In the very next paragraph Mr. Miller seems to forget, that from his own observations on the seeds of the China varnish-tree, he has asserted it to be the Fasi-no-ki of Kœmpfer; but now he finds, in his memorandums, that those seeds were wedge-shaped, and like the seeds of the beech-tree; and that all the three seeds he received seemed to be inclosed in one capsule: so that now he is at a loss what to call it; and at the same time says I have been too hasty in calling it a Rhus.
Mr. Miller goes on, and allows this China varnish-tree changes to a purple in the autumn; but not so deep as the true varnish-tree. I suppose he means, by this true varnish-tree, the Carolina pennated Toxicodendron; for Kœmpfer has not told us what colour the true varnish-tree of Japan changes to in autumn.
But this is no certain proof on either side of the question, only a corroborating circumstance of the species of a tree: nor should I have mentioned it, but for the manner in which Kœmpfer, with an imagination truly poetical, describes the autumnal beauty of his Fasi-no-ki, or spurious varnish-tree. “Rubore suo autumnati quâ viridantes sylvas suaviter interpolat, intuentium oculos e longinquo in se convertit.” Even this description would make one suspect it is not the same with the China varnish-tree, which, I am informed, did not turn purplish in the garden of the British Museum till the first frost came on: whereas it is well known, that some of the Rhus's and Toxicodendrons, particularly the Carolina pennated one, change to a fine scarlet colour in the beginning of a dry autumn, even before any frost appears.
Mr. Miller seems surprised, how I should think, that the Carolina pennated Toxicodendron, or poison-ash is like the Fasi-no-ki of Kœmpfer. I must here acknowledge, at this time, not having seen Doctor Kœmpfer's specimen, I imagined, from the shape of the lobe-leaves (as he has described them) and from the remarkable scarlet colour of both these trees in autumn, that Mr. Miller might be right in what he has advanced; for it was from his authority I took it, depending on the information he gives us in his Dictionary, fol. edit. 6. under the article Toxicodendron, where he takes some pains to assure us, that they are the very same plants.
In the next paragraph I find Mr. Miller has intirely mistaken the meaning of one part of my letter to Mr. Webb; which I must recommend to him to read again, and he will find it exactly agrees with his own sentiments. There he will find my opinion is, that notwithstanding the change of soil and situation, this Sitz-dsju, or true varnish-tree, and the Fasi-no-ki, or spurious varnish-tree of Kœmpfer, are distinct species of Rhus or Toxicodendron, and will ever remain so.
Mr. Miller now desires me, since I have seen Dr. Kœmpfer's specimens in the British Museum, to declare, whether I think I am mistaken.
In answer to this, and to satisfy Mr. Miller as well as myself, I have been very lately at the Museum, and have looked very carefully over Dr. Kœmpfer's specimens, and do sincerely think, as did other judges at the same time, that the Sitz-dsju is not the same with the Carolina pennated Toxicodendron, nor the Fasi-no-ki the same with Father D'Incarville's China varnish-tree.
Mr. Miller informs us, that one of the best kinds of varnishes is collected from the Anacardium in Japan.
In answer to this, I must beg leave to shew the Society, that Dr. Kœmpfer does not so much as mention, that this Anacardium grows in Japan; but that the varnish, which is collected from it, is brought to them from Siam: and I believe it will appear plainly, from what follows, that there is not a plant of this kind in the kingdom of Japan; for Siam and Cambodia, especially the parts of those kingdoms, where Kœmpfer informs us this Anacardium[211] grows, lie in the latitudes of from 10 to 15 degrees north, which must be full as hot as our West Indies: so that it is not probable, that it would bear the cold of the winters in Japan; for Japan lies from the latitudes of 33 to above 40 degrees north, which is about the same parallel with our North American colonies.
I shall now beg leave to lay before the Society that passage of Dr. Kœmpfer, which relates to this dispute, together with my translation of it, that it may be compared with Mr. Miller's translation, which he gives us in his reply to the Abbé Mazeas's letter, Philosoph. Trans. vol. xlix. p. 164. 2d paragraph.