434 MR. C. C. LACAITA: A REVISION OF 
the Isle of Jersey. It has never been doubted that this is Æ. italieum, L., 
Sp. Pl. p. 139 (1753), exclusa var. 8. The erroneous account of the length 
of the corollas is copied from Linnzeus, who repeated it from his Hort. Ups, 
in Sp. Pl. ed. 1, but not in ed. 2, where the first really intelligible account of 
E. italicum occurs, 
There is only one sheet of Æ. italicum in Herb. Miller. It agrees perfectly 
with the specimen in the Linnean herbarium, which is precisely Æ. altissimum, 
Jacq. There is no writing on the sheet in Miller's hand, the name italieum 
being written in pencil by Solander. There is no other Chelsea Garden 
specimen of italicum ; one bearing no. 2716 and the words * E, italicum 
1776,” with a penstroke through them, is 7. plantagineum. It cannot have 
been labelled italicum by Miller, for he died in 1771. 
But Jersey must be exeluded from the habitat. [ts supposed presence 
there is due partly to reliance on the unfortunate * Lycopsis" muddle. The 
false argument was this: Lycopsis has been found plentifully in Jersey by 
Sherard; Linnwus says Lycopsis is italicum and Hudson also calls the Jersey 
plant italicum ; therefore italicum grows in Jersey. But the error has been 
kept alive owing to confusion between the white-flowered form of vulgare 
and italicum. Although vulgare is not quoted for Jersey by Lester-Garland, 
he says it is frequent in Herm and common in Alderney, and it looks as if 
the white form had been found in Jersey in the past, though it cannot be 
claimed with certainty. In Herb. Sloane, vol. 151, p. 177, there is an 
example of white vulgare among Petiver's plants bearing his label : “Hehium 
ramosus flore. suaveolente, H. Ox. ; altera species, Dod. ; Lycopsis, C. B., 
Anglica, Ger. ; altera Anglica, Lob. Wall Bugloss in the Isle of Jersey." 
The plant is certainly vulgare fl. albo, but it is possible that the last words of 
the label may not mean that this individual came from the island. 
Kchium italicum is professedly figured in E. B. tab. 2081 as “a native 
of Jersey, for spocimens of which from Chelsea Garden we are obliged to 
Mr. Fairbairn." Probably the seeds of the Chelsea Garden plant had not 
really come from Jersey.  Sowerby's original drawing at the British 
Museum only says * Chelsea Garden," and does not mention Jersey. The 
diawing seems to be a compromise between Æ. italicum and white-flowered 
I. vulgare, of which an explanation is suggested by a sheet in Sowerby’s 
herbarium at Mus. Brit, where there are two specimens, both referred 
to E. B. tab. 2081, but while that on the left is true italicum, the one on 
the right is white vulgare. Between the two is a piece, in bud only, from 
J. Dickson’s * Hortus Siecus Britannicus; 1793-1799, marked * Echium 
italicum, Jersey." As far as can be judged in so early a stage, this really 
is X. italicum, but did it come from Jersey? or is it a garden plant from 
seeds wrongly supposed to come from that island? If really from Jersey, 
E. italicum must have existed there at that time as an escape and since 
died out, 
