_, Linn.; different species of the genus _Lamprotornis_, Temm.; with various others, of which we regret that we cannot venture to give any description. The foregoing twenty-four species are all that we can undertake to determine upon with accuracy.

* * * * *

Classis. REPTILIA. _Auct._

Ordo. SAURIENS. _Cuv._

Tribus. LACERTIENS. _Cuv._

Genus. MONITOR. _Cuv._

Species 1.—_Monitor Niloticus_.

Lacerta Nilotica. _Linn._ I. 360.

Varanus Dracæna. _Merr. Syst. Amph._ p. 59.

Tupinambis Niloticus. _Daud. Rept._ III. 51.

Monitor du Nile, ou Ouaran. _Cuv. Reg. Anim._ II. 25.

Tribus. CAMELEONIENS. _Cuv._

Genus. CHAMÆLEO. _Lacép._

Species 2.—_Chamæleo vulgaris_.

Chamæleo vulgaris. _Daud. Rept._ IV. 181.

Chamæleo carinatus. _Merr. Syst. Amph._ p. 162.

Lacerta chamæleon. _Linn._ I. 364.

FOOTNOTES:

[Footnote 82: Voyage, ii. 20.]

[Footnote 83: Desmarest states, (Ency. Meth. note), that he cannot find any work of Lacépède in which the genus Fennecus is proposed.]

[Footnote 84: Perhaps M. Cuvier was led into this mistake by an error of the pen or press, in M. Desmarest’s translation of Bruce’s description of the animal. Bruce says, “from the snout to the anus, he was about ten inches long;” the translation, “Ce Fennec avoit six pouces de longueur, depuis le bout du nez jusqu’ à l’origine de la queue.” The same mistake occurs in M. Geoffroy Saint Hilaire’s quotation of Bruce; but this cannot be a misprint, for the length is not expressed by the word _six_, but by the Arabic cypher _6_.]

[Footnote 85: Taken as the stuffed specimen stands.]

[Footnote 86: _Oubara_ seems to be a general name for the _Bustards_ in Africa. A smaller species than the present, of that country, has received this name as a specific title from M. Gmelin.]

No. XXII.

BOTANICAL APPENDIX.

BY ROBERT BROWN, ESQ. F.R.SS. L. & E., F.L.S.

The Herbarium formed during the expedition, chiefly by the late Dr. Oudney, contains specimens, more or less perfect, of about three hundred species. Of these one hundred belong to the vicinity of Tripoli; fifty were collected in the route from Tripoli to Mourzuk, thirty-two in Fezzan, thirty-three on the journey from Mourzuk to Kouka, seventy-seven in Bornou, and sixteen in Haussa or Soudan.

These materials are too inconsiderable to enable us to judge correctly of the vegetable productions of any of the countries visited by the mission, and especially of the more interesting regions, Bornou and Soudan.

For the limited extent of the herbarium, the imperfect state of many of the specimens, and the very scanty information to be found respecting them, either in the herbarium itself, or in the Journal of the collector, it is unfortunately not difficult to account.

Dr. Oudney was sufficiently versed in Botany, to have formed collections much more extensive and instructive, had the advancement of natural history been the principal purpose of his mission. His time and attention, however, were chiefly occupied by the more important objects of the expedition: as a botanist he had no assistant; and the state of his health during his residence in Bornou must, in a great degree, have rendered him unable to collect or observe the natural productions of that country.

For the few specimens belonging to Soudan, we are indebted to Captain Clapperton, who, after the death of Dr. Oudney, endeavoured to preserve the more striking and useful plants which he met with. His collection was originally more considerable; but before it reached England, many of the specimens were entirely destroyed. It still includes several of the medicinal plants of the natives; but these being without either flowers or fruit, cannot be determined.

In the whole herbarium, the number of undescribed species hardly equals twenty; and among these not one new genus is found.

The plants belonging to the vicinity of Tripoli were sent to me by Dr. Oudney, before his departure for Fezzan. This part of the collection, amounting to one hundred species, was merely divided into those of the immediate neighbourhood of Tripoli, and those from the mountains of Tarhona and Imsalata.

It exceeds in extent the herbarium formed by Mr. Ritchie near Tripoli, and on the Gharian hills, which, however, though containing only fifty-nine species, includes twenty-seven not in Dr. Oudney’s herbarium.

The specimens in Mr. Ritchie’s collection are carefully preserved, the particular places of growth in most cases given, and observations added on the structure of a few; sufficient at least to prove, that much information on the vegetation of the countries he visited might have been expected from that ill-fated traveller.

