192 Dr. B. Seemann on the Bignoniacese. XX. — Remarks on the Natural Order Bignoniaccfe. By Beiithold Seemann, Ph.D., F.L.S. Mr. Miers, in concluding his "Observations on the Bigno-niacea;" in this Journal (scr. 3. vol. viii. p. 120), stated that having learnt my intention of continuing inquiries in that family, and wishing to avoid contravention, he had been induced to cede to me the priority, reserving, however, to himself the right of re-suming the subject at a future time. I am fully sensible of the courtesy shown, but feel rather sorry, and I am sure the public will share my feeling, that Mr. Miers should, even for a time, have sus-pended his investigations of a natural order so much in need of a thorough revision, after having already thrown so much light upon it by a series of valuable observations and descrip-tions. The Bignoniacese have hitherto been handled so super-ficially by many authors, that even the labours of Don, Martius, DeCandolle, and Fenzl, important as they are, can scarcely be regarded as more than landmarks to guide us through a region of bewilderment and chaos, where there is room for more than one pair of eyes to observe, and more than one mind to draw conclusions. It is not my intention to open my series of papers on the Bignoniacepe by an elaborate criticism of Mr. Miers's " Observa-tions on the Bignoniacese;" but as the result of his inqunies would seem to invalidate the characters upon which I and others maintained Crescentiacese and Bignoniacese as distinct orders, or, at all events, tribes, 1 am compelled to say a few words respecting them. The principal character dividing Crescentiacese from Bignoniacese proper is that the former have an indehiscent, the latter a dehiscent fruit. The genus Tanaecium I placed amongst Crescentiacese, because it is everywhere described as having an indehiscent fruit ; and I had seen only flowering specimens of T. albiflorum and T. amcigerum, which form my first section; whilst of T. lilacinum and 2\ parasiiicum, belonging to my second section {Schlegelia) , I had seen, and in one instance eaten, the ripe fruit. Now, there are at the British Museum some loose fruit without any other remark save that they had come from Jamaica ; and, though " these fruits are not accompanied by any dried specimen of the plant from which they were ga-thered," ]\Ir. Miers referred them to Tanaecium albiflorum, I cannot admit the justice of this proceeding, and beg to recall to mind that by far the greater part of the confusion now existing in Bignoniacese has been caused by loose fruits and seeds being re-ferred to plants with which they had nothing whatever to do. Mr. Miers has been led to form several erroneous conclusions by not being aware to what extent this has been done. For instance, when
BioStor
