D Olo PART FIRST SUPPLEMENT CYBELE BRITANNICA TO BE CONTINUED OCCASIONALLY RECORD OF PROGRESSIVE KNOWLEDGE CONCERNING THE DISTRIBUTION OF PLANTS IN BRITAIN, BY HEWETT COTTRELL WATSON. LONDON : PRINTED FOR PRIVATE DISTRIBUTION. 1860. NOTICE. This First Part of the Supplement will be sent to all the provincial botanists of Britain whose present ad- dresses are known to the Author. Any future Parts will be sent to those among them who intimate a desire to receive the continuations of it, if printed, in accordance with a notice to such effect given on pages 522 3 of the fourth volume of the Cybele Britannica. As the Author cannot bind himself certainly to proceed with the Sup- plement, or to make it other than a series of desultory papers if proceeded with, he feels that it cannot properly be made a published work ; while he trusts that it may contain as much information, new or newly arranged, as most other books of its class. This one Part indeed includes 38 Local Floras, for counties and other tracts, condensed into the two general lists which occupy the larger portion of it ; not a small amount of information about the local botany of the island ; and much of it now printed for the first time. RECEPTION OF THE CYBELE BRTTANNICA. A Supplement to the Cybele Britannica, commenced before any considerable accumulation of new facts has been obtained, may appear at first thought to be rather a premature proceeding. The wish to continue the work by supplementary sheets, to be printed from time to time as occasion should arise, was stated and explained at the end of volume fourth, page 522. The chief reason for this early commencement, among other minor motives inducing thereto, may be found in that large section of this present part, which will bear the title of ' Sub- provincial Distribution ' some pages onward. One of the objects sought by that section, is to draw attention to those local facts which it is desirable that botanical ob- servers should especially look out for, whether around their own abodes or during their tours from home, as the opportunities may occur. And that section virtually involving numerous queries addressed to all persons ob- servant of facts in local botany, I propose to send out copies of this Part very generally, as is intimated in the Notice on the opposite page. The remarks which will here precede that largest section, will perhaps sufficiently suggest the existence also of other minor motives for so soon commencing a Supplement. Some, curiosity was felt by myself about the reception which my fourth volume would meet with. Subjects were incidentally touched upon ; without the possibility of thorough discussion there, which are little likely to be 4 RECEPTION OF THE understood clearly by persons of feeble ratiocinative powers, however excellent they may be as observers ; and on that account my remarks were all the more likely to be disrelished and found fault with. Moreover, with wonted freedom and independence, I had expressed opi- nions on systematic classification and other matters, such as were ill-adapted to please certain botanists of in- fluence ; those who apparently dream that a ministration to their own personal vanity, or a promotion of their own pocket interests, is something of higher importance than the advancement of intellectual truth. I cannot go so far as to add, that my acknowledged curiosity bordered at all closely upon that fidgetty anxiety about the sayings of the Grundys in the press, which is almost proverbially supposed to accompany authorship, and which doubtless usually does so with beginners. A long addiction to phrenological studies, and the facility thus acquired for estimating at their right value the mental characteristics of other men, have gradually led me to look upon the widest differences of individual appre- ciation, whether oral or printed, simply as peculiarities for psychological analysis and explanation ; not as any- thing to be otherwise personally cared about. Great offence seems occasionally to have been con- ceived against me, on account of the independence of thought and expression, which is engendered through that habit of testing the scientific doings and opinions of other persons, by a psychological analysis of the indivi- dual peculiarities from which they have probably ema- nated. Fully trained to see that talent is almost inva- riably very partial or special, and not ignorant of the truism, that time specially devoted to one department of knowledge, must necessarily imply time not devoted equally to other and different departments, I refuse to CYBELE BRITANNICA. 5 accept dogmatic opinions or judgments from other per- sons, in matters outside of their own particular lines of thought and study. Thus influenced, I may perchance be deemed too care- less about the misappreciations, and even be supposed wilfully to provoke the wrathful manifestations, of certain blustering egotists, who take upon themselves to enun- ciate judgments in every other department of botanical science, solely because they have attained eminence in some widely dissimilar department. Self-sufficient men of this sort, blind to their own mental peculiarities and deficiences, are often the least scrupulous of writers, garbling and misrepresenting that which they dislike, yet find themselves unable to refute by truthful argument. Falsehood has many phases ; and I confess a pleasure felt in exposing the false, while studying them also. But my customary manner of looking at the criticisms of others, whether only commonplaces or curiosities in mental science, is still not incompatible with a free avowal that I do much prefer and desire the good opi- nion of one very limited class of persons ; namely, of those whom I believe to be conscientious truth- seekers, whom I see to be clear-minded reasoners, and who take interest in the same pursuits and studies with myself. Men of this stamp can be pleasurably met even in counter-argument ; because we never find reason to pro- test against intentional misrepresentation by them. Pity it is, that the class here alluded to is not more nume- rously represented in the periodical press. I have not myself met with any notice of the lately published fourth volume of the C. B., in english journals, which appears to require remark from its author. Pro- bably few reviews of it have been attempted. No effort 6 RECEPTION OF THE was made towards drawing attention to the book, fur- ther than making its publication known through very few advertisements. Not a copy was sent to the "Editor" of any periodical. That very usual mode of seeking notoriety was thus entirely abstained from, be- cause no desire was felt for seeing the book reviewed by persons who had given much less attention to its subject than the author had himself given. After this statement it is almost superfluous to add, that no copy was sent to the Editor of the Gardener's Chronicle, or to any other person (so far as known to me) in any way connected with that newspaper. And as most of the matters treated in C. B. seem so little suit- able to gardeners, I was somewhat surprised to learn that the Editor of the Chronicle had gone out of his way to publish a vituperative notice of my work. I should hence infer that some strong personal feeling may have led to that step, without being openly avowed. If that feeling arose from finding cherished ideas about classifi- cation rather roughly treated in the Cybele, it was still no great manifestation of wisdom in the reviewer, to betray that my humble book had proved keen or forceful enough to wound the vanity, and to ruffle the temper, of a potentate of the ' vegetable kingdom.' Not having read a single line in the Gardener's Chro- nicle during many years past, I have only casual informa- tion about it through friends. One gentleman holding a foremost rank in natural science, who had occasion to write to me on more important topics, added a brief post- script to his letter in these words : "I was sincerely grieved at the spirit shown in the review, or, rather, diatribe against the Cybele, in the Gardener's Chronicle." In consequence of this remark, I inquired from my cor- respondent whether there was aught in the diatribe which CYBELE BRITANNICA. 7 could render it incumbent on me, as an inquirer into natural truths, to read the article he had referred to. His reply came in the form of a recommendation not to be at the trouble of reading it. This advice would have sufficed, as I could well rely on the judgment of rny correspondent. But I had mean- time written a similar question also to another friend, one more specially devoted to botanical pursuits, and who would thus look at it from a different point of view. His letter in reply to the query commenced thus : " On receipt of your note I got the Gardener's Chronicle of November 12, and read the notice of Cybele, it is, how- ever, merely personal, and not at all a critical review." Such are the impressions made on the minds of two highly scientific and honorable men through reading the notice. If it. were the reviewer's wish to make such impressions, so little favorable to himself, in minds of that quality, his efforts have been successful. Decided by these reports, I have not gone out of my own way to see the " merely personal, not at all critical, diatribe " in the newspaper named. All sense of obligation to do so was of course quite removed. Al- though, as a general rule, I am disposed to say that any writer of a book, who has placed on record a large num- ber of facts in science, for the use of his successors, ought to give respectful attention to the (honest) criti- cisms of the press. More especially should it be held incumbent on him to attend to any strictures which might profess to disprove his statements, or to show reasonable grounds for questioning the exactness or accuracy of his records. Evidently, by the reports of the two correspondents above referred to, there is nothing of that kind in the Chronicle to demand my attention. Newspaper abuse is soon forgotten ; but those of my 8 RECEPTION OF THE readers, if any, who are curious in " diatribes, not at all critical," will now know where to find one about the C. B. Happily I can turn from the worthless and con- temptible, to something else really worthy of attention. M. Alphonse De Candolle has written the most com- prehensive and elaborate treatise on phyto-geography, which has hitherto come before the public. On this account he must be eminently qualified to decide, whether or not such works as the C. B. ought to be accounted serviceable additions to the literature of that peculiar department of floral science ? whether they are adapted to supply something required by those who prosecute the study of botany in its connexions with geography and meteorology ? Only those who have systematically and successfully devoted attention to the study of phyto- geography in its general bearings, having Delation to the earth at large, can be properly qualified to give any reliable judgment on the questions asked above. It is therefore believed that a review of the C. B., emanating avowedly from the pen of that truthful and assiduous botanist, will not prove unacceptable to those Englishmen who take an interest in the botany of their own island ; and many of whom have contributed by their local knowledge and records, to render the work so much more complete than it could otherwise have been made. Under this belief, I offer here the translation of a review or critical notice of my fourth volume, which appeared in a foreign journal for July, 1859, authenti- cated by the affixed initials of M. De Candolle. No botanist of this island has qualified himself in the same indispensable manner for the task of criticism on the work, if regarded in the character of a local contribu- tion to the general subject. But in its purely local character, as an exposition of CYBELE BRITANNIC A. 9 the botany of Britain only, seen apart from that of the rest of the earth, our native botanists are of course the more suitable judges on the questions, whether or not it is a fairly correct exposition of the botany of this island ? and whether it makes any decided advance or improvement on antecedent knowledge and records re- lating to the same subject ? Doubtless, any critic who looks on the C B. in this more restricted and appro- priate character, ought himself to be well acquainted with our insular flora, both as to the plants themselves and as to their localities and other topographical relations. But a good provincial botanist, familiar with the botany of a single county, is prepared to form some tolerably fair estimate of the work, though it may be a less com- plete estimate. That the C, B. is sufficiently dissimilar from the Floras and other publications on local botany, sufficiently novel in its own kind and purpose, to justify novelty in its name, is testified by M. De Candolle at the outset of his notice. An explanation of the name adopted was given on the second page of the first volume, a dozen years ago, and its analogical appropriateness was then also ex- plained. It has not fallen to my chance to meet with any objection made against the name. But I am told that it has been recently carped at on the far-fetched pre- tence, that the antient worshippers of the deity Cybele were an impure set of beings. As sensibly might we declaim against artists who represent Venus on canvass or in marble, or against poets and lovers who invoke the name of the same deity in their verses and love-letters ; for the antient votaries of Venus were not exactly vestal virgins, any more than those of Cybele. A man of impure imagination himself, anxious and B 10 M. DE CANDOLLE ON THE unable to discover more real objections against my book, might indeed be thus self-prompted to take up that far- fetched one against the name, rather than fail of finding something to be denounced. It is probable enough that the now familiar name of Flora was equally grumbled at, as an innovation, when first brought into botanical litera- ture. Possibly it may have been censured by some Pharisaical critic, some " nice man of nasty ideas," on nearly the same grounds ; since an existing account of Flora in a standard classical book, from the pen of a Doctor in Divinity, and habitually put into the hands of schoolboys, would afford a colourable pretence for still making an equal objection against the name of Flora. " Some suppose," wrote Dr. Lempriere, " that she was originally a common courtesan, who left to the Romans the immense riches which she had acquired by prostitu- tion and lasciviousness, in remembrance of which a yearly festival was instituted in her honour." Those living botanists who have ever use^. the name of Flora, or attempted a ' Synopsis of the British Flora,' may con- gratulate themselves on not having been the first intro- ducers of that equally suggestive name into botanical service ; that is, if such silly censure could be accepted in lieu of sensible criticism. For my own part, under the sanction of a De Candolle, I shall rest quite content to keep the responsibility of the second innovation, that of adding Cybele to Flora. A REVIEW OF THE CYBELE BRITANNICA. " Tire des Archives des Sciences de la Bibliotheque Universelle" Mr. Watson has published the fourth and concluding volume of the work named Cybele Britannica. What is the meaning of this word Cybele, which he has introduced CYBELE BRITANNIOA. 11 into science ? Is it a whim, a crotchet ? Not so ; the term is novel, but the thing designated is a novelty also. It is applied to a work in which are enumerated all the plants of a country, observed in their topographical and geographical distribution exclusively, and not in their characters or botanical distinctions. This is not a Flora, for there are neither descriptions nor synonyms ; it is a work more specially devoted to the botanical geography of a country ; and since the deity Flora has been invoked in the one case, we can in like manner place the other kind of work under an invocation of Cybele. Thus, the phenomena of vegetation which are observed on the land of Britain, the position of the species in all parts of the island, their grouping in each subdivision, at each alti- tude, their origin, if it can be determined, together con- stitute a Cybele Britannica. It is desirable to have works of this character for other countries, as comple- ments of their Floras, and as means of comparison in botanical geography. His concluding volume is devoted by Mr. Watson to summaries and general views, which result from the numerous details included in the three prior volumes. As these latter have appeared in the course of a dozen years, and some important works on the english flora and on botanical geography have been published during the period, the author completes or corrects some facts, and particularly he discusses the opinions of his prede- cessors. Several portions are commentaries, either eulo- gistic or critical, of the work published by myself under the title of Geographic Botanique Raisonnee. We notice this for those persons to whom the last-named work has proved interesting. I (nous) do not complain of the position that Mr. Watson has given me, seeing what a low estimate he professes for the intelligence of botanists in 12 M. DE CANDOLLE ON THE general. According to him, "it is a peculiarity of the botanical mind not always to reason with strict accuracy and soundness." But, according to Mr. Watson, I escape this fault sometimes, even frequently, more especially in the matter of generalisations. Thus, I repeat, I do not myself make complaint. If it be necessary to defend the generality, or at least the majority, of botanists against the imputations of the english author, we will make two reflexions. First, that in the sciences of observation like botany, there are always vast numbers of facts which are more or less doubtful, and on which we are obliged to rely, fully aware that they are not a solid support. We reason about the evolution of organs, and yet the human eye, assisted by the most powerful glasses, can never see and will not be able to see the origin of anything, since matter is infi- nitely divisible. We reason about the symmetry of organs, but this is never a mathematical and absolute symmetry. In botanical geography, an exact author says that a species grows in cultivated ground, but this does not intend that it has never been found at the side of cultivated ground, nor in places which had been for- merly cultivated or which are scarcely cultivated ; we say that a species rises to a thousand metres on a certain mountain, but this does not intend that the limit is pre- cise and constant. The facts of natural history are vague, fluctuating, uncertain, if regarded with absolute strictness ; it is impossible that reasonings based on these facts should not partake of the same defect. They are not worse than those made in history, for instance, where they are not exact, seeing that we guess the opinions of a statesman, that we suppose such opinions of a king or in the public, Trom known facts, and that we reason on them accordingly. CYHELE BKITANNICA. 13 The second reflexion which the interesting work of Mr. Watson suggests to us, is, that he appears to us to abstain too entirely from the truly logical method of Irypothesis. This method is quite logical and scientific, provided that we always know what is a hypothesis. Philosophers (physiciens) and astronomers often resort to it ; we do not see why naturalists should refuse to em- ploy it. Universal attraction, definite proportions, undu- lation or emission of light, are hypotheses that new facts may possibly overthrow, and yet these are grand and use- ful ideas, which advance various sciences. When we say in botanical geography : species are distributed at the present time as if lands now separated by the sea had formerly been continuous, we make a hypothesis which is not to be despised. When we study the boreal limit of a species, and after having tried and re-tried the figures ex- pressing the temperature, month by month, day by day, in detail and in total, we come to say : the species is distri- buted upon such continent as if it could not support such an extreme of cold, nor pass beyond such a sum of heat, above such a degree ; we make a hypothesis, and various such hypotheses are put forth in physiology equally as in botanical geographj*. If we abstain from considerations of this sort, if we distrust them, with the purpose of con- fining ourselves to strict reasonings, we deprive ourselves of a mode of advancing science, in the midst of the ob- scurities and uncertainties which accompany all the facts. The extreme caution of Mr. Watson, in regard to ratiocination, has perhaps inconveniently limited the field of his researches and reflexions, but it has had the advantage of making him precise and philosophical in certain nice questions which he could not avoid. Among them* is that of the distinction of species, genera, and orders. Every one who occupies himself with botanical 14 M. DE CANDOLLE ON THE geography, ought at one time or other to scrutinize the value of these terms, the importance of these grades of association and the manner of defining them. Mr. Watson presents interesting reflexions on this topic. He developes particularly the idea that groups of the same designation in the works of botanists are not asso- ciations sufficiently equal and sufficiently uniform to render comparisons among them satisfactory in a statis- tical light. We concur in this generally so far as orders are concerned, but species likewise present the same inconvenience, for these also are associations which rest on characters of varied importance, whether in them- selves, or according to the mode of view of each author, in each particular instance, and according to his manner of regarding species in natural history. Mr. Watson takes his examples from the modern Floras of Britain. After showing the successive subdivision and recon- struction of certain species, according to the knowledge of the day and to individual opinions, he proves that three categories may be recognized among species well studied: 1, aggregate species, or super-species, as, for example, Rubus fruticosus ; 2, simple species, or ver- species, as Rubus saxatilis ; 3, sub-species, emanating from the subdivision of old species, as the Rubus dis- color. If we concur practically with this fact, which results from the recent history of the science, we may perhaps escape much disputation. Each person will decide to make, according to the tendency of his own mind, either super-species, or ver-species, or sub-species. I will go even further than Mr. Watson, I will say that the authors of european Floras might distinguish by a sign each of these three categories of specific or quasi- specific associations. I hasten however to add that this would be unattainable in exotic botany, in the present CYBELE BRITANNICA. 