In my paper above-mentioned I likewise observed, that the seeds, which were sent to the Royal Society by Father D’Incarville, for those of the true varnish-tree, did not prove to be so; but the plants, which were raised from them, were taken to be referred to the spurious varnish-tree of Kœmpfer; which I believed to be the same, and own, that it is yet my opinion, notwithstanding what Mr. Ellis has said to the contrary: for the number of lobes or _pinnæ_ on each leaf, with their manner of arrangement on the midrib, are the same. And here we must observe, that the figure of this given by Kœmpfer is from a flowering branch; and every gardener or botanist must know, that the leaves, which are situated immediately below the flowers of most winged-leaved plants, have fewer lobes or _pinnæ_, than those on the lower branches: therefore I must suppose it to be the case in this plant; and from thence, with some other observations which I made on the seeds, I have asserted it to be the wild or spurious varnish-tree of Kœmpfer. But Mr. Ellis is of a contrary opinion, because the base of the lobes of those plants, which were raised from Father D’Incarville’s seeds, are rounded and indented like two ears. In Dr. Kœmpfer’s figure and description of the _fasi-no-ki_, the leaves are intire, and come to a point at their base. Here I think Mr. Ellis is a little too hasty in giving his opinion, as he has not seen this plant in the state, that the branch was, from which Kœmpfer’s figure was taken. For as there are often such apparent differences between the leaves on the lower branches of trees, and those which are at their extremities, as that in the descriptive titles of the species Dr. Linnæus frequently uses them to distinguish one from another; so in making the same allowance for the plant in question, I cannot help thinking that I am in the right, and must abide by my opinion, till the plants, which have been raised from Father D’Incarville’s seeds, have flowered, to convince me of the contrary. However, I cannot help observing, that Mr. Ellis has given a title to this shrub before he had seen any of the characters, which are necessary to determine the genus. And I have pretty good reason to believe it should not be joined to the Rhus; for the three seeds, which I received from the Royal Society, were shaped like a wedge, being thicker on one edge than the other, and not unlike those of the beech-tree, as I noted in my catalogue when I sowed them; and, by their structure, seemed as if the three seeds had been inclosed in the same capsule.