In these two collections united, hardly more than five species are contained not already published in the works that have appeared on the botany of North Africa; particularly in the Flora Atlantica of M. Desfontaines, in the Flore d’Egypte of M. Delile, and in the Floræ Libycæ Specimen of Professor Viviani, formed from the herbarium of the traveller Della Cella.

The plants collected in the Great Desert and its oases, between Tripoli and the northern confines of Bornou, and which somewhat exceed a hundred, are, with about eight or ten exceptions, also to be found in the works now mentioned. And among those of Bornou and Soudan, which fall short of one hundred, very few species occur not already known as natives of other parts of Equinoctial Africa.

A complete catalogue of the herbarium, such as I have now described it, even if the number and condition of the specimens admitted of its being satisfactorily given, would be of but little importance, with reference to the geography of plants. Catalogues of such collections, if drawn up hastily, and from imperfect materials, as must here have been the case, are indeed calculated rather to injure than advance this department of the science, which is still in its infancy, and whose progress entirely depends on the scrupulous accuracy of its statements. To produce confidence in these statements, and in the deductions founded on them, it should in every case distinctly appear, that in establishing the identity of the species enumerated, due attention has been paid to the original authorities on which they depend, and, wherever it is possible, a comparison actually made with authentic specimens.

In the account which I am now to give of the present collection, I shall confine myself to a slight notice of the remarkable known plants it contains, to characters or short descriptions of the more interesting new species, and to some observations on such of the plants as, though already published, have either been referred to genera to which they appear to me not to belong, or whose characters require essential alteration.

In proceeding on this plan, I shall adopt the order followed in the botanical appendix to Captain Tuckey’s Expedition to the River Congo. And as there will seldom be room for remarks on the geographical distribution of the species I have to notice, I shall chiefly endeavour to make my observations respecting them of some interest to systematic botanists.

CRUCIFERÆ. Fifteen species belonging to this family exist in the collection, one of which only appears to be undescribed, and of this the specimens are so imperfect, that its genus cannot with certainty be determined. Of those already published, however, the generic characters of several require material alterations, some of which suggest observations relative to the structure and arrangement of the natural order.

SAVIGNYA ÆGYPTIACA, (_De Cand. Syst._ 2. _p._ 283,) is the first of these. It was observed near Bonjem, by Dr. Oudney, whose specimens slightly differ from those which I have received from M. Delile, by whom this plant was discovered near the pyramid of Saqqârah, and who has well figured and described it in his Flore d’Egypte, under the name of Lunaria parviflora. By this name it is also published by M. Desvaux. Professor Viviani, in giving an account of his Lunaria libyca, a plant which I shall presently have occasion to notice more particularly, has remarked[87], that Savignya of De Candolle possesses no characters sufficient to distinguish it as a genus from Lunaria; and still more recently, Professor Sprengel has referred our plant to Farsetia[88]. The genus Savignya, however, will no doubt be ultimately established, though not on the grounds on which it was originally constituted; for the umbilical cords certainly adhere to the partition, the silicule, which is never absolutely sessile, is distinctly pedicellated in Dr. Oudney’s specimens, the valves are not flat, and the cotyledons are decidedly conduplicate. In describing the cotyledons of his plant as accumbent, M. De Candolle has probably relied on the external characters of the seed, chiefly on its great compression, its broad margin or wing, and on the whole of the radicle being visible through the integuments. It would appear, therefore, that the true character of the cotyledons of Savignya has been overlooked, chiefly from its existing in the greatest possible degree. To include this degree of folding, in which the margins are closely approximated, and the radicle consequently entirely exposed, a definition of conduplicate cotyledons somewhat different from that proposed in the “Systema Naturale” becomes necessary. I may here also observe, that the terms Pleurorhizæ and Notorhizæ, employed by M. De Candolle, to express the two principal modifications of cotyledons in Cruciferæ, appear to me so far objectionable, as they may seem to imply that in the embryo of this family, the position of the radicle is variable, and that of the cotyledons fixed. It is at least deserving of notice, that the reverse of this is the fact; though it is certainly not necessary to change these terms, which are now generally received.