15 state of the science, since the greater portion of the exotic species have been made on few specimens, and often imperfect, or on cultivated plants more or less differing from native examples. Prospective judgment is in favour (Uavenir est, dans le sens) of these multiplied subdivisions in the mechanism of classification, for the resemblances and differences of organic objects are infi- nite, and to represent them passably it would be needful to have terms and grades of association more numerous than those which we practically make use of; but the state of knowledge and the incomplete materials in our collections scarcely allow us to think of it at present ; at best this mode could be attempted only in a monograph of species well known, or in the Flora of a country such as England. Britain being an island the vegetation of which has been studied for two ages, and where the observers are numerous, I have devoted much time to tracing out how many species, and which of the species, have been intro- duced into its flora, either certainly or probably, during the historic era. For this purpose I have resorted to all the english works, particularly to the earlier volumes of the Cybele Britannica. I have brought into this investi- gation the idea of the continental distribution of the spe- cies and that of their ordinary Celtic names, as com- pleting that which actual observation of the species in Britain has been able to supply regarding their origin. In his^fourth volume Mr. Watson returns to this inte- resting subject, and discusses anew the same facts. Since 1855, the date of my Geographic Botanique, it does not appear that the study of the original welsh, Scottish, or irish names of the doubtfully native plants has made the least progress. Mr. Watson thinks that, in some in- stances, I have not been sufficiently aware of the degree 16 M. DE CANDOLLK ON THE of value which ought to be placed on the statements of this or that english botanist. This may be so, I admit, considering my position as a foreigner. On the other side, I continue to believe that the distribution in neigh- bouring countries has not been sufficiently studied by the english, even by Mr. Watson, and that it suffices some- times to show whether a species exists in England through antient natural agencies, or whether it has been accident- ally cast upon that country, out of its limits, by some modern agency. However little, in such case, the local indications support the general indications, the species has probably been introduced. Notwithstanding the dif- ferent methods followed by Mr. Watson and myself in this interesting investigation, we attain closely similar results. Not only do we agree in respect to many of the species, but also we arrive at a sum total of introduced species in the spontaneously british vegetation closely similar and always small. I reckon up 83 species as being certainly of foreign origin and become spontaneous, with 100 as probably of foreign origin ; being a total of 18-*i. Mr. Watson considers 180 as foreign or Alien, and by this word he understands species more or less well esta- blished among the spontaneous english plants, but either probably or certainly of foreign origin. Moreover, I have seen nothing in the Cybele, which alters perhaps the most important result from my investigations, that in an island separated from a continent and from another island by arms of the sea of small extent, there t^tes not exist a proved example, nor even a probable example, of a species introduced by natural causes, such as winds, currents, or birds ; whilst for the great majority of spe- cies of foreign origin, we are able to determine historically or to suspect on good grounds a transport by man, by means of vessels, of imported corn, of cultivation, etc. CYBELE BRITANNICA. 17 Consequently, the effect of natural causes of transport has been greatly exaggerated ; consequently also, be- tween the epoch of the last geological events, which have modified an island relatively to a neighbouring continent, and the advent of man, there should exist usually a period during which the vegetation remains free from all admixture. We know through geology, that this period has been long in some countries, and we" are led thus to interesting reflexions on the history of the vegetable kingdom. The last volume of the Cybele Britannica contains numerous tables and statistical summaries of the distri- bution of the species and of the orders in the larger and smaller geographical subdivisions adopted by the author. These latter, smaller than counties, are 112 in number. There is no country of equal extent with Britain, in which the presence or absence of each species has been recorded in districts so numerous. The boreal and austral limits of the species which find a limit in the island, appear in these tables; the upper and lower limits in altitude are also given for a large number of the spe- cies, which have been ascertained up to the present time and with more care ; but in this respect Britain does not offer much of interest, by reason of the moderate altitude of its mountains. We find in the work of Mr. Watson much information and many interesting reflexions upon very local species (p. 443), upon the irish plants which are wanting in Britain proper (p. 227), upon the almost entire absence of species peculiar to this island (p. 389), and upon a mode of grouping the species of a country into certain types of distribution in accordance with actual analogies in their geographical conditions, notwithstand- ing their partial commingling at many points (p. 499). Some of these questions of botanical geography cannot 18 REPLY TO M. DE CANDOLLE be studied thoroughly, nor even be entered into, by the study of some particular country. There is in general more to be learned by the study of some selected species or of some selected order over the surface of the earth, than by the examination of a district or of a more extended country. But the form and nature of a work such as the Cybele Britannica places us unavoidably under the latter conditions of view. It is not to be regretted, since Mr. Watson has accomplished a con- scientious and profound work, the result of many years of investigation and reflexion, and since the precision of its details is found often enhanced in this work by the soundness or novelty of its views. ALPH. DC. A REPLY TO M. DE CANDOLLE. (On the faculties which confer botanical eminence). In the ' Introductory Explanations ' to my fourth vo- lume, page 11, I sincerely expressed a very high appre- ciation of the ' Geographic Botanique.' Yet holding intellectual truth to be paramount over all other con- siderations, I did not hesitate to maintain some dif- ferences of view ; as also, to give criticizing reasons for a dissent from some of the views held and advocated by the illustrious botanist who now so well supports his family name. It will have been seen that M. DS Can- dolle has taken the opportunity afforded by his notice of my book, to give in turn his own comments upon those made in C. B. Audi alteram partem is a golden rule for observance by writers as well as by readers ; and I shall again in my own turn here seek to substantiate and more fully explain an opinion (though more psychological than ON BOTANICAL EMINENCE. 19 botanical) which was expressed only incidentally in my fourth volume, and which has been not quite correctly reported against me in the review translated on the pre- ceding pages. I feel well assured that M. De Candolle would never wish to misreport any opinion or statement of another writer. And having this confidence in his truth and justice, it was a source of considerable annoyance to me to find that he had fallen into a grave mistake (one calcu- lated to injure me in the eyes of botanical friends, if left uncontradicted) in that part of his review where he al- ludes to the " intelligence " of botanists. The word being french equally as english, it is literal and untrans- lated. He there attributes to me " a low estimate for the intelligence of botanists in general." This imputa- tion I must decidedly repel. Neither that word " intel- ligence" nor any corresponding word was used in my own text. I never expressed that low estimate of bota- nists in general; nor do I entertain any such opinion. On the contrary, I think it may safely be asserted, that no person can now gain and retain a scientific repute, botanical or otherwise, unless endowed with considerable ability of some kind. And I know well as a positive fact, through personal or epistolary intercourse with so many of them, that the botanists of this country are in general men of much intelligence ; I would prefer to say, men of much ability and knowledge. Intelligence is of widely various kinds. The term itself has a signification so latitudinarian as to be applied even to dogs and monke3 7 s, It would thus be simply absurd to assert, that any class of scientific Englishmen is composed of persons low in intelligence. While asserting that men who are gifted with an observing intellect considerably in excess over their endowment of 20 REPLY TO M. DE CANDOLLE reasoning intellect, are those who now chiefly hold the lead in botanical reputation in this country, I do not at all deny their possession of good intelligence, I indicate only the kinds of intelligence, by which they are re- spectively most characterized and least characterized. And I must continue to maintain the psychological opi- nion, quite as decidedly as it was ever expressed by me, that individuals whose scientific reputations arise from an excess in their faculties of observation simply, if with- out any corresponding endowment of ratiocinative capa- city, are not those on whose judgment it is wise or safe to rely, in regard to matters of causal reasoning, philoso- phical inference, or logical definition. On the contrary, in such matters, I would myself far sooner trust to the judgment of provincial and amateur botanists, who might even correctly be looked upon by the metropolitan and academical leaders, as being much below themselves in scientific rank or reputation. It is scarcely to be regretted (because a knowledge of the psychological distinction is often so important to cor- rect j udgnient) that M. De Candolle has thus forced into prominence the incidental observation which was made only by way of explanatory caution, and was quite rele- vant where introduced, on pages 12, 30, 58. It is only a sort of truism in the eyes of the phrenological psycholo- gist, to say, that a comparative excess in the faculties of observation is precisely the mental peculiarity which best adapts an individual for the study of botany, or of any other department of science, in which a good knowledge of numerous objects forms an essential element of suc- cess, and is the ground from which any advance towards higher investigations must needs be commenced. He who is deficient in that talent for observing and knowing individual objects, however clear or profound he may be ON BOTANICAL EMINENCE. 21 as a reasoner, cannot take a first rank among botanists in the present stage of the science ; that is, while the art of describing and grouping plants is esteemed so important a part of the study. But where that observative talent is in excess, there must at any rate be some comparative deficiency in the reasoning talent. And very usually I find it to be a marked absolute deficiency ; although not invariably so. This view is abundantly borne out by facts, open to the eyes and understandings of all who seek to see and understand them. We have only to look to the pub- lished works and public acts of our leading botanists, and to analyze the intellectual characteristics shown in them, to become quite convinced as to the soundness of the view ; that is, of course, on the supposition that we are prepared by the necessary knowledge and training, to make such a psychological analysis. Merely general assertions to this effect, however, cannot be expected to convince ; because botanical readers are not Usually also students in psychology, and hence can be only half pre- pared to understand their application. And to adduce individual instances by name and character, would be deemed an unwarrantable liberty taken with the personal dignity of our botanical chiefs ; few of whom would pro- bably consent to be told that their talent is partial in its kind, however good it might be allowed to be of its kind ; or that its superiority in one direction almost necessarily implies a deficiency in the other direction. Botanists in general seek to know plants b} r sight, as objects in nature, to learn their names and synonyms, to distinguish one from another by technical characters, to describe them by those characters, singly or in groups, to represent them by drawings, whether by out- lines of form and colour, or by detailed dissection of 22 REPLY TO M. DE CANDOLLE parts, to unite them into genera and other groups, in accordance with resemblances in their technical cha- racters. To attain excellence in this line of study, a considerable share of ability is requisite. But the re- quired talent is almost solely a natural aptitude for observation, improved by training. It is not a ratiocina- tive, but a purely observative character of mind, seeking to know ivhat is. Some among the botanists evince a different taste or tendency of mind. They are not content only to know plants, whether singly or in groups ; but they seek also to understand something further about them. They seek to know, not only what is, but how it is, and ivhy it is. They endeavour to trace out connexions between plants and the rest of creation, inquiring how plants stand related to places, to countries, to climates, how they have originated in ; or how they can have reached to, their present localities, why they have spread so widely about the e"arth, or do not spread more widely, whether they remain permanently distinct in their kinds, or evolve one kind from another, or can by any process pass into or produce other kinds than themselves, etc. etc. It is the ratiocinative character of mind, as distinguished from the observative character, which prompts to this different line of study. It prompts inquiry also into the nature of things, instead of resting content with simply knowing the things that exist. It prompts to define rather than to describe ; to connect causally, rather than to observe individually ; to trace out relations between objects, rather than to know many objects distinctively. This is a rough division of botanists into two classes, not at all a complete or exhaustive one, but sufficient for the purpose immediately in view. No one is devoid of observative capacity; no one is devoid of ratiocinative ON BOTANICAL EMINENCE. 23 capacity. The real distinction lies only in the propor- tions which the two kinds of capacity bear to each other in different men. And all that I contend for is the obvious fact, that our leading botanists have become leaders in consequence of a high endowment of the ob- servative capacity, usually combined with much less en- dowment of the ratiocinative capacity. This is proved by the best of their published works being exclusively or mainly descriptive ; by their little tendency to take up the ratiocinative departments of botanical science ; by the usual unsoundness of their reasoning, when they do attempt to reason. Now, being obliged to avoid naming individual bota- nists, as above intimated, I will request my readers to answer two or three questions in their own way, and to their own satisfaction, if they can find the examples asked for. Who among our present botanical chiefs has written any botanical work which can fairly be considered as belonging to the same class and character with Lyell's Principles of Geology, Darwin's Origin of Species, or other truly original and ratiocinative publications ? Who among them has written any work on Fossil botany, in which we can discern any approach to that fine capacity for reasoning about the objects described, which is mani- fested so uniformly and so profoundly in Dr. Owen's writings on Fossil zoology ? Who among them has written any work on the connexions between botany and other branches of knowledge, at all resembling in its character the luminous writings of a Humboldt ? I do not here ask who has equalled Humboldt ; for that would be indeed difficult. I refer to the kind of ability, not to its absolute amount. The turn or ten- dency of a mind is shown almost as well by the kind of work chosen, as by the degree of excellence achieved. 24 REPLY TO M. DE CANDOLLE Thus, in descriptive botany, the writer of a County Flora is doing the same kind of work, although on a more humble scale, with the botanist who writes the Flora of a Kingdom, or a descriptive Systema Vegetabilium Orbis. A Synopsis of the British Flora, a Manual of British Botany, indicate the same turn of mind ; though the former may be very poor, and the latter be very good. Classification is sometimes erroneously supposed to require much ratiocinative capacity. It requires this in a very small degree only, as at present executed. Our greatest native worker in this line is only a describer, very feebly a reasoner. After labouring on it during many years, he has utterly failed to reason out any sys- tem, properly so designated ; and he has latterly even abandoned this word * system ' as a book-title. Through many changes, during which the natural system has be- come a natural system, and a natural system has sunk into no natural system, the learned Lindley has at last only achieved a sort of mosaic classification of changeful pattern ; one much resembling Mrs. Fanny Ficklemind's patchwork counterpanes ; each new one different in its pattern, but each in its turn formed by ingeniously joining together some hundreds of pieces of all sizes and shapes, colours and textures, samples from various shops and manufactories, and clipped or stretched into fitting tolerably well alongside of each other. Much industry and skill, much time and tact, doubtless are required for nicely performing this sort of patchwork in botany ; but it is not ratiocination. It is simply descriptive juxta- position ; nothing more. There is no essential difference between describing the lesser groups called species and genera, and describing the larger groups called orders and alliances ; although a wider experience is needed in the latter operation. ON BOTANICAL EMINENCE. 25 On the grounds here set forth, perhaps too curtly for persons unused to psychological investigations, I feel myself fully warranted in asserting, that the highest bo- tanical eminence (in this country, at least) is no evidence of mental fitness for passing judgment on those botanical matters which involve logical definitions, causal reason- ing, or other manifestations of the ratiocinative character of mind. On the contrary, it might be nearer truth to hold such eminence suggestive of probable unfitness, rather than indicative of certain fitness. And in either of these cases, the remarks in my fourth volume (if rightly understood in reference to the kind of intelligence, not to the amount of intelligence, required for botanical celebrity) remain logically unaffected by the strictures upon them in M. De Candolle's review. I look upon the arguments adduced by M. De Candolle in the third paragraph of that review, as being scarcely relevant to the question really at issue between us. They only go to show that many of the data on which botanists reason are unavoidably imperfect. Has anybody dis- puted this truism ? Repeatedly in the Cybele, especially in the fourth volume, I have stated that my own data are so; for instance, the altitudes, boreal limits, nativity, specific distinctions, etc. etc. The true point of my remarks was, that in this country at least, if not else- where, the road to botanical celebrity lies through the line of descriptive botany. Consequently, that botanical eminence is in itself no proof of ratiocinative capacity. Also, I maintain further, that some of our best or best- known technical describers are in fact almost incapable of reasoning ; while exceptional instances might doubt- less be cited. 