422 MR. G. C. DRUCE ON 
British Botany,’ p. 369 (1843), following Smith in the ‘ Engl. 
Flora,’ i. p. 122 (1824), and Parnell in his ‘ Grasses of Scotland,’ 
p- 88 (1842), calls it, although he says “ he has not seen native 
specimens.” The same erroneous reference will also be found 
in Richter’s ‘ Plante Europxe,’ p. 82 (1890), ‘ Index Kewensis,’ 
iii. p. 572 (1894), and is still more recently given by Ascherson 
and Graebner in the ‘Synopsis der Mitteleuropaischen Flora,’ 
p- 401 (1900). 
Nor do I feel justified at present in placing it with the plant 
which Syme named Poa stricta, although its alliance is certainly 
rather with the alpina than with the laxa or cenisia group. 
It differs from alpina in all the ligules being long and acute, 
by the very wavy panicle-branches, and by the conspicuously 
smaller spikelets. It was first described by Sir James E. Smith 
in ‘Flora Britannica,’ vol.i. p. 101 (1800), and was subsequently 
figured and described in the first edition of ‘ English Botany’ 
under the tab. 1128, dated 1803, from specimens gathered by 
John Mackay on Ben Nevis, and his wild and cultivated plants 
are in the Smithian Herbarium ; but I doubt the authenticity of 
the specimen in the Sowerby Herbarium at the British Museum, 
or, indeed, its identity with Smith’s plant. 
Having, therefore, somewhat cleared the ground by elimi- 
nating from the scope of our enquiry the plant named Poa 
flecuosa by Smith, which has been answerable for a considerable 
share in the confusion which surrounds the synonymy of the 
plants named P. stricta and P. laxa, I now propose to discuss 
the names I venture to designate them by, the characters which 
distinguish them, and their history as plants of Britain. 
Poa ALPtna, L., var. ACUTIFOLIA. 
Syn. P. stricta, Syme, ‘E. B.’ vol. xi. pp. 115-117, t. 1763, 
not of Lindeberg in ‘ Bot. Notiser,’ 1855, p. 10, nor of D. Don, 
in Mem. Wern. Soc. iii. (1821) p. 298, which is a form of P. pra- 
tensis). 
P. flecuosa, Knapp, ‘Gram. Brit.’ t. 51 (1804), pro parte; 
Don’s ‘ Herb. Brit.’ no. 6 (1804), pro parte ; Parnell’s ‘ Grasses 
of Scotland,’ p. 83 (1842), pro parte; not of Wahlenberg, ‘ F lora 
Suecica.’ 
P. lawa, Bab. ‘ Man.’ ed. ii. p. 389 (1847) (not of ed. i. p. 369 
(1843)), pro parte ; ed. iii. p. 397 et seg. (1851) ; not of Haenke, in 
Jirasek, ‘ Beob. Riesengeb.’ (1791) p. 118. 