On the subject of Savignya, two questions naturally present themselves. In the first place: Is this genus, solely on account of its conduplicate cotyledons, to be removed from Alyssineæ, where it has hitherto been placed, to Velleæ, its affinity with which has never been suspected, and to whose genera it bears very little external resemblance? Secondly: In dividing Cruciferæ into natural sections, are we, with M. De Candolle, to expect in each of these subdivisions an absolute uniformity in the state of the cotyledons? As far as relates to the accumbent and flatly incumbent states, at least, I have no hesitation in answering the latter question in the negative; and I believe that in one case, namely Hutchinsia, these modifications are not even of generic importance; for it will hardly be proposed to separate H. alpina from petræa, solely on that ground. I carried this opinion farther than I am at present disposed to do, in the second edition of Mr. Aiton’s Hortus Kewensis, where I united in the genus Cakile plants which I then knew to differ from each other, in having accumbent and conduplicate cotyledons; and I included Capsella bursa pastoris in the genus Thlaspi, although I was aware, both from my own observations, and from Schkuhr’s excellent figure[89], that its cotyledons were incumbent. I am at present, however, inclined to adopt the subdivision of both these genera, as proposed by several authors, and received by M. De Candolle; but to this subdivision the author of the Systema Naturale must have been determined on other grounds than those referred to; for in these four genera, in which the three principal modifications of cotyledons occur, he has taken their uniformity for granted.

As to the place of Savignya in the natural family, I believe, on considering the whole of its structure and habit, that it ought to be removed from Alyssineæ to a subdivision of the order that may be called _Brassiceæ_, but which is much more extensive than the tribe so named by M. De Candolle; including all the genera at present known with conduplicate cotyledons, as well as some others, in which these parts are differently modified.

There are two points in the structure of Savignya, that deserve particular notice. I have described the æstivation of the calyx as valvular; a mode not before remarked in this family, though existing also in Ricotia. In the latter genus, however, the apices of the sepals are perhaps slightly imbricate, which I cannot perceive them to be in Savignya.

The radicle is described by M. De Candolle as superior, with relation to the cotyledons. I am not sure that this is the best manner of expressing the fact of its being horizontal, or exactly centrifugal, the cotyledons having the same direction. This position of the seed is acquired only after fecundation; for at an earlier period the foramen of the testa, the point infallibly indicating the place of the future radicle, is ascendant. From the horizontal position of the radicle in this and some other genera, especially Farsetia, we may readily pass to its direction in Biscutella, where I have termed it descendant; a character which I introduced to distinguish that genus from Cremolobus. But in Biscutella the embryo, with reference to its usual direction in the family, is not really inverted, the radicle being still placed above the umbilicus. On the contrary, in _Cremolobeæ_, a natural tribe belonging to South America, and consisting of Cremolobus and Menonvillea, though the embryo at first sight seems to agree in direction with the order generally, both radicle and cotyledons being ascendant, it is, in the same sense, not only inverted, but the seed must also be considered as resupinate: for the radicle is seated below the umbilicus, and also occupies the inner side of the seed, or that next the placenta,—peculiarities which, taken together, constitute the character of the tribe here proposed. It appears to me singular that M. De Candolle, while he describes the embryo of these two genera as having the usual structure of the order, should consider that of Iberis, in which I can find no peculiarity, as deviating from that structure[90].

LUNARIA LIBYCA of Viviani[91] is the second plant of Cruciferæ, on which I have some observations to offer. This species was described and figured, by the author here quoted, in 1824, from specimens collected in 1817 by Della Cella. The specimens in the herbarium were found near Tripoli, where the plant had also been observed in 1819 by Mr. Ritchie, who referred it to Lunaria, and remarked that the calyx was persistent. Professor Sprengel, in his Systema Vegetabilium, considers it a species of Farsetia.

That this plant ought not to be associated either with the original species of Lunaria, or with Savignya, as now constituted, is sufficiently evident. And if it is to be included in Farsetia, it can only be on the grounds of its having a sessile silicule, with compressed valves, an indefinite number of seeds in each cell, and accumbent cotyledons. But in these respects it accords equally with Meniocus, a genus proposed by M. Desvaux, and with some hesitation received by M. De Candolle, and with Schivereckia of Andrzejowski, which he has also adopted. It does not, however, agree with either of those genera in habit, and it is easily distinguished from both by its simple filaments and other characters, which I shall notice hereafter. Is this plant, then, sui generis? ought it to be united with Alyssum, the character of that genus being modified to receive it? or does not Alyssum require subdivision, and may not our plant be referred to one of the genera so formed? A brief result of the examination of these questions, so far as they are connected with the subject under consideration, will be found annexed to the character which is given of the genus formed by the union of Lunaria libyca with Alyssum maritimum, a plant also in the collection, from the neighbourhood of Tripoli.

_Alyssum maritimum_, which is described both as an Alyssum and as a Clypeola by Linnæus, is the _Konig_ of Adanson, who founded his generic distinction on the monospermous cells and supposed want of glands of the receptacle; and M. Desvaux, admitting Adanson’s genus, has named it Lobularia. In the second edition of Hortus Kewensis I included this plant in Alyssum, which M. De Candolle has also done in his great work.