26 ABE GENERA REAL ? AKE GENERA REAL, OR ONLY CONVENTIONAL. In kindly sending to me by post a copy of the review which is translated on preceding pages, M. De Candolle added also a manuscript letter which conveyed some remarks in further explanation of his own views on topics treated in the fourth volume of my work. I venture to translate below one short passage from the letter, because involving a subject of high importance, namely, the reality of generic or other groups, as arrangements in nature. To myself indvidually, to reasoning botanists generally, this passage has also a claim on serious atten- tion, by the support which its writer there gives to my representations about the uncertainty and inequality of book-species ; in regard to which I might be supposed by less initiated readers to have gone too far ; while I feel well assured that my expositions cannot be refuted. In the review, M. De Candolle intimates a general concur- rence with my remarks on orders and species. The few comments on the intermediate grade of genera seem to have been held less satisfactory ; and they shall therefore here presently receive the reinforcement of a very re- markable circumstance in their support. M. De Candolle writes in his letter, "Your chapter on the nature of species has greatly pleased me ; and I could have wished to translate the whole of it. The un- certainty in denning speciea is immense both theoreti- cally and practically. That of genera is perhaps less, since all people have recognized and named sponta- neously some genera, such as Quercus, Populus, Salvia, Ranunculus, etc. etc. However it is not easy to make genera of analogous importance, and we fall now into a OR ONLY CONVENTIONAL ? 27 very useless multiplication ; inconvenient also by reason of the changes in nomenclature which result from it." It seems to my judgment that the uncertainty about genera is less, only because their definition is loose, com- paratively with that of species. In making species, we combine on close resemblance, and show or suppose also a community of descent. In making genera, we combine on less close resemblance, and (Darwinians now excepted) without supposing also a community of descent. No doubt all people have recognized some genera, and have used many general names in application to plants. Strictly, this recognition and use only go to show that conventional groups exist, the individuals of which are so closely similar, or else so imperfectly distinguished by untrained men, as to have been usually comprehended under the same vernacular name. These groups do occasionally correspond with modern botanical genera, while they are still very far from exactly or invariably so corresponding. The argument from general names might be used to show that classes and alliances, or even sub- genera and sub-species, are more real and less uncertain than species themselves. The evident truth is, that technical botanists have no real test for genera, or how could they continue to differ so widely in forming generic groups ? Neither can they impose a limit to the number of genera adopted in books, except a fluctuating limit which arises out of their reci- procal resistance to the generic changes proposed by each other. For example, the name of " Don " is added in lists to sundry generic names, as the botanical authority for the genera. But several of these genera and generic names are in turn authoritatively rejected in the writings of Dr. Lindley ; being so rejected, not because Don was in error, but because the individual ideas or whims of the 28 ARE GENERA REAL ? two botanists have failed to harmonize. And Dr. Lindley himself, our great native expounder of so-called "natural" classification, has involuntarily given us a most curious and convincing illustration, bearing upon the wide uncer- tainty of any arithmetical limit to genera. I shall here assist in keeping that illustration from the oblivion sought for it by a speedy reprint in a corrected form ; believing the mistake to be in itself so very instructive as to render its oblivion by no means desirable. In Dr. J. D. Hooker's recent 'introductory Essay to the Flora of Tasmania ' it is remarked that the widely different estimates of the earth's flora, at 80,000 or at 150,000 species, is " the most conspicuous evidence " of the undefinability of the majority of species. But if the self-same botanist, after a life-long study of species, and repeated grouping and enumeration of those described, should be unable to say whether 80,000 species or 150,000 species were recorded by name in one of his own botanical works, should we not, in such case, be war- ranted in holding his statistical ignorance on the point to be a far more strange and remarkable evidence of uncer- tainty or undefinability in species ? Now, a still wider error than this actually came before the botanical public, in respect of the number of genera adopted and recorded by name in the first edition of Dr. Lindley's elaborate volume on the * Vegetable King- dom,' the result apparently of many years of thought and labour. In the numerical tables of that work the genera of plants were incorrectly summed up to 20,806 instead of 8,935 ; being thus much more than doubled. This was not a misprint, a merely typographical error, but a downright miscalculation to that extraordinary ex- tent. (See Phytologist, 1846, pp. 526, 594). More ex- traordinary still, the enormous inaccuracy of the figures OR ONLY CONVENTIONAL ? 29 was not detected by the Author himself. It remained unconnected, until suggested to him by a notice of his learned book in the humble periodical referred to. [I may here now acknowledge myself the writer of the first notice in the Phytologist, which called the Author's attention to the point ; the vast increase in the stated number of genera having instantly caught my own atten- tion, although not feeling it incumbent on myself to go through the reckonings, in order to detect precisely where the error lay. Doubtless, the habit of inquiring into the accuracy of matters put forth by learned men, instead of humbly accepting on faith their statements and their mis-statements, is a very impertinent practice in their eyes. And I may well therefore be held a troublesome critic, to be put down by hook or by crook ; anyhow, so that it can be done ; if it can.] Dr. Lindley prudently sought to escape the personal credit of that gigantic blunder, by stating (Phytologist, 1846, p. 594) that he had entrusted the calculations or tabular summary of numbers to an assistant ; that is, to an anonymous somebody else, whose remarkable incom- petence or carelessness must be supposed to have brought out the strange results. This defence is plausible, and seems not improbable with respect to the details of casting up figures. But it is to my thinking barely credible, even on his own testimony, that Dr. Lindley could carelessly allow so important a publication to go before the botanical world, without taking the small trouble himself to look at the results or sums-total of the figures, [for the accuracy of which his own name was made responsible on the title-page of the book. On his own showing, he must equally have neglected to look at them both in the manuscript copy and in the printed proofs of his volume. It is to be hoped that such neglect 30 ARE GENERA REAL ? is of rare occurrence among writers on science. I may be wrong in the idea ; but this highly curious error leads me to suspect, that the Author of the ' Vegetable King- dom,' the quixotic champion of " natural " classification, could believe indifferently either in (nearly) 21,000 genera or in (nearly) 9,000 genera only. If so, genera should be held even less certain than species, on faith of Dr. Hooker's mode of reasoning, and notwithstanding M. De Candolle's opinion, rather hesitatingly given in the translated extract from his letter. Small mistakes in printed figures are no doubt too easily made, to cause surprise by their occurrence. And if I, humble author of a book with the denounced name of Cybele, had committed even so vast a mistake as that of substituting 21,000 instead of 9,000 genera, or there- abouts, it might have gone for nothing. A palliating excuse might have been found for my ignorance or blun- dering, in the fact that I regard all systematic groups as purely conventional, and their numbers consequently as being largely optional. But that, our old and experienced labourer in systematic classification should have made that mistake in the number of genera actually admitted by himself at the same date, or failed to detect it when made, is surely stronger evidence of arbitrariness in ge- nera, than the discordant estimates (not reckonings) -by different botanists, between 80,000 and 150,000 species, is evidence of undefmability or arbitrariness in species. The whole question of systematic classification has been re-opened by Mr. Darwin's publication " On the Origin of Species," seemingly the most important vo- lume on natural history ever published. If the views of that profound theorist shall turn out to be practically true, technical classification has hitherto been little VIEWS OF MR. DARWIN. 31 better than groping in the dark. And truly, the capri- cious changes, inconsistencies, even absurdities, mixed up in the learned labours of a Lindley, do go far towards showing that botanical classifiers only poke about in the dark or in the dimmest twilight. But whether some of the more ratiocinative systematists of the Continent ought to be held exceptions to this, I will not take upon myself to decide. In its immediate reference to botanical classification, the theory of Mr. Darwin is, that all resemblances be- tween existing plants (characters specific, 'generic, ordinal, etc.) have been inherited from some common ancestor, near or remote, from whose type the descendants have more or less widely diverged in the long lapse of time ; and thus they have gradually become specifically, gene- rically, ordinally distinct among themselves. On this view it is logically deduced, that a truly natural classifi- cation must really be one of ancestral affinity, and so far rudely analogous to that traced in the family pedigrees among mankind. Thus, all organic nature becomes a complex series of related groups, closer and closer, as we trace backwards to their sources, more widely di- verging, and successively subordinate to each other, as we thence trace forwards to the present species ; any of these in turn tending to produce, during a long future, an indefinite'number of other species, genera, orders. Grave difficulties come in the way to interfere with a full adoption and practical application of Mr. Darwin's views, as they have been explained in his precursor volume ' On the Origin of Species.' While quite think- ing that Mr. Darwin has truly made a most important advance in natural science, and has fortified his position far better than any preceding author who has taken the ground of a gradual metamorphose of species, I cannot 32 ARE GENERA REAL ? avoid still entertaining some serious doubts regarding the completeness or sufficiency of his theory. In parti- cular, it is very difficult to believe in the results to which we are led, by carrying out his ideas of a constant con- vergence of species as we trace backwards in the long course of time, to commence with (half a score, or) a single prototype, the remotely antient Adam of every existent species ; and a constant divergence of species as we trace onwards in time, leading at length to the logical (but not avowed) result of a countless multitude of spe- cies, far beyond their present numbers. To my judg- ment, neither of these extremes seems to be sanctioned by existing facts in nature. Both are so dissimilar from the present, and so utterly beyond proof, as to appear inad- missible or incredible. I have communicated to the thoughtful and candid Author of the theory a suspicion that he ought to have allowed far more influence and effect to a gradual con- vergence of characters, still in onward progress, acting jointly with and in some measure counter-acting the gra- dual divergence of characters ; the two tending to keep up an approximate equilibrium in nature, in respect to the number of species and genera, their mutual affinities, etc. This would not interfere with the operation of his rule of ' natural selection,' the grandly distinctive cha- racter of his theory. But he appears indisposed to believe this idea sound, or as being anywise necessary to save his own views from something very like a logical reductio ad absurdum, one species to begin with, mil- lions to end with. Mr. Darwin also hypothetically explains the geographi- cal distribution of animals and plants by an application of his own theory to the subject. It would lead me too DIERVILLA CANADENSIS NOT A NATIVE. -i'5 far to enter on this topic at present. In event of con- tinuing this Supplement, I may perhaps try whether the views of Mr. Darwin will accord with the distribution of our native plants, or throw any new light upon it. In the work before cited, page 28, Dr. J. D. Hooker has sought to apply Mr. Darwin's views in explanation of australian botany ; it may be a little precipitately, but with great knowledge and generous sincerity. Mr. Darwin's volume ought to be read and thoughtfully studied by every true naturalist, whether zoologist or botanist. It is a fine combination of depth and clearness ; singularly interest- ing and suggestive. DIERVILLA CANADENSIS NOT NATIVE IN BRITAIN. This american shrub has very properly been refused admittance into the Manual of British Botany. It has been recorded as british since publication of the third volume of Cybele Britannica ; although there are no war- rantable grounds for even a suspicion that it may be a native here. "While, on the contrary, all sound inference, based upon known facts in botanical distribution, should have predisposed to a disbelief in its nativity. Neverthe- less, it was hastily recorded as a Scottish species, and was endorsed as such by editorial authority, which ought to have been better prepared to draw the right conclu- sions from the geographical facts bearing on the question, even if insufficiently instructed about the local facts. In the fourth volume of C. B. it was remarked, "Not only is there much difference in the fidelity and accuracy with which botanists record their facts, real or supposed, but there are perhaps still more important differences in their capacities for rightly understanding what they do see, and 34 DIERVILLA CAN 7 ADEXSIS of deducing correct conclusions therefrom." This pas- sage is strikingly illustrated by the record of Diervilla canadensis as a pretended native of Scotland. The facts are first reported with an evident bias, which ought itself to have suggested a cautious acceptance of them. The receiver of the report for record introduces a verbal variation of his own, the effect of which is to increase the bias towards error ; and he draws exactly the opposite inference from the circumstances, geographical and topo- graphical, to that which should have been drawn from a ratiocinative consideration of them. It seems to my judgment, that no one moderately conversant with geo- graphical botany, and capable of sound reasoning on its facts, would have thus hastily taken up a belief in the nativity of the Diervilla in Scotland ; least of all in For- farshire, a county so much explored by tourists and resident botanists. The subjoined paragraphs give the history of the shrub in Scotland. " We have to announce the very unexpected discovery of Diervilla canadensis, in what appears to be a wild state, in the Highlands of Scotland. The circumstance is recorded in the following memorandum from Mr. Alexander Osmond Black, an active and very intelligent young botanist : ' On the 15th of last September, in company with ' my friend Mr. Croall of Montrose, I started from the ' little village at the foot of Mount Catterthun, and 'proceeded up the banks of the North Esk river, ' which is in that glen called The Burn. About half ' a mile above Gannachy Bridge, on the Forfarshire ' side of the Esk, I observed Pyrola secunda and ' Hieracium prenanthoides, and noticed that the beau- ' tiful Orthotrichum Drummondii was very abundant NOT A NATIVE. 35 ' upon the trees. Here my attention was first at- ' tracted to Diervilla, which I found to extend for ' about half a mile, growing in large, scattered clumps, ' often for as much as 40 feet, preventing, by the * denseness of its foliage, the growth of all other plants ' except the Pyrola secunda, which luxuriated beneath ' it. There are no houses near ; and the plant, if not ' truly wild, which its abundance would induce a per- ' son to consider it, is at least perfectly naturalised, ' although it has never before, that I am aware of, ' attracted the notice of British botanists ? ' Although this Diervilla, perhaps better known to the public under the name of Lonicera Diervilla, has never before been found wild in Europe, we see no reason [!] why so common a Canadian plant should not have a really native habitation in a remote [why interpolate this word ' remote' ?] Scotch glen. At all events it is a very remarkable circumstance that no earlier record should exist, that we are aware of, of the occurrence of the plant in Great Britain." (Gardener's Chronicle, as quoted in a Scottish periodical), " Did you see in the Gardener's Chronicle Mr. Black's discovery of Diervilla canadensis as a British plant, which Dr. Lindley [? the Editor] argues to be indigenous ? The station is depicted as a ' remote ' highland glen, but it so happens unfortunately that other parties have long known the station as the pleasure grounds of Me Inroy, Esq., of Burn, on the borders of Forfarshire, near Gannachy, where the honeysuckle has no doubt been planted, as well as the other shrubs. Mr. Watson ought to get a hint of this." (Extract from a manuscript letter, addressed by a Scottish botanist to a London botanist}. 36 DIERVILLA CANADENSIS " We have perused the above paragraph [namely, the quotation from Gardener's Chronicle] with some interest, and we do not wonder that Mr. Black, an entire stranger, and writing perhaps from memory, should have fallen into some little inaccuracies as to localities, etc. ; but we do wonder why an acute observer and such we understand Mr. Black to be should have come to the conclusion that the pretty little plant Diervilla canadensis was really a native there." .... " We are equally assured that, when Mr. Black revisits the spot, he will be convinced, as well as ourselves, that the Diervilla has no more right to be considered a native there than himself. ' The clumps ' occur at intervals along the margin of one of the princi- pal walks that are formed along the river's bank, and have, we have no doubt, been planted for ornamental purposes, along with Spircea salicifolia, Ligustrum vul- gare, and its own near ally, Lonicera Xylosteum, when the grounds were laid out and the walks formed. The Dier- villa has indeed, by means of its creeping roots, esta- blished itself more firmly than its neighbours, and has even extended its territory ; but from the appearance of the capsules, we hardly think it will ever ripen its seeds, and is therefore not at all likely to become naturalised, although, if allowed to remain unmolested, it may extend itself over a still wider area." (A correspondent of Mon- trose Review, Nov. 18, 1853). Such are the facts about this Diervilla, as kindly com- municated to me by botanists. They have been for the most part already printed ; although only in the evanes- cent form of newspaper paragraphs. The Editor of the Gardener's Chronicle adduces no fact to justify belief in the nativity of the shrub, unless he intends his own igno- rance or obtuseness in the matter to be accepted as such, NOT A NATIVE. 37 by informing his readers that he can " see no reason " why this plant should not be native in a so-called "re~ mote" Scotch glen. It is very likely that he did " see no reason." His strong point will certainly not be found on the line of geographical botany, or in the way of appre- ciating reasons. Facts are converted into reasons, by being rightly inter- preted and rightly connected together. Now, it seems that the only pretence for recording the Diervilla among the native plants of Scotland, is found in the fact that it has thriven well where planted as an ornament on a gentleman's grounds. And certainly this one fact cannot be held a satisfactory " reason " in the eyes of british bo- tanists ; however suitable it might have been deemed as a newspaper record for the edification of gardeners, if correctly placed before them as an instance of semi- naturalisation. On the other hand, though acquainted with a goodly number of facts about the distribution of british plants, and not quite uninformed in regard to the distribution of Canadian plants, I cannot recollect one in the whole lot which is fairly convertible into a "reason" for believing the Diervilla anywise likely to have " a really native habitation in a Scotch glen," whether with or without the interpolation of " remote." So far as they bear on the matter at all, they tend only to suggest disbelief, war- ranted by an extreme improbability. Such being the case, I will request M. De Candolle to refer to my previous remarks in reply to his own, on pages 18 25; and I will then ask him, 'Whether a facility in the misinterpretation of facts, and an inability to see them in their true connexions, are to be included among the evidences which go to prove that our eminent botanists are usually sound reasoners ? ' ARENARIA BALEARICA ARENARIA BALEARICA NOT NATIVE IN SCOTLAND. So much mischief may be done by would-be-thought discoverers sending inaccurate reports to editors, who are themselves not duly prepared by the geographico- botanical knowledge requisite for distinguishing between the probable and the improbable in local botany, that I can feel no apology needful to my own readers for here troubling them with a second warning instance ; one for- tunately arrested in time to prevent another most impro- bable species becoming permanently incorporated in our lists of truly british plants. It is a fitting accompaniment to the preceding case of the Diervilla ; resembling that one in the risk of a garden plant becoming thereby re- corded for the future as if really a native production of Scotland. In May last, 1859, I received from the Editor of the Phytologist, new series, a note to this effect : " I enclose an Arenaria sent this morning from Scotland. It is no state of A. serpyllifolia, and it does not agree with Babington's description of A. ciliata. It also differs from A. norvegica as described by Babington. A. multicaulis is unknown to me. Will you be so good as give me your opinion of it when you have time ? " Writing here from recollection, my reply was imme- diate ; and to the effect, that if reported to me from the Mediterranean, instead of Scotland, I should unhesi- tatingly have named the plant A. balearica ; that I knew of no boreal species to which it could be referred or related ; and that the alleged locality of Scotland was geographically improbable, unless I was wrong as to the NOT NATIVE IN SCOTLAND. 