Abstract: This part(Ⅱ) of the paper(part Ⅰ, see vol. Ⅴ, no 1, 37-70, 1985)has dealt with the following species, which have been thought to be thebotanical onigins of the traditional Chinese nedicine "Qinpi" Chinese Drug:(criex Fraxini). They were misinterpreted in the past, especiallytheir Latin name have been in confusion for a long time. (1) Fraxius meaioinalis S. S. Sun, sp. nov. The new species were formerly labeled as Fraxinus chinensis var. acuminata Lingelsh., even were wrongly regarded as Fraxinus chinensis var. rhynchophylla Hemsl. or Fraxinus rhynchophylla Hance. It is mainly distributed in Shaanxi (陕西) and Gansu. (甘隶) A. Lingelsheim (1920) improperly established the variety-Fraxinus chinensis var. acuminata Lingelsh., but I bave found that its syntype shouldbe separated at least into three parts:cited specimens from Japan may be Fraxinus longicusfis S. & Z.;cited ones from Kansu (viz. Gansu)and Schensi(viz. Shaanxi) may well be the new species;yet cited ones from Hupeh, Kanton, etc. need further researching. It is ifferent from Fraxicus chinen. is Roxb. in that flower is polygamo-dioecious;calyx in pistillate or hermaphrodite is obconic or broad-campanulate with irregularly lobes;style shorter;stigma bifid or capitate;especially the length of samara's upper wing always longer than the length of the seed part;its leaflets apex always acuminate or attenuate, rarerostrate. It is distinct from F. obovata Bl. to be mentioned below (viz. Fraxinus chinen is var. rhynchophylla Hemsl. or F. rhynchophylla Hance) It is leafletsare fairly minor ca 5-6 cm long, 2-4 cm late, especially along the midrib and veins beneath always bear white fine hair, without any dense brownish villose like the later. The perules of the terminal bud are thiner than that of the later. It must be pointed out that the new species is not coincident with Fraxinus caudata J. L. Wu (1982), because Wu's name refer to Fraxinus chinensis var. acuminata Lingelsh., but the new species in this paper merely refer tothe part distributed in Gansu and Shaanxi. Besides, Wu's name unwittin-gly involved the type of Fraxinus szaboana Lingelsh (1907), so has become asuperflous name of the latter, hence should be rejected by current ICBN. (2) Fraxinus obovata Bl.(sensu lato) The older name has been overlooked and misinterpreted for a long time.As far as its protologue (original description) is concerned, the species appears to be quite puzzling (cf. Blume 1850). A. Lingelsheim once said:"the flowers of this species are unknown and has never been seen since Blume described it". He took it as "Species non Satis Congnitae", and thendisposed of it as "Species excludendae". However, I have by chance found that some root suckers (surculus), which is sprouted from a block of the stump, much similar to the type features of Fraxinus obovata Bl. which was showed in the publication of Nakai et Koidzumi (1927) fig. 193 (the duplication of that photo is pl.Ⅲ in this paper). The appearance immediately appealed to me, so I managed to investigate on the habit, habitat, morphological change and differentia-tion within species. It has been confirmed that those root suckers (surculus)turned out to be Fraxinus rhynchophylla Hance. Although the epithet "obovata" based on such especial appearence seemsto be improper for the species, the older Latin name Fraxinus obovata Bl. is still legitimate. On account of priority in nomenclature, the name Fraxinus obovata Bl. must be taken into use again. From the point of view of nomenclatural stability, I had hoped I might be albe to dispose of the older name as "ncm. rejioienda" or "nom. dubium". Unfortunately by ICBN Art. 69-1, a specific name can only be reje-cted if it has been widely and persistantly used for a taxon or taxa notincluding its type. Nevertheless, I should like to uphold Dr. P. S. Green'sproposal:"The next International Botanical Congress will incorporateinto the Code of Nomenclature, for such overlooked names, the simple expedient of nomina specifica rejicienda". Acording to the study in field work over large district and in in herbftriua, from tbe available data and specimens, it has been proved that the species .should be disposed of as a polymorphical species of higher evolutionary ,4egree# It is distributed widely from North China,Far East USSR, Korea to North Japan, Consequently obevata Bl. sensu lato in this paper refers to Fraxinus rhynchopylla Hancc, F. japonica Bl. ex K. Koch and their synonyms.The long and confused synonymy in this paper may well be helpful to set forth!the correct name.It must be pointed out that this species (sensu lato) have been further separated into sevaral subspecies, on the basis of the analytical results (N. Bf be published in the next paper), by means of "Fuzzy Glustering Analysis Method" as is called, with computer simultaneously in view of "geographical race" or "ecctype".(3) Fraxtnus paxiana Lingelsh. The species is one of the botanical origins of the "Shaanxi Qinpi"(陕西秦皮)is well as Fraxinus meaiciralis S, S. Sun, but its amount of the natural resources is rather limited. Its chief features are,Urge tree, big leaves with 7-11 leaflets,lateral petiolulcs rather short;along the midrib and veins base beneath covered with dense or lightly browish villose, or nearly glabrious; large inflorescence with a great deal of flowers (i. c. densiflora). Especially, s'aminate flowers bear fragrant petals, while pistillate flowers appear to be no petals, as the petals are so indistinct or early easy dec inev The axis of the inflorescence is stout, redish or brownish with obvious leniicels.Ou affi ities, this species is very closed to Fraxinus suaveclcns W. W. Smith, which is chiefly distributed in Southwest China. Besides, Fraxinus sikkimen.is Haud Mazz. (1936) is a puzzling species so far. Its appearence is evry sinular to the female body of Fraxinus paxiana Lingelsh. Certainly, these opinions need to be confirmed.(4) Fraxinus stylosa Lingelsh. (sensu lato) This species is usually a small tree or shrub. Its leaves are rather sttfiller，up to 20 cm long,3-5-(7) leaflets. The axis of the iafloiescent^ is rather slender,flowers are sparse, petals are spathulate or oblanceolate, up tu 1,5-2 mm loag.Fraxinus fallax Lingelsh. is identical in all details with F. stylosa Lingelsb. but the former's leaves have not any hair on both surl aces.Frarinus oacnicccalyx H.M. ex Stib. is also similar to it. In view of classification equivalence, all of these species should fall within the range of variation.(5) Fraxinus chinensts Roxb.This is, ia fact, a widely cultural species in China. True wild plant have la dly been found so far all over the country. Its chief characteristics ares dioecious (flowers are strictly unisexual);calx in the pistillate flower is always long campanulate and lightly irregularly toothed, while calyx in stamiaate flower is rather little;no petals in any flower. The shape and feature of the samara appear to be unique the terminal wing of the samara is acute and attenuate like ploughshare, and obviously shorierw than tbfc ieed part.As A. Lingelsheim did not clearly know the above key characters, he not only toolc a few related species into confusion，but published several inappropriate varieties. A lot of related species specimens without flowers, used to be wrongly determined as Fraxinus chinensis Roxb. So many speciments in China have been wrongly labeled this name.It is said that this species is not the original plant of the current "Qinpi" goods, but the cortex may be used as the substitute of the Traditional Chinese Medicine "Qinpi", owing to pharmacists study. (S) Fraxinus bungeana DC.Formerly,it was thought to be a main original plant of "Qinpi". This is a "good species" in Taxonomy. It is easy to be determined owing to its unique rhombic leaflets, pubescent shoot and flower bearing linear whitr petals.It is chiefly distributed in Hebei, Henan, Liaoning and Shanxi, bat lots of speciments of other species distributed in many other regions, used to be wrongly re&arded as Fraxinus bungcana DC.