For the genus here proposed I shall adopt Adanson’s name, altering only the termination, and wishing it to be considered as commemorating the important services rendered to botany by my friend Mr. Konig, of the British Museum[92]. In comparing these two species of Koniga, their agreement is very striking in habit, in leaves, in the closely pressed bipartite pubescence, in the calyx, petals, stamina, and stigma. They correspond also in some other points, less obvious but equally important, which I shall separately notice. The first of these is in having eight glands on the receptacle; a character peculiar, I believe, to these plants, and which first suggested the generic name Octadenia. The glands in Alyssum maritimum were entirely overlooked by Adanson, are not noticed by M. Desvaux, and M. De Candolle has described only the four that subtend the longer stamina. These certainly are much more conspicuous than the remaining four, which, however, occupy the place of the only glands existing in several of the most nearly related genera.

The number and position of the glands in this genus give some support, perhaps, to the hypothesis which I have formerly advanced, of the divisions of an hypogynous disk being in most cases formed of abortive filaments; an opinion more strikingly confirmed, however, in this family of plants, by their form and texture in Alyssum calycinum, and minimum.

The second point in which the two species of Koniga agree is in the structure of the septum. On this, which I consider as a new source of character in Cruciferæ, I shall offer some remarks in speaking of Farsetia.

The third point of agreement is the adhesion of the funiculi umbilicales to the septum. This adhesion, though really existing, is not very obvious in the monospermous cells of Koniga maritima; but in the supposed variety of this species from Teneriffe, in which the cells are occasionally dispermous, it is manifest, and is very remarkable in all states of Koniga libyca.

I first introduced this adhesion of the funiculi to the septum, as a generic character, in distinguishing Petrocallis from Draba. It has since been advantageously employed in the character of Lunaria by M. de Candolle, who, however, supposes this structure of much rarer occurrence in Cruciferæ than it really is. According to my observations, it is neither unfrequent, nor always of generic importance. Thus, I find it to exist in some species only of Arabis, namely A. Turrita, pendula, and canadensis, and hence I did not introduce it into my generic character of Parrya, though I have noticed it in my description of the species.

The principal difference existing between these two species of Koniga is that the cells of the ovarium and silicula of _K. maritima_ are monospermous, while those of _libyca_ are polyspermous, the number being variable, apparently indefinite, but not exceeding six. There are, however, other instances in this family, in which the mere difference between definite and indefinite number of seeds is of specific importance only, as in Draba and Meniocus, in each of which a species exists with dispermous cells; and the objection arising from the apparently still greater difference between unity and indefinite number in the two species of Koniga is removed by a supposed third species or variety of K. maritima, in which two seeds are occasionally produced in each cell. It may even be observed, that from unity to the indefinite number in this case, where the ovula in the different cells are alternate, the transition is perhaps more easy than from the binary to the indefinite, in cases where, as in Alyssum properly so called, the ovula are placed opposite in the different cells, and are in the same cell equidistant from its apex; this symmetry, probably, admitting of addition only by fours.

The next genus of Cruciferæ to be noticed is FARSETIA, a fragment of the original species of which is in the collection. There are also several specimens of a plant, found in the desert, supposed to be new, and which, though without flowers, and considerably different in the form of its stigma, I am inclined, from the resemblance in habit, in pubescence, in silicula, in seeds, and especially from the exact similarity in the structure of the septum, to refer to the same genus[93].

As the introduction of the structure of the dissepiment into the generic characters of Cruciferæ is now proposed for the first time, and as I believe that its texture and appearance should always be attended to in constituting genera in this family of plants, I shall here offer a few remarks respecting it.

According to the particular view which I briefly but distinctly published in 1818, and which M. de Candolle first adopted in 1821, of the composition of the pistillum in Cruciferæ[94], the dissepiment in this family is necessarily formed of two lamellæ, derived from the parietes of the fruit. These lamellæ are in many cases easily separable, and where their union is more intimate, their existence is still evident from the want of correspondence, and consequent decussation, of their areolæ. The lamellæ, which are usually very thin and transparent, have their surface divided into areolæ, in different genera of very different forms, some of which may, with sufficient clearness, be described. In many cases no other appearance exists; in some, however, the axis of the septum resembles either a single nerve, or two distinct parallel nerves; and from this axis, whether formed of one or two nerves, tubes having the appearance and ramification of the veins of a leaf, and which generally terminate within the margin, not unfrequently proceed. This is remarkably the case in Farsetia, as I here propose to limit that genus; the central vessels in both its species being closely approximated, so as to form a single cord, extending from the apex to the base of the septum, and the veins being numerous and uncommonly distinct. Approaches more or less manifest to this structure of Farsetia exist in several other genera, as in Parrya, Savignya, and Koniga. But in this last mentioned genus the nerve, which originates, as in all cases, at the apex, hardly extends, even in the polyspermous species, beyond the middle of the septum, and the veins, which are much less distinct, are descendent.