39 name. In the next month's no. of the Phytologist, the following brief notice was given of this pseudo - dis- covery : " Mr. Sim has sent us a specimen of what he thinks may be Arenaria balearica, a plant new to Scotland. He has been advised to send a specimen to Mr. Ba- bington." (Phytologist, 50, 192). So far, the readers of the Phytologist were in a very likely way of being misled into supposing this mediter- ranean Arenaria a wild plant new to Scotland ; no inti- mation of a garden origin being stated or suggested, even while the idea of it being A. balearica is attributed to the finder himself. But in the same periodical for November then following, Mr. John Sim records a " botanical ram- ble " made to the " Hill of Moncrieffe," where he dis- covers Scrophularia vernalis, Anchusa sempervirens, and other garden species, which no geographical botanist believes to be native in Scotland. In course of his ram- ble he visits the " pleasure-grounds and flower-garden of Sir Thomas Moncrieffe," and there he finds, " about the middle of June," the plant new to Scotland, as mentioned in the subjoined extract from his ramble : " On the wall of an old fruithouse I saw a patch of Arenaria balearica, of which I gathered a few speci- mens ; how or by what means it got there I cannot tell, only there it is, and none knows how." (Phyto- logist, 55, 327). The question now arises, Where did the previously found specimen come from ? that which was sent to London in May, and recorded in the June no. of the Phytologist, as a plant new to Scotland ? Very signifi- cantly, that first record is omitted from the Index to the 40 SUBPROVINCIAL DISTRIBUTION. Phytologist for 1859, page 385, where Mr. Sim's con- fession of the fruithouse locality for the species is re- ferred to only. And considering how many localities for improbably- native plants have been already reported on the same authority, it may become matter of some importance to future botanical topographers, to ascertain whether this case of the Arenaria balearica is a fair sample of the rest ? Also, how far it may be held an exhibition of editorial care and competence in announcing new british plants or new british localities ? While sa3 r ing that I cannot place scientific reliance upon Mr. Sim's reports, or upon the phytological records of them, it would be most unfair not to disclaim any insinuation against Mr. Sim personally, on the score of moral truthfulness. I can well believe him writing with perfect sincerity of intention, while imperfect in his reports, and unsound in his conclusions from alleged facts ; the records being made worse against him by want of editorial discernment. SUBPROVINCIAL DISTRIBUTION. The areas of plants have been exhibited in the C. B. by tracing each species through the 18 provinces, into which the counties were grouped ; the range of latitude and that of elevation or temperature being also added. This mode is well enough adapted to show on what por- tion of the surface each species is distributed ; also, whether it is scattered generally or partially within that portion. But it cannot suffice for some other objects sought through topographical details ; the provinces being SUBPROVINCIAL DISTRIBUTION. 41 too few in number, and most of them too extensive in size, to allow of sufficient local precision. At the date when the first volume of the Cybele was printed, it was found not possible to trace the species through smaller sections of Britain with any close approximation to com- pleteness. Those 18 provinces were therefore adopted instead of counties in the three earlier volumes of the work. By the time when the fourth volume was under the hands of the printer, a gradual accumulation of local facts had afforded some facility for tracing out the distri- bution of species through smaller sections, formed by subdividing the 18 provinces into 38 sub -provinces. Ac- cordingly, the ' census of species' was there founded upon these more numerous sections of the surface ; which were also used in the tabular list on pages 379 381, where varying proportions were shown between the size of * areas ' and the numerical value of their floras. It is proposed now to re-state the areas of the species, traced through these 38 sub-provinces. This will be virtually a compilation of so many Local Floras, con- densed into two general lists. Instead of printing 38 floral lists, that is, a separate one for each of these sub- ordinate provinces, two general lists of the species can be made to suffice, through use of thirty-eight nos. to show the ascertained presence of the species ; blanks indicating the absence of any of them from the corresponding sub- province. A double list of the species, one for South Britain, and one for Middle and North Britain, is ren- dered necessary by the impossibility of placing a series of thirty-eight arabic figures on the single line of an octavo page. In the map prefixed to volume third of C. B. the sub -provinces are numbered consecutively from 1 to 38. In the lists presently to be printed the same SUBPROVINCIAL DISTRIBUTION. numbers are adhered to. But the units are repeated without the prefixed tens, in order to avoid an excessive crowding of the figures ; so that 12 22 32 stand sim- ply 2 2 2, on page 48, etc. The two lists are considerably shortened by omitting the names of those species which have been satisfactorily ascertained to occur in every sub-province ; that is, from the first list are omitted the names of species reported on good authority for each of the southern sub-provinces 1 to 18 ; and from the second list are in like manner omitted the names of species so reported for each of the remaining sub-provinces 19 to 38. The species not re- ported on reliable authority from any of the sub-provinces 1 to 18, or 19 to 38, are likewise omitted (with some few exceptions) from the corresponding list. But it is con- ceived that no mistake can arise between these omissions, by confounding the species totally absent from 18 or 20 sub -provinces with those species which are known to occur in all of them. Is it inquired, what is the use of these elaborate lists, to exhibit the subprovincial areas of the species ? The uses are various ; and two or three shall be mentioned in example. First, the distribution of the species is thus shown much more in detail, by tracing them through 38 instead of only 18 sections ; and fulness of detail has its various advantages. Secondly, the distribution is shown more precisely, because the smaller the space to which any floral list relates, the more definite is the information conveyed by stating that any given species is known to occur within the space. Thirdly, attention is thus drawn to many local desiderata (that is, to vacancies in our records arising from incompleteness of knowledge) which would not have become obvious while the areas were SUBPROVINCIAL DISTRIBUTION. 43 traced out by the 18 provinces only. This last is a matter of some considerable importance, in reference to the progress of our knowledge about local botany, as will here immediately be explained. It has been intimated to me by some botanists, who feel sufficiently willing to contribute towards the progress of scientific knowledge, by supplying information about local botany, that they are deterred from doing so through the difficulty still experienced in selecting the facts which are worthy of printed record on the ground of novelty, or of being specially applicable to fill up some void in our accumulated stores of local facts already so largely placed on record in print. I can well understand this difficulty, being also occasionally perplexed in the same manner ; that is, not finding myself prepared to say confidently whether certain facts are novel or known, still deserving of record or already sufficiently recorded. Though as- sisted by very ample notes and references, which have been gradually accumulated during the lapse of years, I often find it too tedious to search thoroughly for some given fact, among the many local lists and other more special records of localities, now so widely dispersed in scores or even hundreds of volumes. And it is easy to conceive that other botanists, who may have devoted less enduring attention to such matters, must experience the like inconvenience in a higher degree, if attempting to determine which of their local facts are yet novel, and which of them have been already placed on record. One object sought by this Supplement will be that of gradually lessening the inconvenience or difficulty here alluded to. In the subjoined lists the series of figures opposite the name of any species will show in which of the 38 sub-provinces it has been reported on good authority. Where lines (-) are substituted for the figures, it will 44 SUBPROVINCIAL DISTRIBUTION. be understood that I remain unaware of any locality for the species in that sub-province ; the letter o meaning that the authority for the locality requires corroboration. Every blank in the series of figures may thus be con- strued into a query, addressed to all our provincial bota- nists, ' Do you know of any locality for this species in this sub-province ? ' If you do know of such, it is worth while (in a scientific view) to put that item of knowledge on printed record. The query may be varied also into the suggestive form of ' Can you find a locality for this species within this sub -province ? ' If so, put your dis- covery on permanent record in a printed form, for the in- formation and service of other botanists interested in such matters. I should myself be thankful to botanists who would take the trouble to send me any notes of localities in evidence that a species does occur in a sub-province for which it is at present left as a desideratum, a blank to be filled up. A simple memorandum about any of the com- moner and easily distinguished species would suffice. For the doubtful and critical species, or recently segre- grated sub-species or quasi- species, a confirmation by the sight of a specimen would much enhance the value of the memorandum. So likewise, if any botanist should be- lieve a species to be erroneously entered as found in some of these sub-provinces, it would be highly desirable to suggest the grounds on which an error is supposed. It must be quite impossible for any one botanist to draw up strictly accurate Local Floras for every part of Britain thus divided into 38 sections. Doubtless I may have overlooked some really reliable records ; and may also have occasionally trusted other records which were not trustworthy. All botanists make mistakes in nomen- clature at times ; labels get transposed to wrong speci- SUBPROVINCIAL DISTRIBUTION. 45 mens ; inadvertencies will occur in copying out lists of names or a series of localities ; and other less pardonable misreports are made, which it is not always possible to avoid being deceived by. Unquestionably many blanks remain to be filled up, and not unlikely several figures ought to be erased, in the lists subjoined. It is to be hoped that a progressive emendation in these respects will arise from thus printing them in illustration of exist- ing knowledge either way. As was intimated in the pre- fixed ' Notice,' the opportunity of learning what is still required for supplementing and correcting the lists will be given by a wide circulation of them. Time will show whether any useful result is elicited thereby. If not, the cost and trouble of publishing them might have been more serviceably devoted. There remains one other point aifecting the accuracy of the areas stated for several of the species, which it may be well again to mention, although alluded to repeatedly in the Cybele itself. Through recent subdivisions of old species, many names have now a more special or re- stricted application than they formerly had. Hence it becomes needful for botanists who now report localities, to make it clear whether they mean the more restricted recent (segregate) species, or the less restricted old (aggre- gate) species, when using a name which may be applied in either manner. Examples will render this need more apparent. Orchis bifolia was long held to be one single species, and by some botanists it is still so regarded. It is treated as a single species in various Floras, local lists, etc. But latterly it has been more usually subdivided into two reputed species, Orchis (Habenaria, or Gymna- denia) biflora and chlorantha, two quasi-species slightly different in technical character. When the name bifolia 46 SUBPBOVINCIAL DISTRIBUTION. is found in an old list, it may now be quite impossible to say with confidence which of the two modern semi-species was intended thereby. The like difficulty will still arise in new records, unless botanists make it clear that they do really intend that form, and only that form, to which the name biflora is now usually restricted. The same sort of uncertainty arises between Potamo- geton natans and oblongus ; in this case the newer name applying to what is probably the commoner species in this country. As a rule, therefore, it might be well to report localities for both of them. In some instances the uncertainty is increased by a triple or quadruple, or even a larger number of sub-species. Thus, we have now Filago germanica, apiculata, spathulata, names for three several species formerly included as a single species un- der the same name of F. germanica. So likewise the Epi- pactis latifolia, media, atrorubens, are now held to be three distinct species, though long grouped under the name of latifolia as a single species only. The names of Rubus fruticosus, Ranunculus aquatilis, Fumaria capreolata, Arc- tium Lappa, Hieracium alpinum, \Hieracium murorum, Potamogeton pusillus, Potamogeton pectinatus, Callitriche verna, and various others are now held by many good botanists to represent groups of species, not single spe- cies only ; and their use thus gives rise to the question, whether the aggregate is intended thereby, or only some very restricted form left after severance of various other forms. In the subjoined lists, I have in various instances been compelled to guess that the old name did mean the modern remnant to which it is still applied, and not any of the sub-species carved from the old aggregate. The sub - provinces here repeatedly mentioned, and represented by 38 figures in the subjoined lists, will not be understood by those botanists who remain unacquainted SUBPROVINCIAL DISTRIBUTION. 47 with the C. B. To obviate any inconvenience which might thus be occasioned, the sub-provinces and their included counties will be found enumerated on the next page, with the figures by which they are represented. Their combination into 18 primary provinces will be also indicated by their corresponding numbers ; for ex- ample, the secondary or sub-provinces of South Thames, North Thames, West Thames, when taken together, form the single primary province of the Thames. The Hebri- des, Orkney, Shetland, are sub-provinces which together constitute a single province called North Isles. Thus, shortly stated, the nos. may be said to represent either single counties or else groups of counties ; those of York, Lancaster, Argyle, Inverness, being subdivided, and por- tions of them assigned to different sub-provinces. It is not expected that many botanists will take the trouble to learn the application and meaning of every figure or no. Nor is it necessary to do so, in carrying out some of the objects for which the lists are printed. The local botanist needs only to learn the one figure which corresponds with his own county or group of counties. By then running his eye down the column where that figure stands, he will easily and rapidly see which of the species are held to have been reported from his county on good authority, which of them require to be corroborated by a more reliable record, and which of them are supposed to remain still unrecorded. If he will do this, and place on permanent record any needful cor- rections or additions, which his own better local know- ledge may enable him to make, he will so far be con- tributing to the actual progress of phyto-geographical science. Would not this be wiser than printing records at random, nine-tenths of them valueless because mere repetitions ? 48 SUBPROVINCIAL DISTRIBUTION. Counties arranged into Sub-provinces. \. 1 South Peninsula. Cornwall. (W. Peninsula, on the 2 Mid Peninsula. Devon. map in Cybele, vol. 3). 3 North Peninsula. Somerset. 2. 4 West Channel. Wilts. Dorset. 5 Mid Channel. Isle of Wight. Hants. 6 East Channel. Sussex. 3. 7 South Thames. Kent. Surrey. 8 North Thames. Essex. Herts. Middlesex. 9 West Thames. Berks. Oxford. Bucks. 4. South Ouse. Suffolk. (The single stands for 10). 1 North Ouse. Norfolk. (The single 1 stands for 11). 2 West Ouse. Cambridge. Bedford. Hunts. Northampton. 5. 3 South Severn. Gloucester. Monmouth. 4 Mid Severn. Hereford. Worcester. Warwick. 5 North Severn. Stafford. Salop or Shropshire. 6. 6 South-East Wales. Glamorgan. Brecon. Radnor. 7 South-West Wales. Carmarthen. Pembroke. Cardigan. 7. 8 North Wales. Montgomery, and other five counties. 8. 9 East Trent. Lincoln. (The single 9 for 19). West Trent. Leicester. Rutland. Notts. Derbj. 9. 1 Mersey. Chester. Lancaster, except northern portion. 10. 2 East Humber. Eastern York. (The single 2 for 22). 3 West Humber. Western York. (The single 3 for 23). 11.4 Tyne. Durham. Northumberland. 12.5 Lakes. N.Lancaster. Westmoreland. Cumberland. Man. 13. 6 South-West Lowlands. Dumfries. Kirkcudbright. Wigton. 7 North-West Lowlands. Ayr. Renfrew. Lanark. 14. 8 E. Lowlands. Peeb. Selk. Roxb. Berw. Hadd. Edin. Lin. 15. 9 South-East Highlands. Fife. Kin. Clack. Stirling. Perth. Mid-East Highlands. Forfar. Kincardine. Aberdeen. 1 Norlh-East Highlands. Banff. Elgin. Nairn. East-Inverness. 16. 2 Inner-W. Highlands. W. Inverness. Argyle. Dumb. Isles. 3 Outer- W. Highlands. Ebudes ; including Isla, Mull, Skye, etc. 17.4 Lower-North Highlands. Ross. Cromarty. (4 for 34). 5 Upper-North Highlands. Sutherland. Caithness. (5 for 35). 18. 6, 7, 8 North Isles. 36 Hebrides. 37 Orkney. 38 Shetland. SOUTH BRITAIN. 49 1. South Britain. 1. Ranunculacece. Clematis Vitalba Tlialictrum alpinum minus flexuosura saxatile flavum Anemone Pulsatilla Adonis autumnalis Myosurus minimus Ranunculus heterophyllus heterophyllus peltatus floribundus marinus confusus Baudot!! trichophyllus trichophyllus Drouetii circinatus fluitans tripartitus CCeUOSUS Lingua auricomus parviflorus arvensis Trollius europaeus Helleborus viridis foetidus Aquilegia vulgaris Delphinium Ajacis ? Aconitum Napellus Actaea spicata 1234567890 123 8-0 --OO----0- 0345 - - o 4 5 -o-45 12345 - - - - 5 -7S---2-4---- -5 - - 3 - 5 - - 3 - 5 5 5 5 5 - - 3 4 5 - 2 3 4 5 1 - - . . 12345 1 o 3 4 5 12345 12345 - 2 3 4 5 07890 - - 8 9 6 7 o 9 67890 67890 . 7 . . . .7 .7 -78-- 12346670 8 1234-678 -------o -------0 12345-78 123 o-o-o--- 12345 12345678 - - 4 - - 3 - - - 3 - - - 7 - 7 67890 67890 - 7 - - - 67o-0 67890 67890 67890 67890 0034567890 ooo4567o90 12345o789o oo -oo-oooO 00800-000- 1 2 3 4 5 6 - - -2345-oo 7 - - 3 - 5 - 7 8 12-45678 123456-8 12345-78 12345678 --3456-8 123oo-oo 12345o-o 12345678 12-000- - 0-3466-8 50 SUBPROVINCIAL DISTRIBUTION. 1 .* Berber aceee. Berberis vulgaris ooo4o-789012345--o 2. Nymphaacea. Nymphaea alba 1 o3456789012o46678 Nuphar pumila -__ -------o--o--- 3. Papaveracece. Papaver hybridura 12345678901234---8 Lecoquii - - - - 5 Meconopsis cambrica 123------------6-8 Glaucium luteum 1234567- -01 -3- -678 3.*Fumariaceee. Corydalis claviculata 12345678-01 -345678 Fumaria capreolata 12345678901 2345678 pallidiflora -23 56-8 Boraei -.5.7. confusa 12----- ---.--.--78 muralis --3- ...( micrantha ---4-678--12345--- parviflora .._. 