, 
FUMARIA CAPREOLATA OF BRITAIN. 165 
3. F. conrusa (Jord.): sepalis ovatis apiculatis dentatis tubi corollz 
latitudinem szquantibus eodemque 2 brevioribus, fructibus sub- 
globoso-compressis apice rotundatis demum paulisper rugulosis, basi 
fructus latissima pedicelli apice conspicue latiore, bracteis pedicellos 
floriferos zequantibus fructiferis patentibus duplo brevioribus, racemis 
evolutis laxis brevibus paucifloris. 
F. confusa, Jord. Cat. Dij. 1848, 18; Lloyd, Fl. Ouest Fr. 94. 
F. Bastardi, Bor. “in Rev. Bot. ii. 359? ; Fl. Cent. Fr. ed. 3. її. 34. 
F. agraria, Mitt. ! in Lond. Journ. Bot. vii. 556 ; Bab. ! in Bot. Gaz. i. 62 
(not Lag.). 
F. capreolata, Bab.! Prim. Fl. Sarn. 4. 
F. capreolata y. media, Bab. ! Man. ed. 4. 17. 
F. media 8. confusa, Hamm. 28. t. 3. 
Sep. often persistent with the young fruit. Cor. rather large, 
but less than that of F. pallidiflora, dingy white or pinkish ; tip 
and sometimes the back dark purple; tube rather thick ; lower 
petal linear, flattened, blunt, keeled and brownish, and with in- 
flexed sides towards the tip; lateral petals linear, truncate-apicu- 
late, broadly but shortly boat-shaped, winged on the back. Young 
fruit rather obovate-acuminate. The fleshy base is nearly as broad 
as the fruit, and wider than the much-enlarged tip of the pedicel : 
it is scarcely narrower at its base than where it joins the fruit. 
The vertical edge of the fruit is regularly rounded, and the whole 
outline, above the enlarged base, is nearly round; apical pits 
broad but shallow. 
If attention be paid to the shape of the fruit, and especially to 
its remarkable base, there cannot be any difficulty in distinguish- 
ing this plant from F. pallidiflora and F. Borei; neither does it 
seem probable that any botanist who examines them when fresh 
will have doubts about the specific distinctness of this plant from 
its allies. 
Had I possessed the acuteness of observation which belongs to 
Mr. Jordan, I should not have been misled into reducing this 
plant to a form of F. capreolata, after having recorded it as a 
species, although with an erroneous name. The effect of my so 
acting has been what is usual in such cases, viz. that the plant 
has suffered total neglect in this country. 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 have seen specimens of this plant from Jersey and Guernsey ; 
Zennor and Trevenna, Cornwall; Ilfracombe, Devon; Tenby, 
Pembrokeshire; Aberystwith, Cardiganshire; Bangor, Caernar- 
vonshire; Hawkhead, Lancashire; and Dublin. 
