real than apparent, being due to a partial cohesion of their edges, which in certain other Anonaceae takes place, so to speak, in an inverted order, the cohesion being at the tipes, so as to form a canopy over the androgynaecium, somewhat as in Vitis.
More disputable matter is involved in his next argument, as follows:—
"Now the three supposed divisions of the calyx in M. De Candolle's figure alternate with the three cohering divisions of the corolla and consequently represent the outer petals, the calyx being thus altogether omitted. In the description this deficiency seems to be supplied by the three supposed internal appendages opposite the base of the cohering petals, of which, however no traces are observable in the figure . . . .", and he adds, "This supposition" (i.e. that the outer row of petals was taken for a calyx) "may at least serve to explain the description; it is less easy to account for the figure, but it may be presumed that the artist, aware that the plant was described as having only three division to its calyx, was satisfied with " having found that number of sepaline parts, and it is possible that the true sepals (easily detached at maturity as in Saccopetalum and Hyalostemma) may have fallen off during the process of manipulation ".
It is obviously just as likely that the "sepals" were naturally caduous; but the case of the fimbriate processes rests on a distinct footing, because, although somewhat disguised in the drawing by a dotted line (b), which indicates the point of insertion of the corolla, they are quite clearly shewn in the figure. These organs are perhaps correlated with the special structure of the androgynaecium, and the saccate, probably nectariferous, development of the " petals ". Traces of like tufts seem to the writer to be present in other species of Miliusa as well, and it may be that the degree of their development is variable even in the same species, as is seen to be the case with the so-called petal-claw or gland in certain species of Greioia from the same parts of S. India.
Further material and particularly observations in the field may necessitate emendation, but in the meantime local botanists will presumably keep up Miliusa Leschenaultii (type of the genus), M. affinis, M. Montana, and M. nilagirica as distinct, though closely allied species. If facts should be adduced in the future to shew that M. Leschenaultii and M. nilagirica, or M. affinis and M. montana should be looked upon as a single unit, it is comparatively easy to carry out the necessary technical corrections.
To return to the history of the genus, — Bennett, having as he believed disposed of Miliusa Leschenaultii, went on to establish his