5-79-0-2------ parviflora ------78-0-2------ Vaillantii ----6-78-0-2 4. Cruciferce. Cakile maritttna 1234567--01----678 Crambe maritima 12345678-01- ---678 Coronopus didyma 123456oo- -- -o-o678 Thlaspi arTense 1234567890123456- - perfoliatum ------- - o ---3 alpestre, occ. -oo------------o-8 Hutchinsia petrsea -_3--. ._ .. -345678 Teesdalia nudicaulis 12- -56789012-456-8 Iberis amara - -o----89-12-oo--o Lepidium latifolium - -o- -o78-01o-o-6-8 Smithii 1234567o-01 -345678 ruderale 12345-78-01o34 -oo- Cochlearia officinalis 12345o7- -01 -3o-678 maritima 12345o7- -01 -3o-678 alpina -------.--.-.__. _g danica 1234567o-01---o678 anglica 12345678-0123- -678 Subularia aquatica o--8 , SOUTH BRITAIN. 51 Draba aizoides 6 incaaa ---o- -------- ----8 muralis o-3--------o3-5--8 Dentaria bulbifera 6789 5 - - - Cardamine amara o--o56789012345--8 hirsuta 123456789012345678 hirsuta 123456789- -23456-- sylvatica -23456789- 1234567- impatiens o-o--o7o----3456-8 Arabis petraea . .-._.....__. -.8 stricta .-3- o -.__...3 ciliata ..._..._-._--. -.7 Turritis glabra --o45-7890l-o45--- Barbarea arcuata -0---6-8-----4---8 stricta _... o _. .-. -4--._ Nasturtium sylvestre 1234-678901234567- amphibium -234-6789012345 Sisymbrium Irio -ooo - -o89--2-o-6-- Sophia 1234-678o012345678 Erysimum cheiranthoides -234-o789012345-78 Mathiola incana _...5 o _.-...-_.. o sinuata 12---0 678 Brassica oleracea 12345-7 O--678 campestris 1234-6789012345-78 Sinapis alba - 23456789012345-78 tenuifolia 12345678901 -345678 muralis 0234-67890--3--67- monensis .--.--..-....--6-8 Raphanus maritimus 123-56------- ---78 5. Resedacea. Reseda lutea 1234567890!23o5678 6. Cistacea. Helianthemum vulgare -23456789012345678 polifolium -23----------0 canura -----------o-o6-8 Breweri ...--__._-. __--_--8 7. Violacece. Viola palustris 1234567-9oo2345678 odorata -23456789012345678 flavicornis -23-56789012-45678 52 SUBPROVINCIAL DISTRIBUTION. % Viola lactea o2-o567---o2-----o lusitanica - 2 - - - 6 7 stagnina 2---------2 tricolor 123456789012345678 tricolor ..-.....---...5.78 arvensis 123456789- -23-5678 lutea oo 345678 Curtisii o 2 78 8. Droseracece. Drosera intermedia 123456789012- -5678 anglica ooooo----012--66-- 9. Polygalaceee. Polygala calcarea .--4-67-----3---O 10. Frankeniaeece. Frankenia laevis ----5678-012 11. Elatinacece. Elatine hexaudra 1-..-67-9----45--8 Hydropiper -__--_7-__-._4_._8 12. Caryophyllacete. Diuuthus prolifer ----56-o9-l--o Anneria -2-45678901 --456-8 caesius ..3........ o deltoides -23-O-789012345--8 Silene maritima 1234567- -01-3. -678 Otites 0-012----0. anglica 12-45o789012-45678 nutans _2o-5-7o---o--5--8 italioa __._..7-----3 noctiflora .---oo789012-4o--- couica __....7--01--o---- annulata ? .........0 acaulis _o---------------8 Lychnis Viscaria .._._.._.... ...6-8 vespertina 123456789012345-78 Githago 123456789012345-78 Moenchia erecta 1234567890123456-8 Sagina "maritima" 123456-8-01 678 ciliata --3-56 2 subulata 12-4567-9 5-78 nodosa 12345-789012345678 SOUTH BRITAIN. 53 Honckeneja peploides 12345678-01 --.-678 Spergularia " marina" 12345678-012345678 media -23456-8 0--78 rupicola - - - - 5 Arenaria leptoclados - - - - 5 tenuifolia 12345678901234o--8 verna 1-3 56-8 Holosteum umbellatuin -01 Stellaria nemorum oo ---3456-8 glauca 0-3456789012345- -8 Cerastiuin aquaticum 023456789012345-78 pumilum 12--5-7----o3 tetrandrum 123456- - -01 - 3 4 o 6 7 8 arvense -O-45-789012345- -8 alpinum ._.- ____8 latifolium -... ......8 13. Linacetc. Linum perenne --o-o-o8-012-o---- angustifolium 1234567- -oo-3-o678 Radiola millegrana 12345678901- -45678 14. Malvaceae, Althaea officinalis 123-5678-0123-o67- Lavatera arborea 1234oooo--o--- -678 15. Tiliacece. T^lia parvifolia -23-56-8oo-23456-o 16. Hypericaceee. Hypericum Androssemum 123456789- 12345678 dubium 123456-89ol2345678 linariifolium 1 2 hirsutum -23456789012345678 montanum 12345-7-9-1-345-78 Elodes 1234567--012345678 17. Aceracece. Acer campestre -23456789012345678 18. GeraniacecB. Erodium maritimum 12345o7- - -O-345678 moschatum 1234oooooooo3oo-7o Geranium sylvaticum o--------oo--45--- pvatense lo 3 456789012345678 pyrenaicum -234oo78901o345678 54 SUBPROVINCIAL DISTRIBUTION. Geranium rotundifolium -2345-7890-234oo-o pusillum 123456789012345-78 columbinum 123456789-12345678 lucidum 12345o7890o2345678 purpureum 12-4-67---------78 sanguineum 123- - - -8-0-2345678 19. Balsaminacea:. Impatiens Noli-tangere --3o--o----o-oo--8 22. Rhamnacece. Rbamnus catharticus -O34567890123456-8 Frangula 12345678 -012345678 23. Leguminifera. Ulex nanus 123456789012345678 naniis _._4_. 7 _ _ _ j _ -4- - 7 - Gallii 1234 345678 Genista tinctoria 1 -3456789012345678 pilosa l-._-6o--o---oo-7o Ononis spinosa 1234567890123456-8 Anthyllis Dillenii 1 678 Medicago sylvestris ........... 0*19 falcata -ooo-ooo-012 maculata 12345678901234- -78 denticulata o2-45678-01--o---- minima --o---7--012---o Melilotus arvensis ----5-78-012---o-. vulgaris -o-o5o78ool - - 4 - o 7 - Trigonella ornithopodioides 12345678o01 -3- - - -8 Trifolium subterraneum 1234567890123- - -78 ochroleucum ---oo-o8-012-o---- Molinerii ? 1 marilimum o- 34o678-oo-3- - - -o 8cabrum 12345678901234 -678 striatum 123456789012345-78 Bocconi 1 glomeratum -2345678-01 - - - -6-0 strictum 1-- __._.._. o suffocatum 123-567--01 8 "filifonne" 123456789012345-78 Lotus angustissiuius 1 2 o - 5 6 bispidus 12-4 SOUTH BRITAIN. 55 Astragalus glyeiphyllos oo3456789012345- -8 hypoglottis - - 8901234---- Ornithopus perpusillus 123456789012345-78 Arthrolobium ebracteatum 1 Hippocrepis comosa -234567890123456-8 Onobrychis sativa -o345o789012345--o Vicia Orobus __3___.--.--ooo678 sylvatica o2345-789o-2345-o8 angustifolia 1234567890123456-8 lathyroides oo34567o-012-4o678 lutea lo34-6---o bithynica o234o678----34-6-8 gracilis -23-5-78- --2 Lathyrus Aphaca -2345678901234- - - - Nissolia 123456789012345 - -o hirsutus -.o-o--8 palustris _.3-5-o-o012-4---8 maritimus o~-4o67--0-------- Orobus tuberosus 1234567890o2345678 24. Rosacece. Prunus spinosa 123456789012345-78 insititia -23456789012345-78 Padus o- - -0-00-0008066-8 Cerasus 12-456789--2--5-78 avium 123456789012345-78 Spiraea Filipendula 123456789012345- -8 Dryas octopetala 5--8 Geum urbanum 123456789012345-78 intermedium _.-o5 12-----8 rivale -23456-89012-45678 Agrimonia odorata 12--567------4-6-- Potentilla rupestris -__.--_---8 argentea - -3456789012-45- -8 verna -o3 0-234o6-8 alpestris -.-..-.__-_~_-_oo- " nemoralis " -23456789012-45678 Comarum palustre 12345678-012-45678 Rubus Chamsemortis 8 saxatilis O-----------3-56-8 idasus 123456789012345-78 56 SUBPROVINCIAL DISTRIBUTION. Rubus suberectus -o--5--o 4 5 - - 8 fissus .---5 plicatus 45-7S----345-78 nitidus 5-78 2345-7- affinis 6-8 345-78 latifolius imbricatus .._....-._- .3 incurvatus -----6 -5-78 rhamnifolius -2--5--8--1-345-78 Grabowskii tbyrsoideus 8 - - - 2 3 4 5 - 7 - discolor -23-5678--12345-78 leucostachys 1-3-56-8----345-78 carpinifolius 12--5--8---2345-78 villicaulis ..3.5. - 8 345-78 pampinosus _._..__..-. . _ 4 - _ _ - mucronatus ---45--- Salteri 5 5--8 macrophyllus 12--5678----345-78 Sprengelii ..--5--8----345--8 Bloxatnii -..-.- ------ .4 Hystrir - 2 ---6-8 2345-7- Radula - 2 - 4 5 - - 8 2-45-78 rudis -23-56-8 345-78 pallidus 8 234--7S Koebleri 12-4 8 345-7- fusco-ater --3--6-S--- -345-78 pyrraidalis --3 3 4 - - - 8 Guntheri I S----34 hirtus 78 45--- glaudulosus - 2 - - 5 6 - 8 -345--8 scaber 8 4---8 Balfourianus ..._.. ._-_.. .4 corylifolius -23-56-8--12345-78 nemorosus S678---2345-7- csesius --345678-- 12345-78 Eosa spinosissima 12345678-012-45678 Wilsoni 8 " Sabini," etc. -2---678-01--4--78 " villosa" o2--o-7-o 345678 SOUTH BRITAIN. 57 Rosa " toinentosa " -23-5678-012345678 "inodora," etc. --3o56-8----34o--- "inicrantha" --345678-0-234--78 "rubiginosa" 123o5o789012345--8 " sepiuin '' --o-o--8-----4---o systyla -o3o-67S9---34-67o arvensis -2345678901 2345678 Sanguisorba officinalis 1 2-4 - - -89o-2345678 Poterium muricatum - -3-56789o-2-4 Alcheinilla vulgaris 1234-6-89- -23456-8 Mespilus germanica oo3--67---o--4 Cotoneaster vulgaris .-__-_.-__...._. -8 Pyrus communis -23456789012345- -o torminalis 123456 78901234567o Aria -23456789ol23456-8 . Aria 3 4 scandica -23-5-7-9---34---S fennica --3-5o7-----3----- Aucuparia 123o56789ooo345678 25. Onagrace<je. Epilobium angustifolium --3-56789-123456-8 lanceolalum -2---o7-----3 roseum -23o5678 3456-- tetragonum 123456789012345678 tetragonum 7 4 obscurum 57 4 alsinifolium - 8 Isnardia palustris - - -'-56 Circaea intermedia - 3 alpiua --o o--ooooo8 26. Fluviales. Myriophyllum verlicillatum o-ooo6789012ooo-oo "spicatum" 12345678901 2345678 alterniflorum 1-3-56789--2-45-78 Callitricbe pedunculata 12--56789--- -45-78 platycarpa 123456789-12-45-78 autumnalis - - 00-00-0-0-00008 Ceratopbyllum demersum - -3456789012345-78 submersum o-3--678-01--o---- 58 SUBPROVINCIAL DISTRIBUTION. 27. LythracecE. Lytbrum hyssopifolium o 2 - -o-o89o-2-oo-o- 29. Cucurbilacea. Bryonia dioica -03456789012345- -8 31. Illecebraceae. Illecebrum verticillatura 1 2 Corrigiola Httoralis 1 2 Herniaria "glabra" ] -o-o--o-olo---o-- "ciliata" 1 Polycarpon tetraphyllum 12-4 o Scleranthus annuus 123456789012345-78 perennis --o---o--01---o6-o 33. Grossulariaceie. Kibes Grossularia ooo ooo ooooooooo -oo nigrum -o3-5o78o- 12o45-78 rubrum 123456o89oo234o--7o alpinum ---o45oo8 34. Crassulaceae. Tillaea muscosa ---45----01 Sedum Rhodiola - < 6-8 dasypbyllum --o-oooooo- oooo- -o anglicum 1234567--ol---5678 " album " -o34oooo--oo34o-oo reflexutn ooo ooo oooo oooooo oo glaucum - - -f o-o o rupestre -23 0-3-5678 Forsterianum --o oo4o678 Cotyledon Umbilicus 1234567-9- -2345678 35. Saxifragaceee. Saxifraga stellaris o -----8 nivalis - 8 oppositifolia 6-8 granulata ---45-789012345--8 cxspitosa .-._-.- ---. hypnoides --3o -456-8 Cbrysosplenium altemifolium -0345-78-01 -3456-8 Parnassia palustris - -o45-o89012345--8 38. Umbeliifera!. Sanicula europaea 123456789012345-78 Eryngium maritimum 12345-7--01----678 SOUTH BRITAIN. 59 Eryngium campeslre o23 0-2o--6-- Physosperum cornubiense 1 2 Smyrnium Olusatrura 1234567oo01oooo-78 Cicuta virosa --3o-678-012o45--- Apium graveolens 12345678o012345678 Petroselinum segetum 123456789-12345-7- Trinia vulgaris -23 -_3___-o Helosciadium inundatum 1 2-456789012345678 " repens " -234567890123456-8 ^Egopodium Podagraria 123456789012345-78 Carum Carui G--O-----OOO-OO--O vevticillatum -o _..._678 Bulbocastanum _....-o8---2 Pimpinella raagna -2-4-6789012345..-- Sium latifolium lo 3 456789012 3 456-8 angustifolium 1234567890123456-8 Bupleurum tenuissitnum - -345678o01234- - - - aristatum - 2 rotundifolium --345678901234---- (Enanthe fistulosa -234567890123456-8 pimpinelloides -23456-S----34 Lachenalii 12345678-01234-678 silaifolia - - ooo67-9oo234 - - -o crocata 1234567890- -345678 Phellandriuin -23456789012-45- -8 fluviatilis -- 345-7890-234 Fceniculum vulgare 123ooo7o-01o3oo-78 Seseli Libanotis ..,.-6-8 2 Silaus pratensis -234567890123456-8 Meum athainanticum ..__._. ...... ..-.8 Crithmum maritimum 1234567---0----678 Peucedauum officinale ._.._o78--o palustre _.3----o-012-o---- Pastinaca saliva o23456789012345o7- Tordyliuin maximum 8 9 - - - o Daucus gummifer 1234567 6-8 Caucalis daucoides --34--789012-4 Torilis infesta -23456789012345678 Antbriscus vulgaris 123456789012345-78 Myrrhis odorata __o- - -ooo- - -oo5oo8 60 SUBPROVINCIAL DISTRIBUTION. 39. Loranthacete. Viscum album -234o6789012345--8 40. Caprifoliacece. Samhucus Ebulus 023456789012345678 Virburnum Opulus 123456789012345-78 Lantana 02345678901234--7- Louicera Periclymenum 123456789012345-78 41. Rubiacece. Rubia peregrina 1234567- ---o34-678 Galium elongatum 7- ---------- uliginosum -23456789012345678 erectum ooo45678o-12-oo--- Mollugo 12345678901234567- sylvestre o-3--------o3o5--o anglicum ,-o---7o-012ooo-o- tricorne - -345678901234-6-- Vaillaintii 8---O boreale -- ------ 6-8 Asperula cynanchica o2346678901234 -67- 42. Valerianacece. Valeriana dioica 1234567890123456-8 " officinalis" 123456789012345678 officinalis 6-89--2---67 sambucifolia -23456789- -234- -78 Fedia olitoria 123456789012345-78 Auricula 12345678- ---34-67- 43. DipsacecB. Dipsacus pilosus - -3456789012345--8 44. Composite. Hypochceris glabra -23-5678-012-45-O- maculata l--o---8-0-2o----8 Lactuca virosa o -oo56789012o456-o Scariola o78-o-2-4 saligna 0-678---2-4 Soncbus palustris -o-o--7oo012--o--- asper 1234567890-2345678 Crepis biennis __oo--78-o-2----oo paludosa _o--------o---56-8 Hieracium pallidum 0--78 lasiophyllum - 8 SOUTH BRITAIN. 61 Hieracium argenteum - 8 murorum ___-__7__---34---- caesium vulgatum -2345678901 2345678 gothicum .---.----.-.-...-8 tridentatum -2--567S---234- boreale -23456789012345678 Borkhausia foetida - -- - -67ooOoo taraxacifolia -----o78-0 8 Taraxacum palustre 12-456o8o012-45 -78 Arnoseris pusilla o-oo5-78-012oo---- Arctiuro ma jus 5 intermedium 4 minus tomentosum pubens 24 8 Saussurea alpina .--..--_...----_-8 Serratula tinctoria 123456789- -2345678 Carduus tenuiflorus 12345678901o3-5678 eriophorus o2345o78901234567- Forsteri 67 prateiisis -2345678901234567- tuberosus ... 4 acaulis -2345678901234-6- - heterophyllus -_-.._ooo-o---56-8 Onopordum Acanthium o23456789012345-7o Carlina vulgaris 123456789012345-78 Centaurea iiigrescens ? 123456789- --34 567- Cyanus 123456789012345-78 Calcitrapa 123-6678-012 6 Chrysocoma Linosyris -2 3 --------------8 Diotis maritima 1--0--0--0-------8 Tanacetum vulgare 1 2345o789012345678 Artemisia campestris -o-~-----01 maritima 123-5678-0123- -678 Antennaria dioica I 89012--5678 Gnaphalium sylvaticum -2-4567890123456-8 Filago gallica ----.-78 minima 12-456789012345-78 germanica 123456789012345-78 63 SUBPROVINCIAL DISTRIBUTION. Filago apiculata .... 5. 78-012-4---- spathulata ---456789-- 2 Petasites vulgaris 123456789012345-78 Erigeron acris 1 -3456789012345678 Aster Tripolium 12345678-0123-0678 Seuecio sylvaticus 123456789012345-78 viscosus - - o- -789 o 2 - 006-8 paludosus _....._. -o-2------ saracenicus ? --34--7-O-----5--8 Cineraria palustris o--------012--oo-o . campestris ---456789--23-.--S Inula Helenium 12345oo89012345678 crithmoides 12345678-oo-3- -678 Pulicaria vulgaris ---456789-12-4 Pyrethrum maritimum 12-456- 678 Matricaria Chamomilla 1 23456789012345-78 Anthemis nobilis 12345678901 -345-78 arvensis 0234567890123456-8 Cotula 123456789012345-78 45. Campanulacece. Campanula patula - -34567- 9-0-3456-- Kapunculus --o-oo78-ooo-45--8 latifolia o- - -o-78o0123456- 8 rapunculoides ....... _ o --2-o Trachelium -23456789012345678 glomerata . - -34567890123456- - Wahlenbergia hederacea 123456789- - -345678 Specularia hybrida 123456789012345 Pbyteuma spicatum ----- 6 orbiculare - - - 4 5 6 7 45.*Lobeliaceee. Lobelia urens - 2 - - - - o Dortmanna ---..-_.-...-.. 5678 46. Ericaceae. Erica ciliaris 1 - - 4 o - o ragans 1 o Andromeda polifolia '* --3-----o-o2--5678 Vaccinium Myrtillus 123456789-o2345-78 Vitis-idaca -. o ... 45678 Oxycoccos - -3-567- -012-45678 SOUTH BRITAIN. 63 Pyrola rolundifolia -o- o-o7-ool-oo5--- media ..-..6--o----4o--- minor -5-789--23456-S Monotropa Hypopitys oo3456789-12345o- - 47. llicaceee. Ilex Aquifolium 123456789012345-78 48. JasminacecB. Fraxinus excelsior 123456789012345 -78 49. Apocynacece. Vinca minor oo oo5678o01oo45-o8 50. GentianacecB, Gentiana Pneuraonanthe ---4567o901 78 Amarella 123456789012345-78 campestris 1234o6o89- 12345-78 Cicendia filiformis lo-456----------7 Erythraa littoralis 123-56---0 678 pulchella 12345678-012- -o678 latifolia Chlora perfoliata -234567890123456-8 Villarsia nymphajoides -----o789-123oo 50*Polemoniacece. Polemoniurn caeruleum -ooo--ooo---oo5--o 5 1 . Convolvulaced. Convolvulus Soldanella 12345678-01 ----678 5\..*Cuscutacece. Cuscuta europasa - -3456789012345--- Epithymum 12345678901234 8 Trifolii .--46678-012-4.---- 52. Solanacea. Solanum nigrum 123456789012346 -78 Atropa Belladonna -o345o7890123456-8 53. Scrophulariacece. Verbascus Thapsus 123456789012345-78 Lychnitis oo3oo678oooooo5 - - 8 floccosuin -0--0-0--01 nigrura 1234567890123456- - Blattaria 12-o56oo9oooooo67- virgatum 123---oo--o - - o o o - o Veronica spicata o-o----o-0-23--6-8 verna -..--0---01. 64 SUBPROVINCIAL DISTRIBUTION. Veronica triphyllos __.._. ___oi--o---- bumifusa ......--8 Buxbauinii I23o5o78901o34567- Bartsia viscosa 12-456---------6-- Rbinanthus major O----6------3-5--- Melampyrum cristatum ----5--8-ol2oo arvense - . - o 5 - -8ool-oo Scropbularia Ehrharti ----6-8-----45--8 Scorodonia 1 2 Antirrhinum Orontium 123456789012345-78 Liuaria spuria 12345678901234-67- repens 123-5oo89--23--67- minor 1234567890123456-8 Limosella aquatica oo3o 6789012o45 - -8 Sibthorpia europaea 123--6 6 - - 54. Orobanchacece. Orobancbe "major" 12345678901 2345o78 caryophyllacea - o - - - - 7 " elatior" oo3456789012o4oo-o minor o2345678901234-6oo amethystea 1 picridis ....5. 7-- --2---- 7 bederae 123-5------- 3--67S rubra 1-- -----. ------ o -- caerulea ----5--8o-l-3- -o Latbraea squamaria -23456789- -2345- -8 55. Lamiacece. Salvia pratensis ----oo7-9-oooooo-o verbenaca 123456789012345-78 Mentha, rotundifolia I2345o78o0123456o8 sylvestris 12345678-012345678 piperita 123oooo8-012345o78 saliva 1234567890-2-46- -8 rubra o2o--o789-l-345--8 gentilis 12ooo-o8- - ooo45- 78 Pulegium 1 -O4567890123456-8 Thymus Serpyllum Chamaedrys 67 4 Calamintba " Nepeta " ooo4 -6789012 3 o-67o syjvatica .... 5 SOUTH BRITAIN. 65 Melittis Melissophyllum I23-56o-----oo-o7 Teucritnn Scordium - 2 - 9-12 Botrys ------ 7 AjugaChaniaepitys --45o78---2----oo Ballota ruderalis --3-5678- -12-45--- Lamium incisutn 123-56789012-45678 Galeopsis Ladanum 12345678901234567- ochroleuca _______ Qo----4---8 versicolor 6o89012-45--8 Stachys Betonica 1 234567890-2345-78 ambigua 1 -o--o78o-o2o-oooo germanica o---o-oo9--2 Nepeta cataria 123456789012345-78 Marrubium vulgare 12345o789012345678 Scutellaria minor 12345678oO- -345678 56. JBoraginacece. Myosotis repens -23-5678-0----567- caespitosa 12345678901 -345678 sylvatica -oo-5o78-012345--8 collina 12345678-012345678 versicolor 123456789012345-78 Lithospermum arvense 123456789012345-78 p. cscnilcuin -23---7----0-0-6-8 Mertensia maritima O o--o-----------o8 Symphjtum tuberosum -----ooo-oo?o-o--8 Anchusa sempervirens 1234oo7890123456-8 Asperugo procumbens - - oo-ooo-o-o-o5- -o Cynoglossum sylvaticura -----o78o-o23oo Pulmonaria angustifolia - - - - 5 57. Pinguiculacece. Pinguicula vulgaris -2345- -89012345-78 lusitanica 12345-----O------- Utricularia vulgaris 123456789012-456-8 intermedia -2-45------------- minor l-345678-012o-5678 58. Primulacete. Primula elatior ___._.. 8-0-------- veris 123456789012345-78 Hottonia palustris - -3456789012345- -8 Lysimachia nummularia -23456789012345678 I 66 SUBPROVINCIAL DISTRIBUTION. Anagallis caerulea 1234567890123456- - Centunculus minimus 12-4-56789012-4-678 Glaux maritima 12345678-012345678 59. Plumbaginacea. Armeria maritima 12345678-0123- -678 Statice Limoniam o23 45678-0123- -678 bahusiensis -2--567S-0------7- spatbulata 1234o678--l----678 occidentalis 1- ----7---l----oo- Dodartii o2o l----67o caspia --o---o---12 60. Plantayinacea? . Plantago media -23456789012345678 maritima 12345678-01234-678 Littorella lacustris 123456789012-456-8 62. ChenopodiacecB. Chenopodium olidum 123456789012--- --- polyspermum 1234567890-2345-78 urbicum --oo - -7ooooooo-- -o intermedium -2-05678-----45 rubrum 123o5678901234-678 botryoides o----ooo-01- -----o murale 12345678901234o-7o hybridum --34--78o01234---- ficifolium 4o6789-12--o--- glaucum _--o5o78-------o-- Atriplex portulacoides 02345678-012- - -678 pedimculata ._._.. 7.. Q12----0- areuaria oooooo78- oo-- -- --o Babingtonii 123o5678-oo-34-67o "erecta" 1234--78 4 - - 7 - "deltoidea" J-3-5678----345-7- litloralis ---45678-012---678 marina ..-.5.78---------- Beta maritima 12345678-0123--678 Salsola Kali 1234567--01----678 Schoberia maritima 12345678-0123--678 fruticosa ooo4---8-01 ----o-- Salicornia herbacea 1234567- -0123- -678 procumbens 1--4567--0-----6-- radicans o4567---l----o-- SOUTH BRITAIN. 67 63. Polygonacece. Polygcmum Bistorta o2345o789012345678 viviparum --_._-_-_-__. o ---8 laxum -.--_6o8----34---- mite 0---0-78---2---0-- minus - -3456789012-45678 maritimum .... 5 Baii 123456 1----678 duraetorutn --3-S678----3 Bumex pratensis 1- - -5678- - -23456-8 pulcher 123456789012345-7- maritimus -234-6V89012-45--0 palustris 1234-678-012-456- - Oxyria reniforrais _.__-. ___._. o _---8 64. Eleagnacea. Hippophae rhamnoides ------ 7 -01------- 65. Thymeleaceee. Daphne Laureola o23456789012346- -o Mezereum --o456o89oo--oo--- 66. Santalacece. Thesium humifusuin Io34567890123 67. Asaracece. Asarum europaeum ...4-_. 9--- 68. EmpetracecE. Empetrum nigrum --3- -O------345678 69. Euphorbiacece. Euphorbia Peplis 12345 67 platyphylla 1-345678 234---- stricta ...-0-------3 hiberna - 2 pilosa - - 3 Paralias 12345678-0 678 portlandica 12-45oo 678 Buxus sempervirens -o ooo -7o9 oo2o-o Mercurialis annua o234567890123-o678 70. Urticacece. Parietaria erecta ------- S--------7- Humulus Lupulus 123456789012345-78 Ulmus " montana " 123456-890-2345-78 " suberosa " o2345678---o345-7o 68 SUBPEOVINCIAL DISTRIBUTION. Ulmus "campestris" -23456789012345-co 71. Amentiferee. Quercus intermedia ....___. -...345 sessiliflora -23456789ol2o45678 Fagus sylvatica 123456789012345-7o Carpinus Betulus -234o678o012345--o Betula verrucosa .--__. 7. ___-...___ glutinosa ......7... ...4.. 7. Populus " alba " 1234ooo89012345--8 "canescens" -23o5 -78-012345- 78 tremula -23456789012345-78 Salix pentandra oo- - -ooooo- --45-78 " decipiens 1 --456789012-45 fragilis 123456789012-45-78 "Kusseliana -2-o-o78--123456-8 alba -2345o7890l2345-78 " ritellina 1-345- -89012345678 triandra -2-456789012345678 purpurea -2-4-6789012-45-- - " Helix --o4-o789-12345--8 " rubra, etc. -2-45-78oOo2-4o--8 viminalis 123456789012345-78 "stipularis -2---6-8o01--45--8 " Smithiana 123-5678901-3456-8 " acuminata -2-45o-8o-12345-o8 " aquatica -23456-89012345678 " oleifolia -2--5678--12-45-78 aurita 123456789012345-78 " ambigua 6-8-0 herbacea ------- ---.----6-8 Myrica Gale 1234567o-012- -5678 72. Coniferce. Juniperus communis - -3456789- -234o6-8 nana .