As far as my observations on this subject at present extend, I expect, with great confidence, uniformity in the structure of the septum of strictly natural genera, and in many cases, though certainly not in all, I have found a resemblance in this respect in more extensive groups. Thus Draba, Arabis, and Aubrietia, agree in having amorphous areolæ, bounded by flexuose tubes or lines; while Alyssum, Berteroa, and Fibigia, have narrow linear areolæ, bounded by parallel or slightly arched lines. Capsella bursa differs from Thlaspi and Æthionema, as Draba from Alyssum, and agrees with Lepidium procumbens, _Linn._ improperly referred to Hutchinsia, and which equally has incumbent cotyledons. Cochlearia differs in like manner from Kernera. And numerous other examples of the same agreement in nearly related plants, and of differences where the usual sources of distinction are less available, might be noticed.

HESPERIS NITENS of Viviani is sparingly in the herbarium, both in flower and fruit. The seeds, though not ripe, are sufficiently advanced to show that the direction of the cotyledons is in this stage accumbent; and, as I have found in Cruciferæ generally that the ultimate agrees with the early state of cotyledons, I conclude they are likewise accumbent in the ripe seed. The plant is also abundantly different from Hesperis in other respects, and does not appear to be referrible to any genus yet published. This new genus[95] I have dedicated to the memory of Dr. Oudney, who found the present species in many of the wadeys between Tripoli and Mourzuk, and remarks that camels and mules eat it.

HESPERIS RAMOSISSIMA, which is also in the herbarium, was found in Fezzan. This plant differs in aspect from most of the other species of Hesperis, approaching in some points to Malcomia, in others to Mathiola; and as its cotyledons are very obliquely incumbent, it may form a section or subgenus, with a name, Hesperis (Plagiloba) ramosissima, indicating that character.

CAPPARIDEÆ, of which eight species occur in the collection, is the family next to be noticed. I consider this order as belonging to the same natural class with Cruciferæ; and that this class includes also Resedaceæ, Papaveraceæ, and Fumariaceæ.

M. de Candolle, in defining Capparideæ, appears to regard the ovarium as having in all cases only two placentæ, and therefore formed of two pistilla or carpella. But to this, which is certainly the more usual number, there are many exceptions. These exceptions occur chiefly in the genus Capparis, which, as it is at present constituted, includes species differing from each other in having an ovarium with from two to eight placentæ, and, consequently, composed of an equal number of pistilla. Capparis spinosa is the most decided instance of the increased number of placentæ, and this, as well as some other nearly related species, are also remarkable in having septa subdividing the placentæ, and uniting in the centre of the compound ovarium.

In the herbarium there are three species of the genus Cleome. Two of these, C. pentaphylla and arabica, are in many respects well known plants; the third I believe to be an undescribed species, but nearly related to monophylla.

If the very natural group, formed by the Linnæan genus Cleome, is not to be preserved entire, its subdivision must be carried much farther, and established on other grounds, than has been done by M. de Candolle, whose genera and sections appear to me to have been equally founded on partial considerations. Thus, his _Polanisia_, uniting all the Cleomes whose stamina exceed six, contains in its first section, in addition to the species from which the genus was formed, at least two sets of plants, having very little affinity either with each other, or with the original species, whose only congener is placed in a second section.

_Gynandropsis_ also consists of two groups not very intimately connected: the first is composed of species belonging to South America, and having the usual æstivation of the family: the second, of which _C. pentaphylla_ may be taken as the type, is chiefly African, and is readily distinguished by its very different æstivation,—the great peculiarity of which consists in the petals not covering the stamina at any period. To this mode of æstivation of petals, which has never before been noticed, though it equally exists in Crateva and in Resedaceæ, I shall apply the term _aperta_. It is constantly conjoined, and, perhaps, necessarily connected with the early opening of the calyx, whose segments are originally connivent and slightly imbricate: for it may here be remarked, that in all the modifications of what I have termed imbricate æstivation of petals, they are, I believe, in the very early stage in like manner erect, and the sexual organs equally exposed.