plant, namely that given in “ Jackson’s Account of the 
Empire of Morocco” (Ed. iii. 1814, p. 136, plate 7), and 
which represents an entirely different species of Umbellifer. 
That Jackson’s figure represents the true Fashook is now 
proved by a living specimen at Kew, procured by Mr. 
Hunot, H.B.M. Vice-Consul at Saffi, from the interior of 
Marocco, in 1886, and which, Mr. Watson informs me, now 
shows signs of flowering. This latter plant more nearly 
resembles the foliage of the Canarian F’. Linkii, Webb, 
than those of F. tingitana. I should add that Mr. Ball 
and I, when in Marocco, vainly sought for the Ammoniacum 
plant, which the natives assured us grew only in the 
interior districts inhabited by predatory and fanatical 
Moors, to the north of the city of Marocco. Mr. Ball 
(judging from Jackson’s figure) was decidedly of opinion 
that it would prove to be a species of Hlaeoselinum, of 
which genus we had found a small species with somewhat 
similarly cut leaves on the road to Marocco, where the 
Fashook had been reported to have been seen (see 
“Marocco and the Great Atlas,” p. 386). I have only 
further to remark that Lindley’s opinion was founded on 
Specimens of the gum which he received from Marocco, 
together with others of F’. tingitana, as the plant believed 
to produce it, and that I hope in due time to be able to 
figure the true plant in this work. 
Mr. Ball (Journ. Linn. Soe., vol. xvi. p- 474) observes 
that in specimens of F. tingitana gathered by us at 
Tangiers, the central umbels had peduncles five to six 
inches long, that both involucres and involucels were some- a 
times absent, or that the involucres present consisted of 
three to four long setaceous bracts, and the involucels of 
many short setaceous bracteoles. 
f. tingitana is a native of the whole coast of Northern 
Africa, from Marocco to Tripoli, as also of the Islands 
of Rhodes and Chios, and of Syria. Specimens from the 
last-named country, having leaves more glaucous and with 
more obtuse segments of the leaflets, were described at first 
by Boissier as a different species, Ff’, sancta, but subsequently 
referred by him to the African plant, not even as a variety. 
The obtuse leaflets of the specimen here figured may in- 
dicate its being the Syrian form, but unfortunately nothing 
18 known of its origin, it having been in cultivation at Kew 