-.---.-.-.-..-._8 Taxus baccata o234o67o9ooo3456- 8 73. Orchidacece. Neottia Nidus-avis 1 234567890123456-8 Spirantbes astivalis ----5--------0 Listera cordata -23-5- 5--8 ovata 123456789012345-78 SOUTH BRITAIN. 69 Epipactis latifolia 1234567890-2345678 latifolia 7 -234-6-8 media -2 6789--2-45--- atrorubens _..-o----- 1--4---8 palustris -23456789012-45-78 Cephalanthera grandifolia --34567S9--234---- ensifolia ---o5678----345--8 rubra --3--------oo----o Epipogium aphyllura ....... ...... 4 Orchis Morio 123456789012345-78 mascula 123456789012345-78 ustulata -23456789012340- - - militaris . .....o89 tepbrosanlhos ......7-9o fusca ...__o7o hircina -._-._7--0 pyramidalis 023456789012345-78 maculata 123456789012345-78 Gymnadeiiia conopsea 123456789012345--8 bifolia 123456789012345-78 bifolia 45678-012-4- -78 chlorantha -23456789012345-78 Habenaria viridis - -34567890123456-8 albida ....o6-----o-oo-78 Aceras anthropophora ---0-6789012------ HermiDium Mouorchis - - ooo67890123 Opbrys apifera 1234567890123456-8 aracbnites -_oo--7-----o aranifera - - oo567ooO-2- -o fucifera .... 5 6 7 muscifera - - 3 4-5 6789012345- -8 Malaxis paludosa -2- .5670-012-. o- -o Liparis Loeselii -...,.o--012 74. Iridacea. Crocus nudiflorus ............. 45... Gladiolus imbricatus Trichonema Columnar 75. AmaryllidacecB. Narcissus p. narcissus 123456789012345-78 Leucojutn aestivum _o-4 - -7o90 70 SUBPEOVINCIAL DISTRIBUTION. 76. LiliacecB. Fritillaria Meleagris o -345o78901o3o5 Allium oleraceura - -3-5678-01234o-o- sphaerocepbalura ___--. __----3 Schoenoprasum 1-- --------------- Gagea lutea __3o--o-90--34---- Ornithogalum pyrenaicum -234-6oo- - - 2 o - o Scilla verna 12--0 678 autumnalis 12o-5-7o----3-o--o Hyacinthus nonscriptus 123456789012345-78 Muscari racemosum ---o--oooOoo Lloydia serotina ._...-_-_.-------8 Simetbis bicolor - - - 4 Asparagus officinalis Io34o-oo-oo-o<- -678 Euscus aculeatus 12-4567890oo- - -6- - Convallaria majalis - -3456789012345- -8 multiflora -oo4567890-23-o- - - Polygonatum --3oo-o--o--3o--7- 76*Trilliacece. Paris quadrifolia - -34567890123456-8 78. Melanthiacece. Colchicum autuinnale -o345-7-90-2345-78 Tofieldia palustris ? Nartbecium ossifragum 1234567-9-12345678 79. Hydrocharidacete. Hydrocbaris Morsus-ranae -23466789012345-78 Stratiotes aloides -_-_o-o-o012------ 80. Alismacece. Alisma ranunculoides 123456789012-45678 natans -_.----------o56-8 Actinocarpus Damasonium o- - -567890- -- -5 Sagittaria sagittifolia -23456789012345-78 Butomus umbellatus o234o6789012345678 Triglochin maritimum 12345678-0123-5678 Scheuchzeria palustris .--.---.------6--- 81. Fluviales. Potamogeton densus -23456789012345-78 pectinatus lo3456789012345--8 flabellatus --3-5-78--1-345 pectinatus 7...1-.4--.- SOUTH BRITAIN. 71 Potamogeton filiformis 6----1 8 pusillus 1 -3456789012345678 trichoides ____.__. __]__. _ o compressus -23- 0608- -12-45- - - gramineus -ooo-678o012345--o acutifolius -----6-8--1 zosteraefolius -__o-o-8---2-45--- crispus -23456789012345678 pevfoliatus 123456789012345--8 lucens -234o6789012345- -8 praelongus 89012- -5-- - heterophyllus ---45-789-12--5678 rufescens --3--678---2o45-78 natans 123456789012345678 natans oblongus -23-5678-0-2345-78 plantagineus ----5-78--12----78 Ruppia"maritima" 12345678-012 678 rostellata __3-5-----------7- Zannichellia palustris 12345678901. 2345-78 Zostera marina 12345678-01--- --78 nana -_-45(5_--.-_ .--.._ 82. Aracece, etc. Leinna minor 123456789012345-78 gibba -23-56789012345-7- polyrbiza -23456789012345-7o trisulca -23456789012345-78 Arum italicum - - - - 5 Acorus Calamus -2345o78901o -45o- - Sparganium natans - -345-78-012-456-8 natans -...--7._.._._.._8 minimum ----5----012-4-6-- Typha angustifolia 0-3456789012-456-8 84. Juncaceas, Juncus diffusus ----5678-Oo2-4---- maritimus 12345678-01- ---678 acutus o234-678-oo-o--678 acutiflorus 123456789012345-78 obtusiflorus -23456789012345-78 supinus 123456789012-45678 72 SUBPROVINCIAL DISTRIBUTION. Juncus compressus 1234-67-9oooo456-o coenosus 12345678-01-0--678 squarrosus 123456789012345-78 triglumis -_-_. _.___.-8 Luzula sylvatica 123456789012345-78 pilosa 123456789012345-78 Forsteri -23-56789- - -34o67 multiflora -23456789012345-78 spicata -__.___.___. _....g 85. Cyperacea. Cyperus longus 1 -345-7---o---o-7 fuscus ______78---------- Cladium Mariscus 1 -oo5-7- -012-o56o8 Schoenus nigricans 12345- -89012-45678 Rbyncospora alba 1234567-9012-45678. fusca 1 -345 06 Blysraus compressus 0234567-9012345- -8 rufus _.-___-.-..._. _._8 Scirpus glaucus 123456-8-012--0-78 carinatus -.-__67 O ------o triqueter 678--O Savii 12345 678 Holoschoenus -2ooo--------o maritimus 12345678-012345678 sylvaticus 023456789012345-78 uniglumis ---4-6 ..__. o _ multicaulis 12345678-012--5678 pauciflorus 1 -3-56o8o012-45678 caespitosus 0234567- -012345678 acicularis 1234567890123456-8 fluitans 12-456789012345- -8 Eriophorum vaginatum 1234567-O-1-345678 latifolium -2--5-789--O-456-8 gracile -----o7 o---o Carex dioica o-oo-6o890123456-8 pulicaris 123456789012345-78 ovalis 123456789012345-78 curta -00-567-9012345678 Persoonii 8 elongata 78 5--.- SOUTH BRITAIN. 73 Carex rcmota 123456789012345-78 axillaris -2345678-012-4- Boenninghauseniana ----5678 ..... intermedia 123456789012345-78 arenaria 12345678-01- ---678 divisa 02345678-01 78 muricata 12345678901 2345-78 divulsa 023456789012345- -8 teretiuscula -234-678-012-45-78 paniculata 123456789012345-78 atrata -.._ ______ g rigicla -o . . . _ g stricta --oo-678--12-45o-8 acuta 023456789012-45-78 " flava " 123456789012345-78 " Oederi" 12345678-012345-78 extensa 1 23456-8-01 - - - o 6 7 8 pallescens -23456789012-45-78 " fulva," etc. -o345 6789012o45-78 distans 123o5678-0123oo678 punctata ? 1 ~____8 binervis 123456789012-45-78 Iffivigata 123-56789 5678 panicea 123456789012345-78 depauperata - o - - - - 7 limosa --o-5----01--o56-8 irrigua o o strigosa --3456789oo23456-8 sylvatica 123456789012345-78 Pseudo-cyperus -23456789012345- -8 praecox 123456789012345-78 montana 6o----o34 pilulifera 123456789012345-78 tonoentosa --.4. clandestina --34 34 digitata --34 34---- liliformis -o3-5----012o-5--8 liirta 123456789012345-78 vesicaria o234 -6789012345-78 paludosa o 23456789012345 -08 & 74 SUBPEOVINCIAL DISTRIBUTION. Carex riparia 0234567890123456-8 86. Gramina. Leersia oryzoides - - - - 5 6 7 Spartina stricta -2--5678-01 alterniflora - - - - 5 Cynodon Dactylon 1 o - 4 - - o Digitaria huuiifusa ----5-7- -01 Setaria viridis ----5-7o--lo Phleum arenarium 12345678-012- - -678 asperura --Q---O-O--OO Boehmeri -------8-012o Alopecurus pratensis 123456789012345-78 pronus 60 fulvus -4-678--12-4o--8 bulbosus -23456o--01-3--o agrestis -23456789012345-7o Knappia agrostidea - o 8 Gastridium lendigerum 12345678-ol -34-6-0 Polypogon littoralis ---45-78--1 monspeliensis -oo-5-78--l Milium effusum 12345678901234- -08 Apera Spica-venti ----5-789012-ooo-o interrupta ----01 Agrostis setacea 123456o-o 6 canina -23456789012345 -78 Ammophila aruudinacea 12345678-01 - -o-678 Arundo Calamagrostis -ooo5678-012oo5o- - Epigcjos -23456789012345678 Sesleria caerulea ___.<>--- Aira alpina ? _.--_____". .......Q flexuosa 123456789012345-78 canescens --OO--7--01 Avena fatua 123456789012346-78 pratensis -234567890-2345- -8 pubescens 123456789-12345-78 Triodia decumbens 123456789012345-78 Koeleria cristata 1 23456789012345-78 Melica uniflora 123456789012345-78 miians -oo- - -oo-o- -345--0 Molinia caerulea 123456789012345-78 SOUTH BRITAIN. 75 Catabrosa aquatica -0345678901 "2 345-78 Glyceria aquatica -23456789012345678 plicata --3-567S---2345--8 maritiraa -2345678-0123- -678 distans -2345678-01234 -6-8 Borreri ...-5678 procumbens 12345678-01 -3-- - o - loliacea 12345678-012- - -678 Poa bulbosa -2o-56o--01 alpina 0----------8 compvessa -23456789012345-78 nemoralis -23456789012345-78 Balfourii ._.__--_._..___. _8 cssia, glauca _._..-_8 Briza media 123456789012345-78 minor 12o45-------oo Festuca uniglumis -2345678-0 -- - - -678 P. myurus 123456789012345 -78 duriuscula -234567890123456-8 rubra 1234567--01o3o--78 sylvatica ___o-6---o--345-o- arundinacea - 2 - - 5 " elatior" 1234567890-2345- -8 " pratensis " -23456789012345678 "loliacea" -23456789012345- -8 Bromus madritensis -23-5-7o- - - - 3 o - 6 7 erectus -o3456789-12345-oo secalinus 02-456789012345678 commutatus 12345678901 2345-78 Brachypodium pinnatum -o3456789oo2345- - - Triticum caninum 0234567-9012345678 " laxum " 5678 7 - "junceum" 12345678-01 -34-678 Lolium temulentum 12-456789012345678 Elymus arenarius _o34-----0l 08 Hordeum sylvaticum ...o5-789--234---o pratense -23456789012345678 marilimum o2345678-0123--6-- Lepturus filiformis 12345678-012 3 --678 76 SUBPROVINCIAL DISTRIBUTION. 87. Filices. Ceterach officinarum 123456789- 12345678 Woodsia ilvcnsis ..._.8 hyperborea 8 Polypodium Phegopteris 12- - -600- - - -345678 Dryopteris - - oooo- oo- - -345678 calcareum - -34- -- -9- - -34o6o8 Allosorus crispus -o3 -45678 Cistopteris fragilis -o34- 67- - olo345678 Polystichum Lonchitis ------__.-_o---o-8 " lobatum " -23456789012345678 angulare -2345678-012345678 Lastrea Thelypteris - o3-5678o012-45678 cristata -o-----ooolo-oo--- uliginosa .___.__ o--l--oo--- spinulosa o2oo5678-o!234 5ooo glandulosa -- ... 3 - 5 fcenisecii 123--67 o56-8 Asplenium viride oo------4o6-8 marinum 123456 678 lanceolatum 123-o67-o- - -3-o678 germanicum .......... -_._.__8 septentrionale . 2 o - - - o -__-8 Adiautum Capillus 12o 06-- Hymenophyllum tunbrigense 123--67 --06-8 Wilsoni 12 .-..5678 Osmunda regalis 123456789012-45678 Botrychiura Lunaria 1234567-9012345678 Ophioglossum vulgatum 123456789012345- -8 88. LycopodiacecB. Lycopodiuua clavatum -23456789-12-45678 annotinum -------------- _._8 inundatum 123456789012-45--- alpinum ._3-o o678 Selago 1234567-9- 1 -o45678 selaginoides -o----------.--.-8 89. Marsileacea. Isoetes lacustris .-___--__--__- 6-8 Pilularia globulifer* 12345678-012-45678 M. N. BRITAIN. 77 90. Equisetacece. Equisetum sylvaticura -23456789012345678 hyemale -oo---7--012-o56-8 variegatum -23--------------- 2, 3. Mid and North Britain. 1. RanunculacccB. Clematis Vitall>a -o-2oo---oo Thalictrum alpinum ----3456--9012345678 " minus " -012345678901234567 "majus" 23456-89 flexuosum ----o-5- --o saxatile ----.- .__9 flavum 9012345-789--2--0 Anemone nemorosa -0123456789012-45 Pulsatilla 9 - - 3 Myosurus minimus - 1 2 3 4 Ranunculus heterophyl. 9012-45678901234-67 heterophyl. 2 peltatus 2 flovibundus 2 marinus o 4 8 confusus o 4 8 Bauclotii 4 8 trichophyllus 235 8 trichophyl. Drouetii circinatus 90o234---8 fluitans - CO3UOSUS - hederaceus 9 Ficaria 9 Lingua 9 auricomus 9 234---S 3 -3-567 234567890123456 23456789012-4- -78 2345678901 o 2345678901 bulbosus 901234567890123- --o uirsutus 9012345-7890-2 sceleratus 9012345678901234-6 parvitiorus 901234 78 SUBPROVINCIAL DISTRIBUTION. Ranunculus arvensis 9012345-78 Caltba radicans _-_._. __---0 Trollius europseus -0123456789012345- -8 Helleborus viiidis -Oo2345- oooo foetidus -o-o34o-oooo Aquilegia vulgaris -Oo234567o ooooo Actsea sp'cata ---23-5---O 1 .*Berberaceee. Berberis vulgaris oOo234 ooo ooooo 2. Nymphceaceee. Nympbaea alba -012345678901 -3456-8 Nuphar lutea 901234567890 o-3 pumila -----O--O-9012 3. PapaveracecB. Papaver hybrid um - - 1 o - 4 Argemone 9 012345- -8901234-6 Rhosas 9012345-78900 oo Meconopsis cambrica --oo3-5o-oooo Chelidotiium majus 9012345678-ooo Glaucium luteum --12-456789-o2 o 3.*Fumariace<E. Corydalis claviculata -0123456789012-4 Fumaria capreolata -01234567890123-567 pallidiflora Boraei 5 confusa 5 muralis 3 officinalis 9012345678901o-45-78 micrantha -0---4---8901 parviflora -- -2-----8-oo------o parviflora - - - 2 Vaillantii - - - 2 4. Cruciferce. Cakile maritima 9- 12-4567890123-5678 Crambe maritima 9--2--S6-8---23 Coronoptis Ruellii 90123456-8901 Thlaspi arvense 9ol2345-789012-45-7 alpestre -0--345----0 alpestre 4 occitanum 3 M. N. BRITAIN. 79 Thlaspi virens Hutchinsia pelraea - - - 3 Teesdalia nudicaulis -012345-78901 Lepidium latifolium --12oo--ooo-----o Smithii -0123456789012 campestre -012345678901 Cochlearia officinalis -01234567890123-5678 maritima - - 12-4567890123- oooo alpina ----345---9012 danica --1--45--89012----78 anglica -olo--56oo--ooo Subularia aquatica ------ 56--90-2-45 Draba rupestris __..____--901---5 incana -0-o345---901 -345-78 muralis -0-o3-o--o-o verna -0123456789012-45-7 inflata 9 Dentaria bulbifera _-_.____7 Cardamine amara -012345678901 2 hirsuta -012345678901234-678 hirsuta -012345---90-23--6 sylvatica -012345-7890123--6 impatiens -Oo23-o-o----o Arabis tbaliana -012345-789012-4--7 petraea -o-o--o---901-3-56-8 hirsuta -012345-78901234o Turritis glabra -0-2345-7-9o-2 Barbarea vulgaris 9012345678901 arcuata - - o 2 - o o stricta ---23--o intermedia Nasturtium officinale 90123456789012345-7 sylvestre -01234o6-89 terrestre -01234567890-2 amphibium 90123o-ooo--o Sisymbrium officinale 9012345678901234567 Irio -o -8 Sopbia 901234--78-01 --4 Erysimum dlieiranthoides 9oooooo--o--o-o Alliaria 90123456789012-4 80 SUBPROVINCIAL DISTRIBUTION. Brassica oleracea ---G-OO--OO campestris -0123o56-ooo-oo Sinapis alba -01234 --7890-23o-o nigra o01234-6-8o-o tenuifolia --12-45--89 muralis --OO-O----Q Raplianus maritimus --lo--567----2-----o 5. Resedaccce. Keseda Luteola 90123456789012-4 lutea 90-234- - -890o 6. Cistacete. Hcliantbemum vulgare 9012345678901 --4 cauum - - - - 3 - 5 7. Violacea. Viola palustris 9012345678901234567 odorata 9012345- oooo hirta -0123456-890 flavicornis 9012345- -8901 staguina ? 9 tricolor 90123456789012345678 tricolor 01 5 9 78 arveusis 9012345-7890123- -6-8 lutea -01o34567890l234-6 8. Droseracece. Drosera intermedia 90123-56o-o--23---oo anglica -- 1234567- -Ol234567o 9. Polygalacece. Polygala vulgaris 9012345678901234567 uliginosa - - - - 3 11. Elatinacea. Elatine hexaudra -01---- ---90-2 12. Silenacete. Dianthus Armeria --1-345---90 deltoides -012345- -8901 Saponaria officinalis 9012345-789oo Silene inflata 9012345678901 -34- -o maritima - -123456789012345678 anglica -0123-5-78901 nutans _o--3-o---90- o M. N. BRITAIN. 81 Silene noctiflora -0-234---890 conica ___.._. .-8-0 acaulis 5---9012345678 Lychnis alpina _--___5__-_o Viscaria --.-.--6-890 vespertina 9012345678901 - -4o Githago 9012345678901234- -oo IS^Alsinacece. Moenchia erecta - 1 - 3 4 Sagina "raaritima" --12-45-789012345678 apetala 901234--7890 o ciliata - - - 2 3 4 saxatilis --------o-90l---5--o subulata --ooo45-7890l23-56-8 nodosa 9012345678901234-67 Honclceneja peploides 9-12-456-89012345678 Spergularia "marina" 9-12-45678901234- -78 media 9-12-45 rubra -0123456789012-4- -o Arenaria noiregica ______ _-..._-_--_- g serpyllifolia 9012345678901234567 leptoclados tenuifolia ---o3----oo verna -01 -34567890 rubella - 9 ft uliginosa - - - - - 4 triuervis 9012345678901--4 Stellaria nemorum -0123456789012 holostea 90123456789012-45-7 glauca 901234o678o graminea 90123456789012-45-78 cerastoides ----------9012 Cerasiium aquaticura 90123---oo-o-- ----o semidecand. 9012345678901 o tetrandrum -012-45-7890123 --678 arvense 9012 3 4 5" 6-8901 o alpinum 0-----5---90-2--5 latifolium 9012--5-oo nigrescens ---------------- ._-g Cherleria sedoides --- 90-2345- -o 82 SUBPROVINCIAL DISTRIBUTION. 13. Linacea. Linuin pevenne 9 - 2 3 4 o angustifolium - - 1 o - o 5 Radiola millegrana -01234567-901234 - 7 14. Malwcece. Malva moschata 901234567890 ooo sylvestris 9012345678901234 rotundifolia 901234- -7890o Althaea officinalis 9---oooo-----o Lavatera arborea 06-000 15. TiliacecB. Tilia parvifolia o o o o o 5 16. Hypericaceee. Hypericum Androssem. -o!234567o9- -234 perforatum 9012345678901--4--o8 dubium -0123456789- -2 quadrangul. 9012345678901234 humifusuin 901234567890123 hirsutum 9012345678901--4 montauum -012345-0 Elodes -0123-567 2S---7 17. Aceracece. Acer campestre 90123-45-oooo-o 18. GeraniacecB. Erodium cicutarium 901234567890123456 maritimum -01---56 Geranium sylvaticum -0123456789012-4- -o pratense -01234567890123 pyrenaicum -o-23oo--oo-oo pusillum 9012345-78-01 dissectum 90123456789012345 columbinum 9012345-7890-2 lucidum -0123456789012-4- -o Kobertianura 90123456789012345-7 sanguineum 9012345678901 -34 lancastriense ------ 5 19. Bakaminacea. Iinpatiens Noli-langere -olooo5-o--o 20. Oxalidacece. Oxalis Acetosella 901234567890123456o M. N. BRITAIN. 83 21. Celastracece. Euonyinus europaeus 90o2345678--o 22. Rhamnaceee. Rhamnus catharticus 90-2345o o Frangula 90123-5- o"---o 23. Leguminifera. Spartium scoparium 90123456789012345-0 Ulex europsus 90123456789012345oo uanus -Ol-3456-oooo nanus ----o--o Gallii - - 1 - 3 4 5 6 7 Genista tinctoria 90123456-8 anglica 9012345678901--4 Ononis arvensis 9012345678901 2345 spinosa 901234567890-2 Antbyllis Dillenii ._... Medicago lupulina 9012 3.4 5-78901234- -o maculata -0-2-4----oo denticulata --J2-o----oo Melilotus officinalis 9012345-78ooo arvensis .-].-. _.-_ o vulgaris - - lo -o5--89oo Trigonella ornithopod. --loo-5-789o Trifolium subterraneum - 1 2 medium -012345678901234--78 arvense 9012345678901-34 scabrum -01234---890 striatum -Oo2345- -890 fragiferum 901234o- -89 procumbens 9012345678901234- -7 minus 9012345-7890-00 filifonne? oO!2345-78901--4 Lotus corniculatus 9012345678901234567 major 901234567890o23 Astragalus glycyphyllos 90-23456o8901 - -4 hypoglottis 9--234 8901--45 alpinus _._.--_..._o Oxytropis uralensis -------6--90-2-45 campestris ._..-. _ . . . . o Ornithopus perpusillus 90123456789012 84 SUBPROVINCIAL DISTRIBUTION. Hippocrepis comosa 90-23-5-O- -0 Onobrychis saliva 9 - - 2 3 4 o Vicia Orobus o4567890- -3 sylvatica 90123456789012-4 angustifolia '-012345--8-01 latbyroides -012345-789012-4 lutea -o-o- -0-7-90 sepium 9012345678901234567 bilhynica - - - 2 o hirsuta 901234567890123-5-O tetrasperma 901234-67-oO Lalhyrus Aphaca 9oooo----o Nissolia 90-o--o--o-o palustris 9oo2o- -o sylvestris -0-2--5678-0-o3 marilimus 9____- o -----------o8 Orobus tuberosus -012 3 456789012345-78 niger ..---4----901 24. Rosacece. Prunus spinosa 90123456789012345 insititia 9012345678oo---o Padus -012345678901 -345 Cerasus - 1 - - - 5 avium 901234567890o-3 Spiraea Filipendula 9012345-0890- - -o Dryas octopetala ....3 90-2345-7 Geum urbanum 90123456789012-4 intermedium -0-2345-7890 rivale 90123456789012345-7 Agrimonia Eupatoria 901234567890123 odorata - - - - - 5 Sibbaldia procumbens ----- --0-89012-45--8 Potentilla fruticosa ----345-o argentea -0--345--8901 verna -Ooo345- -890 alpestris --0-345---90 reptans 901 234567890-2 " nemoralis " -01234567890o--4---8 Fragariastruin 9012345678901--4--O Fragaria vesca -0123456789012345-78 M. N. BRITAIN. 85 llulms Chamaetnorus - 1-345-789012-45 saxatilis - 123456789012345678 idcEus - 123456789012345-7 suberectus - Io3o56o-901234--o fissus plicatus - 1 56-890 uitidus - 5-7 affinis - 56--9--2 hitifolius imbricatus incurvatus rhamnifolius - 1 - - - o Grabowskii - thyrsoideus - discolor - leucostachys - 5 carpinifolius - 5-78--12 villicaulis - pampinosus mucronatus - Salteri - macropbyllus - 56-8 Sprengelii - 1 - - - 5 Bloxamii - Hystrix - Radula - rudis - - - 3 - - - 7 8 pallidus - 45-7-9 Koebleri - . ... 5 - 7 fusco-ater - 1 pyrmidalis Guntberi liirtus glandulosus - - 2 - - 5 scaber - Balfourianus corylifolius - o 1 - <y nemorosus V - 56 ca3sius o ooo4o6ooooo " fruticosus '' 9 12345678901234567 86 SUBPROVINCIAL DISTRIBUTION. Bosa spinosissima -0123456-89012345-0 rubella .._..4_.--_o hibernica - - - 2 - 4 5 involuta _._____. __.__2o " Sabiui," etc. -0-2 345- -8901 " villosa" -012345-7890123-5-0 "toinentosa" -012345-789012--5678 " inodora," etc. -0--34---8--12 "micrantha" - - 2 3 "rubiginosa" -OI23oo67890oo canina 90123456789012-45-78 systyla ---G--O--OO-OO arvensis 9012345-78-0 Sanguisorba officinalis 90123456-8-0 Poterium Sanguisorba 90123456789o Alcheinilla vulgaris 90 123456789012345-7 alpina ....3.5 90123456 conjuncta .-----o----o-o arvensis 90123456789012345-7 Crataegus Oxyacantha 901234567890123-5o-o Pyrus communis -0-23oo-o- -o Malus 9012345678oooo torminalis - o o - - o o Aria 90o2345-oo-oo2--o Aria scandica ----34---o------o fennica -O-------.--.2 Aucuparia -01' 23456789012 3 45678 25. Onagracete. Epilobium angustifolium -01234567890123-5-78 rosmarinifol. .------..-9 hireutum 901234567890o o parviflorum 9012345-789012- --6 roseum -0-23-----ooo tetragonum 901234567890123- -67 tetragonum obscurum alpinum -o- - o o o - - -9012-45 anagallidifol. alsinifolium - -- -3456- -9012- -5 M. N. BRITAIN. 87 Circaea lutetiana 90123456789o02--5 intermedia -0--3-5-789o-23 alpiua -oo-3o5-oo9012o45-7 26. Haloragiacece, etc. Hippuris vulgaris 901234567890123--678 Myriophyllum verticil. 901234o-----o o spicatum 9012345678901 - ooo67 alterrrifl. -012345-78-01-3-56 Callitriche "verna" 901234567890123-5678 pedimculata -0123456-890-23-56 platycarpa -012345-7890123- -6-8 autumnalis -oooo4o-oo90l -3oo-oo Ceratophyllum demersum -012-4---890 suhmers. ---o-----o 27. Lythracece. Lythrum hyssopifolium - o - o - o Salicaria 90123456789- -23 Peplis Portula 90123456789012345-7 29. Cucurbitacece. Bryonia dioica 901234 30. Portulacacece. Montia fontana -012345678901234567 31. Illecebracece. Herniaria "glabra" 9 -oo 32. ScleranthacecB. Scleranthus annuus 90123456789012345 33. Grossulariacece. Bibes Grossularia -olo345oooooo- -o-o nigrum -o-2345ooooo - -o rubrum -01o345ooooo--3 petraum -.--345---901-3 alpinum -012345-oo 34. Crassulaceae. Sedum Rhodiola - - --345-7890I2345678 Telephiura -012345678ooooo---oo villosum - -0-3456789012 anglicum --O2-4567-90123--6-8 acre 9012345678901234567 reflexuin -ooooo - -ooooo rupestre ? _o-o--o6 88 SUBPROVINCIAL DISTRIBUTION. Cotyledon Umbilicus -01-3-567----23 35. Saxifragaceee. Saxifraga stellaris ----3456-890123456 nivalis .___-. 5. - - 9 - 2 o Hirculus .-1_ 3 45-7890 aizoides -oo-345-7-90l2345-7 oppositifolia -- - -3-56o-90l2345-78 granulata -012345678901 cernua .-_______. 9 rivularis ._-.__-._. 