The soil should be very poor, or half the beauty of the blos- 

 soms is lost. 



Nothing can well be more confused than the synonymy 

 of this species and L. nitida. Without pretending to say 

 what the exact plant may have been to which the latter 

 name properly belongs, — an inquiry which is far more 

 curious than interesting or useful, — we are contented with 

 stating, that under the name of L. nitida there lie two 

 totally different plants ; one with small flowers and a 

 humble stature, the other with large flowers and a size so 

 considerable as to have led to the supposition of its being 

 the L. acan 



not however by us, as our friend Dr. 

 Hooker inadvertently states. Mr. Ker indeed supposed it 

 to be the same (in fol. 785), but we were the first to correct 

 this error. 



Of these, the one 



known 

 ppend 



that which is now figured 



is 



larg 



not only by its greater size, but by its having the 



iges of its inner petals sessile, undivided, much 



and regularly three in number, and by its having 



at least twice as large as those with which it is 



pared. The other, which is very likely to be confounded 



th it, 



habit 



known by its small flowers, much more dwarf 

 d by its having the appendages of its inner petals 

 pedicellate, jagged, and often only two, the third being 

 either altogether wanting, or existing in the form of a little 

 tendril, or now and then like the two lateral appendages. 



This 



G 



species is nearly related to L. prostrata of Dr. 

 Its characters and synonyms are as follow : 



L. nitida ; caule erecto ramoso, foliis oppositis superioribus sessilibus pal- 

 mato-pinnatifidis : laciniis incisis, calycis laciniis ovato-lanceolatis ser- 

 ratis, petalorum interiorum appendicibus angustis ovatis pedicellatis incisis 

 cirrhosis : intermedio seepifis obsolete, capsula hispida turbinate. 



L. nitida. 



L. tricolor. Ker in Bot. Reg. t. 667. 



In the third volume of the Prodromus, M. de Candolle 

 separates the L. tricolor of the Bot. Reg. from L. nitida, of 

 which it is a mere synonym ; and he quotes to the L. acan- 



thifolia of Lamarck the figure in the Bot. Reg 



which 



belongs to L. Placei ; and finally, he omits L. Placet itself. 

 On the other hand Dr. Hooker makes Cuming's No. 663, 



¥ 



