to which however the plant bears the ftrongeft refemblancer 

 throughout ; differing chiefly in being altogether (mailer, fome- 

 what yellower in the leaf and ftem, in not having one of the braftes 

 fuuated above the middle, but nearly at the bafe of the pedicle, 

 in having a corolla of a much paler yellow colour ; and yellow 

 inftead of vermilion-coloured anthers ; the interrupted or broken 

 raceme is not a conftant charaBer, as we have learned from the 

 spontaneous Specimens fhewn us by Mr. Pursh; by whom it 

 was found in North-America, in boggy Situations, from Quebec 

 to Lake Miftaffin ; plentifully at Quaker-Bridge, in New-Jerfey. 

 The fpecimcn from which our drawing was made had been im- 

 ported by Mr. Lyon, in i8n. 



In our fafciculus for the preceding month, we had given this 

 plant for the Narthecium gluttnofum of Michaux. Info 

 doing, we had entirely relied on the authority of Mr. Pursit, 

 a learned, acute, and zealous Botanift, with whofe abilities the 

 world is likely foon to become more fatisfaclorily acquainted, 

 by a Flora of North-America^ which he has now in the prefs. 

 He had fhewn the plant to Dr. Barton, a very eminent Ame- 

 rican naturalift, the friend, and fometimes the companion of 

 Michaux in botanical excurfions, and that gentleman had 

 aflured him of its being the plant wf gave it for ; add-to this, 

 that he had found it in abundance in the diftricls mentioned as 

 the places of its abode by Michaux ; who, if this is not the 

 plant, has omitted to record it at all. Yet when we were lately 

 fhewn a fpontaneous American fpecimen in the Bankfian Her- 

 barium, of a Tofielda (the Narthecium of Jussieu) 

 which had been noted by Mr. Dryander, as the probable 

 N. glutinofum ; we own the above authority loft all weight with 

 us, and we regretted that we had been decided by collateral 

 evidence, however ftrong, againft that contained in an author's 

 defcription of his plant. The fpecimen, befides a more im- 

 mediate coincidence as to genus, has the rough clammy fcape 

 afcribed to his fpecies by Michaux ; a character which, as we 

 obferved in our former account, was wanting in our plant, and 

 which we now find to be equally wanting in the fpontaneous ones 

 of Mr. Pursh. Confidering it as diftin6t from ojzfragum, we 

 have afcribed to it the prefent name; the fpecies being un- 

 noticed in any work known to us. We ought to obferve that 

 Mr. Pursh, as well as ourfelves, have been always fully 

 aware that the Narthecium intended by Michaux, was that of 

 Jussieu, and not the prefent; and this we had from the firft 

 dated as our chief fcruple, when we applied to Mr. Pursh; 

 but he remained, and ilill does remain confident that he is right. 

 He maybefo; but the evidence of Michaux himfelf would 

 not now convince us, that our plant was that which he had in view 

 when he inftituted his Narthecium glutinofum. G . 