90-2 tridactylites -012345--8901--45 hypnoides -0--34567890123-5-7 ca3spitosa -o----o----0oo Chrysosplenium opposit. -0123456789012345-7 altern. -0123456789012 Paraassia palustris -0123456789012345-78 36. AraliacecB. Adoxa Moschatellina 9012345678901- -4 Hedera Helix 90123456789012345-7o 37. Cornacece. Cornus sanguinea 9012345-ooo-o-o suecfca ---2-4---o9012-45 38. UmbellifertB. Hydrocotyle vulgaris 9012345678901234-678 Sanicula europaea 90123456789012-45 Eryngium maritimura 9-12-4567890-23- -- -o campestre - - o - - 4 Conium maculatum 901234567890123-567 Smyrnium Olusatrum -olo-4--ooo--o Cicuta virosa 9oo23oo67o90-2 Apium graveolens 9ol2o456-8-oo2 Petroselinum segetum 9--2----------0 Helosciadium nodiflor. 90123456-8---23 "repens" -012--56-8 inundat. 9012345678901234- -o Sison Amomum 90123o---o jEgopodium Podagraria 90123456789012- - - -o Carum Carui 9oo2oo5- ooooo- oo- - -o verticillatura ------ 667--. -2 Bunium flexuosum 90123456789012345-7 M. N. BRITAIN. 89 Pimpinella Saxifraga 901234567890123-5 magna 901234---o9 Sium latifoliura 90-2-4o- -oo angustifolium 90123456-8901 -- - -o Bupleurum tenuissimuna 9 - 1 - - 4 rotundifol. 90-234 CEnanthe fistulosa 901234-678ool2 Lachenalii 9012345678- --23 silaifolia - crocata 9-1234567890123 Phellandrium 9012345- -8- - -o fluviatilis - .Ethusa Cynapium 9012345678901 o Foeniculum vulgare -OOG-OO----O Ligusticum scoticum 4--7890123-5678 Silaus pratensis 9012345- -8 Meum athamanticum ----34567o9012 Crithmum maritimum __-..-567o Peucedanum palustre 90o-3-o-oo Pastinaca saliva o01o34--o----o Daucus Carota 901234567890123456-8 Caucalis daucoides 9 - - 2 3 4 Torilis Anthriscus 901234567890123 infesta 90123- O ---o nodosa 9012345--8-0 Scandix Pecten 9012345-78901--4--O Anthriscus sylvestris 9012345-7890123-5678 vulgaris ' -012345oo8901---5--8 Chaerophyllum temulent 90123456789012-4 Myrrhis odorata -123456789012-4-6 39. Loranthaceae. Viscum album -0123o----oo 40. Caprifoliacece. Sambucus nigra 90123456789oo23oo-o Ebulus -012345678000- -o Viburnum Opulus 9012345678901234 Lantana - - 2 3 o - -oo-o Linnaea borealis _...-4---8901--4 41. Rubiacece. Galium crucialum 9012345678901 - 90 SUBPROVINCIAL DISTRIBUTION. Galium elongatum - - - 2 ' uliginosum -012345-78901 oo erectum -o-23----o-0 Mollugo 90-2345-78900 sylvestre -Oo-345--890 7 commutatum - - - - 3 montamun - - - - 3 tricorne 90-234o- -o Aparine 9012345678901234567 boreale o34567890l2345-78 Sherardia arvensis 9012345678901234 Asperula odorata 90123456789012345- -8 eynanchica - - 1 o 3 - 5 42. Valerianaceee. Valeriana dioica 9012345- -89- -2 officinalis 9012345678901234567 officinalis sambucif. 5 90 Fedia olitoria 90123456789012-45-7 Auricula ---23 9 dentata 9012345678901 43. Dipsacece. Dipsacus sylvestris 901234o- - ooooo pilosus -Oo-3-----o Scabiosa columbaria 9012345- -8-0 Knautia arvensis 90123456789012-45-0 44. Composite. Tragopogon minor, etc. 9012345-78901 - - -5 Helminthia ecbioides 901234- --o Picris bieracioides 90-234- -o Thrincia hirta 9012345-789o Apargia hispida 9012345-78-0 o Taraxaci 90123456 Hypochffiris glabra - o 1 2 3 o - - 7 - 9 o 1 maculata --~-o-o----o radicata 9012345678901234567 Lacluca virosa -0-234---89 o muralis -012345 o Mulgedium alpinum o Sonchus arvensis , 90123456789012345-78 asper 90-2345-7890-23- -6-8 M. N. BRITAIN. 91 Sonchus oleraceus 90123456789012345-78 Crepis virens 9012345-78901234-G-o biennis - - 2 3 o o succisaefolia ----34---890-2 paludosa -0123456789012345 Hieracium Pilosella 9012345678901234567 alpinum o---oOooooo holosericeum ------5---9012 eximium 0-2 calenduliflo. -----------0 gracilentum globosum -..._-_._--o nigrescens -----012 lingulatum -----90-2 senescens --90 chrysanthum ------5----012--5 anglicura ----345- -o90oo-ooo7 iricum ----34-6--90----5 palliduna ----3456-89012-45-7 lasiophyllum -----------0 argenteum -----45---90-----6 nitidum _--.__--... Q aggregatum ---..----.-0 murorum -Oo2o45-oooO oo- ooo7o caesium ---23------0----5 flocculosum ------.----0 vulgatum 901234567890123456 gothicum ---234----90 tridentatum -012345o--oo-o-o prenanthoides ----34o-oo90ooo denliculatum --------- 8---2 strictum ----3-5---90123-5 umbellatum 90123456-890-23-O crocatum ----34o---901oo rigidum ----345-7890 5 corymbosum --.--4-----0 boreale 901234567890o23 Taraxacum palustre -012345-789012-4---8 Arnoseris pusilla _ o _-..-----oo Lapsaua comrnunis 9012345678901234567 92 SUBPROVINCIAL DISTRIBUTION. Cichorium Intybus 9012345-7890o2 Arctium majus intermedium minus tomentosum . pubescens Saussurea alpina --0---56--90-2345678 Serratula tinctoria 901234567 Carduus nutans 9012345-78-oo o acautboides 9012345-7890o2-- - -o teuuiflorus -012345-7890o eriophorus 90o234o--oo--o prateiisis -0-23o-------oo acaulis 9 - - - o o heterophyllus -Olo3456789012345 Onopordum Acanthium 901o34o-o89 Carlina vulgaris 90123456-8-012 Centaurea nigrescens -0-2-456---01 Cyanus 9012345-789012-45-78 Scabiosa 9012345-7890o o Bidens cernua -012345678-012 tripartita 901234567-9--23 Eupatorium cannabinum 90123456789012 3 4o Tanacetum vulgare -01234567890123456oo Artemisia maritima 9-12-456-8-0 Absinthium o012345--89o oo Gnaphalium sylvaticum 90123456789012345-7 norvegicum -----------0 supinum ----------9012-45 uliginosum 901234567890123 78 Filago minima 9012345-789012-45 germanica 90123456789012-4 apiculata ... - 3 spathulata Petasites vulgaris 901234567890123 --ooo Tussilago Farfara 90123456789012345-78 Erigeron alpinus ..._._----9o acris 9012345----0 Aster Tripolium 9-12-4567890123456 Solidago Virgaurea -0123456789012345678 M. N. BRITAIN. 93 Senecio sylvaticus 90123456789012345-7 viscosus -Oooo456o890-2 erucifolius 9012345-o8o paludosus 9 - o saracenicus ? -Olo3oo6789ooo Cineraria palustris o - o - - - o Inula Heleniura o-o2345-o- -o-ooo Conyza -0123o5---o crithmoides .......6 Pulicaria dysenterica 90123456-8---23 Chrysanthemum Leucan. 90123456789012345-78 Pyrethrum Parthenium 9012345-789012-c " maritimuru" --12-45678-01234-67 Matricaria Chamomilla 9012345-78o--o---oo Antheinis nobilis -012-4---o---23---o arvensis -OJ234o-78901 Cotula 901234- -789o-o--o-oo 45. Campanulacece. Campanula rotundifol. 901234567890123456-8 patula -O-oo-o latifolia 901234567890123 rapunculoid. -0-o3----89o Trachelium -0-2--5-789--0 glomerata 90-2345- -890 Wahlenbergia hederacea --1-3-5-7 Specularia hybrida -0-234---oo Jasione montana -01234567---123---78 Lobelia Dortmanna 567-901234567 46. Ericaceae. Menziesia caerulea ._._... ...9 Azalea procumbens ----------9012345-78 Andromeda polifolia -01-34567-9 Arbutus alpina 0----012345-78 Uva-ursi -oo-34 5 --89012345-78 Vaccinium Myrtillus -0123456789012345678 uliginosum 045---9012-45-78 Vitis-idffia -012345-789012-456 Oxycoccos 9012345678901 --4 Pyrola volundifolia - - 1 234o oo890o-- - - -oo media --oo3456789Q1234- - .8 94 SUBPROVINCIAL DISTRIBUTION. Pyrola minor -0-2345678901234 secunda ----3o5o--90l2-4 uniflora ------ o---9ol --456 Monotropa Hypopitys 90123-5 1 47. llicacete, Ilex Aquifolium 90l2345678o012345o 48. Jasminacece. Ligustrum vulgare 90o234ooooooooo Fraxinus excelsior 90123456789012o4oo 49. Apocynacece. Vinca minor -oooooooooooo 50. Genlianacece. Gentiana rerna - - - - 3 4 5 Pneumonan. 90123-5 nivalis ......... -00-0 Amarella 9012345--8-012345-78 Erythraea Centaurium 9012345678901234-6-8 " littoralis" --1--456-8-0123--6-8 pulchella 9-lo---6-o latifolia .-i-- O o------oo Chlora perfoliata 90123-0 Villarsia nymphaeoides -ooo -oo- ooo Polemonium caeruleum -0-o345oooooooo 5 1 . Convolvulacece. Convolvulus arvensis 9012345-7890o--- --o sepium 901234567oooo23 Soldanella 9-lo-4567- -0-23 Cuscuta europaBa -Oooo--ooo-o Epithymum -012-0-6 Trifolii - - 1 2 - 4 52. Solanaceee. Hyoscyamus niger 9012345-7890o2- o Solanum nigrum -01234-6-oo Dulcamara 901234567890123o Atropa Belladonna -012345oooooooo 53. Scrophulariacece. Verbascum Thapsus -01234567890o2 nigrum -0-ooo---o Veronica spicata 5 tripbyllos - - - - 3 M. N. BRITAIN. 95 Veronica humifusa -----45---9012--5 alpina 9012 saxatilis ....._--._ 9 - o - - o scutellata -0123456789012-45-0 montana -0123456789010 Chamaedrys 90123456789012345-78 hederifolia 90123456789012-4- -78 agrestis 9012345678901234567 polita 901234567890-2 Buxbaumii -01234-6789-0 Bartsia alpina ----34o---9--o-o viscosa --1----67----2 Odontites 901 2345678901234567 Rhinanthus major -0-2345--8-01------8 Melampyrum pratense 9012345678901234567 sylvaticura - ooo34567890l - -4 - - o Scrophularia nodosa 9012345678901234-6 Ehrharti - - I - 3 8 Balbisii 901234o-ooo o Digitalis purpurea 9012345678901234567 Linaria spuria 90-2-0 Elatine - o 2 3 o repens -o-23o5-oo-oo vulgaris 90123456789012 minor 90-234- -78o Limosella aquatica -01234---8-0 54. Orobanckacece. Orobancbe "major" -01234-6--o--oo "elatior" oo-2-o-------o minor - - - 2 3 rubra .-..3 o~-234 Lathrsea squamaria 90123456789--O 54.* Verbenacece. Verbena officinalis 9012345- --o 55. LamiacecB. Salvia verbenaca 901234---89oo--o Lycopus europaeus 9012345678901234 Mentha rotundifolia -0-o3o5--8-o-o sylvestris oO-o3-o--oooo2 piperita -012345- -890-2 96 SUBPROVINCIAL DISTRIBUTION. Mentha aquatica 9012345-78901230- -7 sativa 9- 1 23456 890o23 rubra -Ol-34-oooo-o-o gentilis -01-3456-8---2 arvensis 9012345-7890 1234- -7 Pulegium -012o45--o--o Thymus Serpyllum ! ChamaEdrys 2 Origanum vulgare 9012345678901 -3 Calamintha Acinos 9012345678901 officinalis 9012345 Clinopod. 9012345-78901 Teucrium Scorodonia -012345678901234567 Scordium 9 - - - 3 Ajuga reptans 9012345678901 -34- -78 pyramidalis ______-.-----2-4567 Ballota fcetida 9012345-78--0 ruderalis - - - - 3 4 Lamium Galeobdolon 90123-o--o---o album 9012345678900- -o amplexicaule -0123456789012-4567 intermedium - -- - -o-67890o23- -678 incisum -012345-789012- - -6-8 Galeopsis Ladanum 9012345-78901-----0 ochroleuca - o o 3 4 versicolor 9012345678901234 Stachys JBetonica 90123456789 ambigua - oooo45ooo9- oooo- -7o arvensis -0123456789012345-7 Glechoma hederacea 9012345678901234--O Nepeta cataria oO-234--ooo-----o--o Marrubium Tulgare 901-34o--89-o Scutellaria galericulata 9012345678901234-6 minor -01234567 2 56. Boraginaceee. Myosotis palustris 90123456789oo- -oo- oo repens -01234567890-2- -56 ceespitosa 90123456-89012345678 alpestris _.__3-5---9 sylvatica -012345678-oo M. N. BRITAIN. 97 Myosotis collina -012345-o8901 8 versicolor 9012345678901234- -78 Lithospermum officinale -01234567890o2-4 arvense 9012345-78901- -4-6 Mertensia inaritima 56789012345678 Symphytum officinale 90 1234567890 tuberosum oo-23oo-7890o-3 Anchusa sempervirens -Oo23o5ooooooo- o Asperugo procumbens ---__4_--890----5 Cynoglossurn officinale 9012345 - -890o- -o- -o Echium vulgare 9012345 -789012-456 57. Pinguiculacece. Pinguicula alpina 34--0 lusitanica ----5oo---123456o Utricularia vulgaris 90123456o8-01- -4-678 intermedia -__--45----Ooo-45 minor 9ol2345678-0123-56 58. PrimulaceoB. Primula veris 901234567890o- - -5-7 farinosa --12345--8 scotica --.--0---5-7 Trientalis europsa - - -23-45oo89012-4- - -8 Hottonia palustris 9012345- - - -o Lysimachia vulgaris 901234567890-23 thyrsiflora -Oo23-o-7o90-2 nummul. 90123o5ooo-o nemorum 90123456789012345 Anagallis arvensis 90123456789012 " caerulea " 90123o56-oo tenella 901234567890123- -678 Centunculus minimus --123-5678-01 Samolus Valerandi 90123456-89- 123 Glaux maritima 9- 12-456789012345678 59. Plumbaginacete. Armeria maritima 9-123456789012345678 Statice Limonium 9-12-45o-----------o bahusiensis --1--456 'spathulata 9 - 1 - - - 5 6 occidentals ___.._56 Dodartii - - o N 98 SUBPEOVINCIAL DISTRIBUTION. 60. Plantayinacece. Plantago media 90123456-890 oo maritima 9- 1 23456789012345678 Littorella lacustris -012345678901234-678 62. Chenopodiacece. Chenopodium olidum 9012-4---8 potysper. -Oloo------o urbicum --QO-O---O-O in termed. rubrum 901234- -7890 murale -012o4o-o--o fioifolium - o - 2 - 4 glaucum ---oo4----o B. Hen. 9012345678oOoo-o Atriplex porlulacoides 9-12-456-o---o peduuculata 9 .... o areuaria o- 12-oo-7o-ooooo5-o Babingtonii 9- 12-4o678901234-678 hastata 9012345678901-3-5-78 "deltoidea" -0-23--6-8 8 angustifolia 901234567890-23- -678 " erecta " -0-2-4-6-8-0-23--6 littoralis 9-12-45--890---OO marina 9 - - 2 - 4 Beta maritima -o-2-45--89o--3---78 Salsola Kali 9-12-4567890123 Schoberia maritima 9-12-45- -8901234- -78 Salicornia herbacea 9-12-456-8901234-678 procumbens 9--2--5-,--0-23 radicans _..2-------o 63. Polygonacea. Polygonum Bistorta 901234567890oo3o- -o viviparum 0---345---9012345-78 lapathifol. 901234567890123o laxum 2 Persicaria 9012345678901234-678 mite - - 1 2 3 - o Hydropiper -01234567890123- - -08 minus -01234-6---0 Rail 9-1---567890-2 -8 M. N. BRITAIN. 99 Polygonum Convolvulus 9012345678901234567 Kutnex Hydrolapathum 9012345-7-oo- -3 aquaticus - --2345-78901o3- -678 pratensis - o - 2 3 obtusifolius 9012345678901234567 sanguineus 901 234567890123 conglomerates 9012345-7890 08 pulcher 90---o--o uiurkimus 90oooo-o-oooo-----o palustris -o!23o-----o Oxyria reniformis ----0-5---901234-67 64. 'Eleagnacece. Hippophae rhamnoides 9--2-----o---oo 65. Thymeleaceee. Daphne Laureola 90o234o-789o Mezereum - - - 3 4 5 67. Asaraceee. Asarum europium --l-3o5--o 68. Empetracecc. Empetrum nigrum -012345678901234567 69. Euphorbiacea. Euphorbia platyphylla - - - 2 3 o Paralias - - 1 - - - 5 portlandica --1-.-56 exigua 901234 5*6 - 8 9 Peplus 9012345-789012- -5 amygdaloid. - - - 3 4 Mercurialis perennis 9012345678901234- -7 annua -01o-oo---9 70. Urticaccce. Parietaria diffusa 9012345- 7890o--o erecta 8 9 Humulus Lupulus 9012345oooooo Ulmus montana -Oo2345o78901oo456 " suberosa " 90o234-o--oo " campestris " -OOOOQ--OO-O 71. AmentifercB. Quercus pedunculata 9012345678901234 intermedia sessiliflora -012345-789--2--5 100 SUBPROVINCIAL DISTRIBUTION. Fagus sylvatica 90123o- ooooooooo Carpinus Betulus -Oo- ooooooooo Corylus Avellana 9012345678901234567 Alnus glulinosa 90123456789012345o Betula alba 90123456789012345-7 verrucosa glutinosa 24 80234 7 nana o--o89012-45 Populus " alba " 90o234--oooooo " canescens " -0-2-4o--o tremula -012345-7890.1234567 Salix pentandra -01234567890123'- -o " decipiens -0-234---8 fragilis, etc. -01234- -789oo23 " Russeliana -0-234--789oo--o-o alba, etc. 9012345-7890o23--o " vitellina -0-234-67--0-2--5 triandra, etc. -01234---890 acutifolia - - - 2 purpurea, etc. -0-23- -6789o-23 " Helix -01234- -7890-23 " rubra -0-2345--89 viminalis, etc. 901234567890o23- -o " stipularis - ---Q----O-O--O Smithiana, etc. o012345--89o-23 " acuminata -0-2345-78----3---7 " cinerea 9012345-7890123--678 "aquatica -01234o-78901 678 " oleifolia -0-23--- -890 aurita 901234567890123-5678 caprea 9012345-7890123 nigricans -o-o345o-8901-3 " laurina .-..345. -.9 phylicifolia --l-3456o-9012----7 " ambigua 0----90--3-5-7 repens, etc. -01234567890123-5678 " anguslifolia -- 6---0 "Doniana -- . . _ _ o arbuscula --O--90-2----7 Lapponum -- - -4- - -89012-45-7 M. N. BRITAIN. 101 Salix lanata ......... -oO " procumbens ----O-----9012 Myrsinites ----0-----9012 reticulata ----o-o---90----5 herbacea ----3-56--901234567o Myrica Gale -0123456789012345 72. Coniferce. Pinus sylvestris ooo ooooooo9012345-o Juniperus communis -Oo23456789012-45-78 nana 345----0-23-5678 Taxus baccata -Oo2345-oooOo2 73. Orchidacece. Goodyera repens -----OO---9012-4 Neottia Nidus-avis 90123456789012 Spiranthes autumnalis - 1 2 3 - 5 Listera cordata -0123456789012345-7 ovata 9012345-789012345 Epipactis latifolia 9012345678901--oo latifolia 234 78 media 0235 8 atrorubens 35 5 palustris -OJ2345--89---3 Cephalanthera grandif. -0----5---o--o ensifolia -0-o345--89--o Corallorhiza innata ------ --78901--4 Orchis Morio 9012345--0 o mascula 90123456789012-4--78 ustulata o 1 2 3 4 o pyramidalis 90-234o6--o---o latifolia 9012345678901234-678 Gymnadeiiia conopsea 90123456789012345-78 bifolia 90123456789012-45 bifolia 012 56 2 chloran. 90123456-89--2 Habenaria viridis 901234567890123456-8 albida - -1 034567-901234- -78 Aceras anthropophora 9 - - - o Ophrys apifera 90-234 muscifera 90-2345 Malaxis paludosa --l-o45G--9012-45 102 SUBPROVTNCIAL DISTRIBUTION. Cypripedium Calceolus - - - 2 3 4 o 74. Iridacece. Iris fbetidissima -0-234---oo Crocus nudiflorus - 1 - o 75. Amaryllidaceee. Narcissus p. narcissus 901o345-oooooo 76. Liliacece. Allium Scorodoprasuin --123456-89oo oleraceum -0-2345---90 vineale -Oo234567890 Schoenoprasum -o--o45-oo---o ursinura 9012345678901234 Gagea lutea -Oo23456-8901 Scilla verna 45678-0123-5-78 Hyacinthus nonscriptus 9012345678901234-6-0 Asparagus officinalis o-l------o Ruse us aculeatus -0-ooo--o-o-o-o Convallaria majalis 9012345ooo901 verticillata -----4-o--9o Polygonal. - - - - 3 4 o multiflora -Olo34oooooooo 76*Trilliacea;. Paris quadrifolia 9012345678901 77. Tamacece, Tainus communis 9012345 78. Melantkiaceae. Colcbicum autumnale -012345---0 Tofieldia palustris 34----9012345 79. Hydrocharidaceee. Hydrocharis M.-ranae 901234---0 Stratiotes aloides 90123oo--ooo 80. Alismacete. Alisma Plantago 9012345678901234- -o ranunculoides 9012345678901234 natans ---2--oo Sagittaria sagittifolia 9012345-O Butomus umbellatus 901234o--oo Triglochin maritimum 9-12-456789012345678 Scheucbzeria palustris -01 - ;j ----- y M. N. BRITAIN. 103 81. Fluviales. Potamogeton densus 90-2345-78 pectinatus 901234-6-8-01 78 pectin. ! filiform. -Ooo-o---8-0---4--7 flabellat. - - 2 pusillus 90123456-8o0123---7 gracilis ? . .... 4 compressus -01234-ooo -G-O----O gramineus 901234o678-0 o zosteraefol. -O-o -90 crispus 9012345678o0123----o perfoliatus 9012345678-01-3-567 lucens 9012345678900 oo praelongus 9--23-5--8901 heterophyl. -012345678901-3 78 rufescens 90l234o6-8-01-3-5 uatans 901234567890123456o8 natans oblong. -012345-78901234-67 plantag. -0-2345--8---2 Ruppia " maritima" --12-45678-0123--678 rostellata 46 23 7 Zannichellia palustris 9012345-78 4--7 Zostera marina - -12-4567890123-5678 nana .....4.. .7 82. Aracece, etc. Leinna minor 9012345678901234- -7 gibba 9012 8 polyrhiza 90123 78 trisulca 901234o-78-0 Arum maculatum 9012345678ooo Acorus Calamus -0123---O Sparganium natans 90123456789012345678 natans 4 7902 8 minim. 2 679 5 simplex 901234567890123o--o ramosum 9012345678901234--7 Xypha latifolia 9012345678901 o angustifolia 901234-6--9 104 SUBPKOVINCIAL DISTRIBUTION. 83. Resliaceee. Eriocaulon septangulare .3 84. Juncacece. Juncus filifonnis _-o---5---oO------o conglomerate 9012345678901234-678 effusus 90123456789012345-78 diffusus 90-2345-- -oo glaucus 901234567890 o balticus 01--456 maritimus 9-12-4567-90123 acutiflorus 9012345-789012345678 obtusiflorus 901234-6-8-O nigritellus . supinus 9012345-789012345678 compressus oO-o3o5-oo-oooo---78 ccenosus 9-12-4567890-2 678 castaneus 0----90-2 trifidus 0---9012345 biglumis -..-..-...9010 triglumis - ---345---9012-45--8 Luzula pilusa 9012345678901234-678 multiflora 901234567890123-5678 arcuata ....--._._ o O----5 spicata ------5---90123456 85. Cyperacea. Cyperus fuscus - - - 2 Cladium Mariscus 9-1234o6---o----5 Schoenus nigricans -0123456-89012345678 Rhyncospora alba -o!234567o-0123456-8 Blysmus compressus 9012345-78-- -oo rufus --1--4-6-89012345678 Scirpus lacustris 9012345678-012-45678 glaucus 9--2 67890-23---0 setaceus -012345678901234567 Savii --1 ---567---- 23 maritimus 9-12-456-890-2-4 sylvaticus -0123456789012 " palustris " 9012345-78901234-678 unigluinis .-1-.4-..8-0--3-.67' multicaulis -0123456-89012345-7 M. N. BRITAIN. 105 Scirpus Watsoni o 2 pauciflorus -0123456-89012345-O caespitosus -0123456789012345678 acicularis 90123o56789o o fluitans -012345678901-3-567 Eriophorum vaginatura -0123456789012345678 alpinum _--._-----oo----o latifolium o012345678-01 - -45 gracile ----3 oo Elyna caricina ----S45---9 Carex dioica -0123456789012345678 pulicaris -0123456789012345678 pauciflora ---o-4-6o-9012345 rupestris ._--___-.-oO----5 incurva 8901--45o-8 stellulata 9012345678901234567 leporina ---0 ovalis -01234567890123456-8 curta -012345678901-3 Persoonii ..-2-4----90---4 elongata - - 1 2 3 remota -0123456789ol234 axillaris -<)123----oo Boenninghausen. --o 89-1 intermedia 901234-67890- -3 arenaria 9-12-456789012345678 divisa 9--2o4---o-o muricata 90123456789012, divulsa - - 2 3 o - -oo vulpina 9012345-7890123- -6 teretiuscula -0123- -678901 paradoxa - - - 2 3 paniculata -01234--789012-45-7 Vahlii atrata .. ----6--90 rigida 3456-o90123456-8 aquatilis -...---. --0 aquatilis? __._.__. 7 stricta -o!23o5 ooooooo - - - -o acuta -01234-678-0123 o O 106 SUBPROVINCIAL DISTRIBUTION. Carex pulla 90123-5 " flava " -0123456789012345678 "Oederi" -o!2345678-0--3---78 extensa --12-456-890123--67 pallescens -0123456789012345 " fulva," etc. -0123456789012345678 distans -oi2o4o67890123-5-7o laevigata --l-345678ooo23 panicea -0123456789012345678 vaginata .-.- 9012--5 capillaris ----34-6--90---45--0 " limosa " --1-34567890-23-0 irrigua -----45oo-9--2 rariflora ____. __-_-oi---o strigosa -oi-3----o-----o sylvatica -012345678901 pendula -012345-78901 P. cyperus -0123-------o-o glauca 9012345-78901234-678 praecox 9012345678901 -o 78 pilulifera 9012 3 456789012- -56 digitata - - 2 3 filiformis -Ol23456o8-01-3-5 hirta 90123456789012] ampullacea -0123456789012345678 vesicaria 901234567890123 paludosa 901234- -7890o234 riparia 9012345678-01 86. Gramina. Spartina stricta 9 Phalaris arundinacea 90123456789012345-78 Hierochloeborealis ......... _ . . _ . _ 5 Phleum alpinum 9 o o pratense 901234567890123-oooo arenariurn 9-12-45- -890 Alopecurus alpinus ---------o01--4 pratensis 90123456789012345-78 geniculatus 9012345678901234-678* agrestis 9012345-oooo Milium effusum -012345678-0123 o M. N. BRITAIN. 