against their trunks in the mountain forests, as the C. margiuata does at Cape Horn. Their Australian representative is the Brymophila cyaiwcarpa, Br., a subalpine Tasmanian plant, very similar to them in habit.
2. Callixene polyphylla, Hook. Ic. Plant, t. 674.
Hab. Cape Tres Montes, C. Darwin, Esq.
The C. marginata does not attain a lower latitude in South America than the Strait of Magalhaens, but is replaced in South Chili by the present species, which is much handsomer ; this, again, is represented in Peru by the genus Lusurmga of Ruiz and Pavon.
2. PHILESIA, Comm.
Flores hermaphroditi. Perigonium corollinum, campanulaturn, sexpartitum, lacinia? exteriores interioribus multoties breviores. Stamina 6, imo perigonii inserta ; flamenta filiforinia, infra medium in tubum connata ; antlierce inclusa?, lineares, extrorsas. Ovarium parvum, uniloculare. Ocula plurima, sub-biserialia, orthotropa, fuuiculis brevibus, placentis parietalibus elongatis aduexa. Stylus elongatus, simplex. Stigma exsertum, eapitatum, plumosum, obscure 3-lobum. Bacca unilocularis, polysperma. Semina pidpo glutinoso nidulantia, ascendentia, ovoidea, rugosa; testa tenuis, flavida ; albumen corneum ; embryo cavitate axili albuminis lente arcuatus, extremitate cotyledonari hilo oppositus. — Suffrutex Chilensis suherectus. Rami teretes, strieti v.jlexuosi. Polia alterna, coriacea. Pedunculi ramis terminates. Flores magni, sjpeciosi, basi bracleati. Philesia, Commerson, ex Juss. Gen. p. 41.
1. Philesia buxifolia, Lam., Blast. Gen. t. 248. Poiret, Encijcl. vol. v. p. 269. Rcem. etSch. vol. vii. p. 314. Lhidl. Veg. Kingd. p. 217.
Hab. Strait of Magalhaens, Commerson; Port Famine, Cajjt.King; Good Success Bay, Banks and Solander.
Except by the parietal placentation, the genera Philesia and Lapageria (themselves very closely allied), differ in no important points from Callixene and Luzuriaga, and since placentation does not afford characters of the importance amongst Monocotyledonous that it does in Dicotyledonous Orders, I see no objection whatever to arranging these two genera under Smilacea proper and next to Callixene.
In Asteliacea, as I have mentioned elsewhere, the placenta; are axile, parietal or pendulous; in Juncete, parietal or basal ; in Amaryllidea, axile or parietal; in Liliacea, the same ; and other orders equally display a very considerable amount of variation in the consolidation of the carpels, and consequent disposition of the placenta?, unaccompanied, however, with any other characters of more than generic value.
In all other respects, Philesia is even generically very nearly related indeed to Callixene, through Luzuriaga, which has the three inner segments of the perianth still larger in proportion than in Callixene ; and on the other hand, through Lapageria, in which they are all equal in size. The habit, texture, distichous insertion of the leaves, which are all on the same plane with the ramuli ; the texture, nervation, margination, and even fonn of the leaves, which are glaucous beneath, are alike in Callixene and Philesia ; so are the terminal, large, solitary, bracteate flowers, the texture of the perianth, extrorse anthers, baccate fruit, the numerous ovules in two series on three rows of placenta?, the many ovoid seeds, delicate testa, dense albumen, and axile embryo which is of similar form in the two. The only difference in the ovules is, that those of the Callixene are heterotropal, those of Philesia nearly straight or atropal, characters rather indicating close affinity than the contrary.
With regard to the genus Lapageria, R. and P., it is so closely allied to Philesia that I doubt its validity, the chief differences being the nearly equally divided perianth of Lapageria, its more distinctly three-lobed stigma, oblong
