/ 



or WESTEKN SOUTH AMERICA, 157 



perhaps be likewise referable to Crisiaria^ although very different 

 in appearance from the first. If so it Is probably O. viridi-luteola, 

 Gay, nearly allied to C. seselifolia^ Turcz. The third plant, which 

 I found growing in some abundance at one place on the rou^^h 

 . slopes, is certainly Teucriitm mulicaule, Hook. Eot. Misc. ii. 235. 

 This well-marked species appears to be one of the characteristic 

 plants of the arid literal region of Northern Chili, and to the 

 best of my belief does not extend beyond it ; but it is worth while 

 to point out the errors, very excusable but very misleading, which 

 have embarrassed in this as in many other instances the study 

 of the botanical geograpliy of South America. In 1880 Sir 

 William Hooker received from Mr. Cruickshanks a considerable 

 collection of plants from the western coast of South America. 

 The large majority were collected in Peru in the neighbourhood 

 of Lima, and most of these in the valley of Canta, while a small 

 proportion were found in Northern Chili, chiefly at a place called 

 Arqueros, north of Copiapo, and in the adjoining Atacama desert 

 region. With his accustomed activity Sir W. Hooker described 

 the plants of this collection, many of which were then new to 

 science, in the ' Botanical Miscellany,' and in describing Teucrium 

 nndicmde mentions the fact that the label had been mislaid, but 

 that he believed the plant to have come from the valley of Canta 

 in Peru. Tiie consequence was that In the 12th volume of the 

 ' Prodromus ' Bentham gave that valleys, with a note of interroga- 

 tion, as one of the native localities for Tcuonum mtdicaule. 

 Since that date no one of the numerous botanists who have 

 visited Peru has found the species, while several specimens 

 have been brouirht from the desert re^^Ion of Northern Chili, 

 chiefly from the neighbourhood of Copiapo. In C. Gay's 'Plora 

 Chilena ' the plant is said to inhabit Northern Chili, and Arqueros 

 is specially mentioned as one locality. There can be little or 

 no doubt that the plant originally sent to Sir W. Hooker came 

 from that j^lace. Besides tlie specimens fi'om Northern Chili 

 there is one in Kew Herbarium labelled " Concepcion, Bridges." 

 If it were authentic this would be a fact of botanical distribution 

 more anomalous than the supposed Peruvian Jiahitat; for Con- 

 cepcion, which Is nearly ten degrees of latitude south of Co2)Iapo, 

 has a moist climate, and the general character of the flora is 

 markedly different. I have found, however, that the same 

 locality — Concepcion — is affixed to nearly all the Chilian plants 

 sent by Mr. Bridges to Sir W. Hooker, probably because they ^ 