107 Apera Spica-venti -oo23oo--o Agrostis canina -012345 -7890ooooo-oo Ammophila arimdinacea 9- 12-4567890123-5678 Arundo Phragmites 901234567890123-5678 Calamagrostis o 1 2 3 4 o Epigejos 9012345-7ooO--3 stricta __i___-_-__o Sesleria ceerulea -_--345-_-9---.4 Aira alpina -----o----9012--56o caryophyllea 90123456789012345-78 Avena fatua 901234- --8-01 78 pratensis -Oo23456-89012-4 pubescens -012345678901234- -7 flavesceus 9012345--890o o Holcus mollis 9012345678901234-6-8 Koeleria cristata -0223456789012345 Melica uniBora -012345678901--- o nutans -Oo2345678901 o-4 Catabrosa aquatica 90123456o890123--6o8 Glyceria aquatica 901234-67890 plicata 9012-4---oo-------o maritima --12. -4-678901234-678 distans 9012345--890 procumbens --12-4---0-0 rigida 901234 890 4 loliacea --o2-456-89o- o Poa alpina ----3-5---9012--5 laxa 0-2 minor -___.------0-2 compressa 90-23-5-78-0 4---o nemoralis -01-345-789012 Parnellii 34 Balfourii -.--34----90-2 caesia, glauca ----3-----90-2 Briza media 9012345678901- -4--o Festuca uniglumis - - 1 o bromoides 90123456o8901234--o P. myurus -Olo3o--o-oo duriuscula -012345678901234-678 rubra 9- 12o4o6-8901-34o6o 108 SUBPROVINCIAL DISTRIBUTION. Festuca sylratica ----345-o89-lo arundinacea D----O----O "elatior" 9012345-7890123--678 pratensis 90123456789012-4--7 loliacea -012345-7890 -7 Brooms giganteus 901234567890123 asper 901234567890123 sterilis 9012345-78901o erectus 90-23- -o-89 secalinus 00123456-8901234 coramutatus 9012345o7890123- - -oo Brachypodium sylvatic. 9012345678901234- -7 pinnatum 90-23oo---o Triticum caninum -012345-78901--4- -o junceum 9-12-45-789012345678 junceum 8 laxum o 2 4 8 2 Lolium temulentum 9012345-78-0123----8 Elymus arenarius 9-o2-4o-7--012- -5-78 Hordeum sylvaticum - 1 2 3 4 pratense 901234--o8o murinum 9012345--890o o maritim. 9-12-4o---oo Nardus stricta -0123456789012345678 Lepturus filiforrais 9-12-456-8o 87. Filices. Celeracb officinarum -01-34567-9--2 Woodsia ilvensis ----o456--oO Lyperborea --_.--.___9o Polypodium Phegopteris -0123466789012345o78 Dryopteris o 0123456789012345 calcareum - 1 - 3 4 5 Allosorus crispus -01 -34567890123456 Cistopteris fragilis -012346678901 - -4567 niontana .-.--.. ___90 Polystichum Lonchitis ----34o-o-90l2o45-o aculeatum 90123456789--2o lobatum 901 0345678901234 angulare -0123-5--8 Laslrea Thclypteris -012345----0 o M. N. BRITAIN. 109 Lastrea Oreopteris 901234567890123-56-8 rigida - - 1 - 3 - 5 cristata -01-o------o uliginosa -01 o spinulosa -012345- -o9ooo-o-o dilatata 9012345678901234567 fcenisecii ---23o5- ---o-23--o7 Pseudathyrium alpestre ---------- 9012--5 flexile 01 Aspleniura Trichomanes 9012345678901 234567 viride -Ooo34567-9012o45 mariimm --12-45678901234o67 Ad. nigrum 9012345678901234567 Euta-mura. 901234567890123-56o germanicum -----4S--89 septentrion. ----o45--89o------o Scolopendrium vulgare 901234567890123-0-78 Adiantum Capillus V. -o----5----o-o Hymenophyllum tuub. --oo 3 -60000- -23o Wils. --1 -3o567890-23-5678 Osmunda regalis -01234567-90-23456-8 Botrychium Lunaria 90123456789012-45678 Ophioglossum vulgatum 90123456789012----78 88. LycopodiacecB. Lycopodium clavatum -0123456789012 3 45-7o annotinum -Oo--o5---901234--7 inundatum -0123-5---ool2-4 alpinum -0123456789012-45678 Selago -0123456789012345678 selaginoid. -0123456-89012345678 89. Marsileacece. Isoetes lacustvis ---o-o5---90-23-5 Pilularia globulifera -0123456789012--5 90. JEquisetacece. Equisetum Telmateia -012345-78-Q-23 umbrosum ----345-7890123 sylvaticum -0123456789012345678 hyemale -012345678901 --4 Mackaii variegatuin -1-345-78-0-2-4 110 SUBPROVINCIAL DISTRIBUTION. These two Lists may be said to exhibit a condensed summary of present knowledge concerning the local dis- tribution of our usually recognized species. Indepen- dently of errors or oversights by the compiler, it is also to be recollected that "present knowledge" really signi- fies reports and records of widely unequal reliability. In too many instances it was found quite impossible to de- cide, with any satisfactory degree of confidence, whether some given species should be entered as sufficiently or as insufficiently recorded for some given province. And the grounds for deeming records insufficient are too various in themselves to allow of their being explained by brief general rules applicable in all cases. The details about distribution already given in the Cybele Britannica will serve to suggest such grounds in many individual cases. But a good deal must still be left to the knowledge and reason of those botanists who may find occasion to con- sult the lists. It will readily be guessed that in many instances the letter o is substituted in place of an arabic figure simply because the wildness of the plant is insufficiently authen- ticated for the particular province, and not because its existence there is doubted ; less strictness in this respect being observed with denizens and colonists, than with the undisputed natives of Britain. In other instances, the letter is so substituted because the species itself is sup- posed unlikely to occur there ; and though some single authority for it may be quite good, yet an additional testi- mony is held to be needful or desirable for sureness. In numerous other instances, the personal authority is deemed not sufficient, while there may be little cause for distrust in other respects ; the species being more or less likely to occur. A good deal of allowance should always be made for the degree of facility with which the individual species EXPLANATORY COMMENTS. Ill may be distinguished from all others. Obscure and con- fused species will of course require a more trained expe- rience in the botanists whose testimony is to be accepted as sufficient evidence. In all cases, it may be said, a sort of balancing estimate is needed ; personal authority and geographical probability counterpoising each other in- versely. The less likely is any given species to be found at all, or found truly wild, in the sub-province under con- sideration, the weightier should be the authority to cer- tify its actual existence there, and wild. Conversely, the more likely is the species to grow there, the slighter may be the personal authority to testify the fact. While a single Borrer, Babington, Balfour, Bloxam, Bowman, Baker, Coleman, Gordon, Hort, More, Newbould, Oliver, Purchas, Syme, or Wilson may usually be relied upon, as a sufficient witness, and would be questioned only under some special circumstances, a score of Aikens, Palmers, Huttons, Wrights, Grindons, Sidebothams, Ship- leys, (R) Reynoldses, and such like, might properly be held insufficient in the case of doubtful plants ; and singly they could only be accepted in witness of the most easily known and most expected species. It is necessary also to explain one particular circum- stance here, which affects the completeness of the figures for some few plants in the two lists above printed. As originally prepared these lists were kept in strict con- formity with those given in the fourth volume of Cybele Britannica ; all further subdivisions of the species, which were not adopted there, being at first left out here also. On after thought, while the pages of this Supplement were actually going through the press, it was rather sud- denly decided to make some changes in that respect. The lists being printed chiefly with the hope thereby to elicit additional records, in extension and emendation of 112 SUBPEOVINCIAL DISTRIBUTION. existing knowledge, it has appeared on the whole more advisable to include in them also various recent segre- gates or sub-species ; although very debateable species might better have been omitted, if a supply of data suit- able for statistical comparisons had been the leading pur- pose of the lists. The suddenness of this change in plan has left the recorded distribution of some of the intro- duced sub-species too imperfectly shown, more especially in the earlier pages of the lists. For example, instead of Ranunculus aquatilis and Arctium Lappa, entered as two species only, the names of a dozen segregates or sub- species were hastily substituted ; and not having at hand Mr. Babington's papers on these sub-species, his records of their localities have not been indicated by the corre- sponding subprovincial nos. Practically, the effect of the omission may be good rather than bad, if it lead to addi- tional records by other observers of localities. Still, opinions may differ about the propriety of this inclusion of several more of the least satisfactory species, among others with which they cannot be held equals or equivalents. Some botanists will hold it an unwise course thus far to go along with the species-splitting fancies ; while other botanists may deem it better to take that course which seems most likely to draw forth notices about the local distribution of those plants, whether designated species or varieties. Mr. Darwin's recently published views may be said to have given an importance to varieties (the " incipient species," as he holds them to be) which previously they were not sup- posed to possess. This should induce us all the more carefully to observe varieties, and to trace out their local distribution. And yet the placing of very doubtful sub- species in the same scientific category with the most generally recognized species, is a practice liable to grave EXPLANATORY COMMENTS. 113 objections, and is attended with much inconvenience. But if M. De Candolle's useful suggestion (page 14) were adopted, that of recognizing and distinguishing in our printed Floras three grades of species, we might thus gain nearly all the advantages, while still escaping most of the disadvantages, which now result from the splitting up of old species. If the old familiar term ' species ' has not really dif- ferent meanings among botanists of the present day, it has at any rate widely different applications ; and this difference between those who aggregate and those who segregate becomes a wider gulf every succeeding year. Dr. Hooker thinks that " the time is happily past when it was considered an honour to be the namer of a plant." Doubtless he has himself risen above that petty ambi- tion ; but the current practice of many cotemporaries is utterly contradictory of the opinion expressed by him. No antecedent generation of botanists has laboured so much at species-splitting and name-changing. And those who indulge in the practice very extravagantly bepraise each other on account of their achievements in this line of notoriety- seeking ; thus clearly showing that they be- lieve such achievements to be great and honour-worthy operations. Although we may sometimes smile at the disproportion between the small feats accomplished and the large eulogies bestowed, it should be fairly admitted that undiscriminating compliments, heaped upon those who only combine because they lack the time and pa- tience to distinguish clearly, are earned as easily and deserved as little. It may be quite true, as the same high authority above quoted also remarks, that " any superficial observer can separate by words and a name " those partially dissimilar 114 SUBPROVIXCIAL DISTRIBUTION. forms which our leading botanists still treat as specifi- cally identical. But it is equally true that some of our local species-splitters are by no means superficial ob- servers, whatever maybe thought of their judiciousness. Really, they are men who observe more closety, not more superficially, than the general botanists whose wider gaze is doubtless at times found to have been too wide for strict accuracy in small matters. The man who concen- trates his attention on 5,000 european species, taking all the assistance to be derived from the writings of nume- rous competitors and antagonists, is less likely to ob- serve " superficially," than is the man who diffuses his attention over 50,000 exotic species, with comparatively few other describers to assist him, and extremely few to oppose or correct him if going wrong. While the most judicious mean cannot be agreed upon, excessive combi- nation is perhaps a worse evil than excessive subdivision. A confusion together of things too widely dissimilar, how- ever convenient it may often be found in saving time and trouble, leads to worse consequences than the occasional severance of things too closely similar is likely to do. A remark lately made by Mr. Babington has much point and pertinence ; namely, that " there seems to be no surer mode of diverting attention from a plant than that of placing it as a variety of some species supposed to be well known." I would remind the writer of that sentence, however, that it is one thing to join "a plant" to some well-known species, another thing to split varieties from such a species. While I should myself be much slower than Dr. Hooker, in joining a dissimilar and little - observed australian or antarctic plant with an english species,. I should likewise hesitate longer than Mr. Babington usually does, and require more experimental evidence of distinctness, before chipping off "new species" EXPLANATORY COMMENTS. 115 from those long-observed in this country, and hitherto regarded as single species, While there is some useful truth in the following passage, attributed to the pen of the able physiologist Dr. Carpenter, no great authority, by the bye, in questions about botanical species, there is to my judgment quite as much of falseness and fallacy in it : " The error of the ordinary species-maker consists in basing his idea of a plant upon the form and aspect which it presents in a small number of specimens collected within a limited area ; he makes no allowance for the effects of local peculiarities in temperature, humidity, soil, or exposure, unless he can absolutely trace the cause to the effect ; and hence he attaches great importance to habit, stature, colour, hairiness, outline of leaves, period of flowering, &c., all of which characters are recognized by the more experienced botanist as pre-eminently liable to be affected by external conditions. A truly philoso- phical systematist like Dr. Hooker, on the other hand, bases his conclusions on the most extensive comparison he can make, not only of dried specimens in herbaria, but of living plants in all latitudes ; and thus he comes to acquire a knowledge of the influence of external agencies, not only upon the general phenomena of vegetation, but also upon individual forms. It has been after this fashion that Mr. Bentham has studied the British Flora ; with the result of annihilating about a fourth of its re- puted species. ' And the more thoroughly and extensively this method is carried out, the more, it is now obvious, will it tend to simplify botanical science, by reducing the number of really distinct specific types, and clearing out from our systematic treatises the vast mass of rubbish with which they have been crowded by the unscrupulous 116 SUBPROVINCIAL DISTRIBUTION. creativeness of species-mongers." (Medico-Chirurgical Review, April, 1860, page 385). I am unaware upon what authority this Reviewer im- pliedly asserts that Mr. Bentham has studied the british flora upon " living plants in all latitudes" ; nor should I be disposed to admit, if the assertion were really true, that a more correct special knowledge of the british flora could be attained by the study of foreign specimens chiefly, whether living or dried. I presume that Mr. Ba- bington will demur to the alleged annihilation of one- fourth of the species described in his Manual, through the process supposed by the Reviewer to have proved so successful. Since publication of Mr. Bentham's service- able Handbook, our Master in the opposed school of british botany has nevertheless seceded somewhat farther still from the views of the annihilators. In recently adopting four subordinate species, in the place of one british Fumaria capreolata, Mr. Babiiigton thus writes : " Some excellent botanists will doubtless say that these plants are all forms of one variable species, and I suppose that no person is in a position to contradict them ; for who knows what really constitutes a species amongst plants ? It seems to me to be just as impossible to prove that the ' aggregate species,' as Mr. Watson terms them, are quite distinct from each other, as it is to show that the ' segregate species ' are so." (Journal of the Linnean Society, Feb. 1860, p. 162.) The argument of Mr. Babington is here more sound than the assertions of Dr. Carpenter ; probably because the former was writing from actual knowledge, while the latter was reproducing only borrowed ideas not fully un- derstood. The Physiologist fallaciously assumes that re-unions are necessarily more " really distinct specific types" than are severances. The Botanist rightly argues EXPLANATORY COMMENTS. 117 that they are not proveably so. And if such " really dis- tinct types" do exist, is it not as possible to err by con- fusing two of them together, as to err by unwarrantably severing one into two ? The name of Darwin and the term species are now so closely associated that it seems hardly a digression here, to express a hope that the impossibility admitted by Mr. Babington will fall under the notice of Mr. Darwin. It may be useful to him to know that so good an observer of plants holds it " impossible" to prove distinctness be- tween botanical species of any grade, segregate or aggre- gate, eliminated or consolidated species. A step farther in digression. It might be advantageous also for Professor Owen to ponder the same admission. In a hostile review of Mr. Darwin's lately published volume, which bears upon the ' Origin of Species ' with unmistakeable indications of the Professor's heavy ord- nance, we find quoted and enforced, by way of finishing salvo, the Linnean aphorism " Classis et ordo sapientise, species nature opus." But it is difficult to believe that the logical fallacy of that aphorism could escape the highly reasoning mind of an Owen. He translates the aphorism into this english form, " Classification is the task of science, but species the work of nature"; thus himself half-showing that the distinction is mainly verbal, resting on the double meaning attachable to the word * opus.' We expunge the verbal fallacy by writing, " Classes and orders are figments of science, species are existences in nature." But in this corrected form it is a mere assertion without proof. If we cannot prove distinctness of botanical species in nature, as Mr. Babington is not alone in believing, but can only group the individuals variously and conventionally in books and herbaria, it 118 SUBPKOVINCIAL DISTRIBUTION. would seem that our named species are as truly the task- work of science, as are any of the higher groups design- ated genera, orders, etc. Thus, it might be said, while we do know our species to be the task of science, we sim- ply suppose them to be also and equally a work of nature. And what if hereafter, on better knowledge, we should find them to be a ' work of nature ' only in the like sense that genera and orders are so ? Mr. Darwin might make a brief definition of systematic groups, which would be equally applicable in turn to each successive grade of classification ; namely, ' Resem- bling individuals, ancestrally related.' By those who adopt his views on the origin of species and larger groups, it might be justly contended that each one of the successive grades or groups of science ought to be com- posed of individuals ' next of kin in equal degree,' as the lawyers might express it. This would necessitate a change from the Linnean contrast between species and the larger groups, into a true uniformity adapted to the degrees of consanguinity at each grade in the series ; for example, ' Classis, ordo, genus, species, sapientice con- geries, natures congeneres.' Whether the theoretic views of Mr. Darwin will ever materially assist in changing present conventional heaps into natural kindredships, in making each technical group really consist of objects equally akin by descent, is a problem to be left for solution by another generation of botanists, trained under lights that have not assisted the present race of classifiers, so great in technicalities, so small in rationalities. To revert more nearly to the objects sought by this Supplement. It has long been a wish on my part, to put on record in a printed form the personal authorities for EXPLANATORY COMMENTS. 119 the individual facts of distribution, such as are indicated by the arabic figures and signs in the preceding lists, and elsewhere in the Cybele Britannica. The vast number and variety of those facts render it difficult to carry that wish into effect. Yet would the record be found highly useful to future botanical topographers, and would be a permanent acknowledgment of the valuable aid given to me by manuscript notes from many cotemporary bota- nists. It is supposed that such a record, made in a suffi- ciently ample and complete manner, would require 1500 pages of small print. It would consequently entail a large pecuniary loss, besides the sacrifice of much time. This is no novelty with me. Though far from rich, the peculiar line I have chosen will acquit me of writing from mercenary motives, and sufficiently show that the pursuit of science is a hobby, not a trade, in my practice of it. The botanical public is at best a small one ; and my writings are suited only to a small section of that small public. Consequently, they are always printed at a con- siderable loss. The paying public, to trading or pro- fessional botanists, are medical students and gardeners. Shrewd men of the' world will accordingly write down to these numerous classes ; and they have every right to do so, if they wish to combine science and money-making. My own predilections are of a different kind ; and in gratifying a special hobby I must accept the unprofitable consequences of my own preference. Printed by E. NEWMAN, 0, Devonshire Street, ISishopsgate Street, London. UC SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY A 000 074 397 1