PRIMULA ELATIOR IN BRITAIN. 179 
accident, rather than to any care in discrimination on his part. 
That there were, nevertheless, at this time, or shortly after, British 
botanists who were familiar with (though they did not recognize) 
the true Oxlip of Jacquin in its English habitat is certain. 
Henslow and other Cambridge botanists could not be other- 
wise than familiar with it; and, in Henslow’s Herbarium of 
Cambridgeshire plants, now in the University Museum, there 
are genuine specimens of P. elatior, Jacq., from Bartlow on April 
8th, 1826. This fact, however, does not prove that Henslow or 
others at that time discriminated between the True and the 
Common (Hybrid) Oxlip. Probably, indeed, they did not. The 
first to recognize the difference between them appears to have 
been Edward Forbes, who, as early as 1838, pointed out* that 
the “Primula elatior” of British botanists was certainly not the 
same plant as the Primula elatior of Jacquin, which latter, he 
believed, did not occur in England; but the confusion between 
the two was, at that time, so great that no one seems to have 
taken any notice of what he wrote. However, a year or two 
later, a good deal of interest came to be taken in the nature of 
the Common (Hybrid) Oxlip of Britain, and in the question 
whether it was a hybrid or not, and what bearing its existence 
had upon the question as to the specifie distinetness or other- 
wise of the Primrose and the Cowslip. These points were 
warmly discussed in the pages of the ‘ Phytologist’ and the 
rine Chronicle’ during the years 1841-46. H. C. 
Y "d rof. J. S. Henslowt, R. S. Hill (of Teddington)s, 
p Be alll, Dr. W. A. Blomfield, J. B. Whiting**, “ Stt, 
upon "s (of Thun)if, and others, all published their views 
results of matter. The two first-named printed in detail the 
the mat experiments whieh they thought threw light upon 
atter; but the fertilization of flowers (and especially of 
* 
Ann Net Hist. vol. iii. (1839), p. 122. 
aid y ogist, vol. i. pp. 9, 232, & 1002; vol. ii. pp. 217, 285, 313, & 852; 
“il. pp. 43 & 45. 
P. cit. vo]. i, p. 191 ; 
Op. cit. vol. i. p. 188, 
J Op. cit. vol. ii, p. 284. 
Md Op. cit. vo]. iii, pp. 690-696. 
tt oper Chronicle,’ October 9th, 1841. 
n Qp. it. March 12th, 1849, 
tt Phytologist,’ vol. i. p. 192 
and vol. iii. p. 651. 
