210 MK. J. BALL OX THE TLOKA OF NORTH PATAGONIA 



question, and illustrate the tendency (from which even men of 

 science are not free) to draw large inferences from a slender 

 foundation of observed facts. What has been stated in general 

 terms respecting the flora of Patagonia, if supposed to apply to 

 the whole region, is much as if one should discuss and describe 

 the flora of France who had landed at Dieppe and Nantes and 

 Bordeaux, and travelled at each place a few miles into the 

 interior. Thus Grisebach has borrowed from Mr. Page the 

 statement that the plains of North Patagonia are so devoid of 

 tree-vegetation that a single stunted tree of Acacia* near the Bio 

 Negro is worshipped by the natives as a sacred object. But I 

 learn from M. Claraz that groups of small trees or shrubs tall 

 enough to conceal a man on horseback, especially those of Iodina 

 rliombifolia, are dotted at rather wide intervals ; while along the 

 valleys Salts Humboldtiana and other small trees are not unfre- 

 quent, and in the valley of the Upper Limay the apple-tree, intro- 

 duced from Europe, forms considerable groves. 



Again I may remark, with reference to the valley of the Uru- 

 guay, that the assertion, also accepted by Grisebach, that the 

 trees on the banks are all low, not exceeding 10 metres, or 33 feet, 

 may be true at some points, but certainly not as a general state- 

 ment. At many places, both along the shores and on the nume- 

 rous islands, the trees range from 50 to 60 feet in height ; one of 

 these is Luhea divaricata, and several appear to be Leguminosa?, 

 which, however, I was not able to approach. Again, with regard 

 to the asserted poverty of the flora of Uruguay and Entrerios, I 

 venture to entertain much douttt. Much of the territory of both 

 provinces is flat and uniform in physical conditions, but about 

 1000 species are known from Entrerios, to which, out of a small 

 set of 60 species, as above mentioned, 8 additions have to be made, 

 showing how incomplete is our present knowledge. The sur- 

 face and the soil of Uruguay, on the opposite bank of the same 

 river, are much more varied, besides which there is a long stretch 

 of sea-coast with moderately high land. If M. de St. Hilaire, 

 while travelling in the best season, was unable to collect more 

 than 500 species, I conclude that his itinerary was not well 

 chosen for botanical purposes. To judge from two short excur- 

 sions made in the depth of winter (end of June) from Monte- 

 video, and from Paisandu on the Uruguay, I should have formed 

 a very different conclusion. Near the latter place I found the 

 * Perhaps the same spoken of by Darwin. 



