1900] Robinson, — New England Agrimonies 237 
(A. gryposepala) to which Mr. Bicknell has applied the name sua. 
Torrey's A. Eupatoria B hirsuta has therefore scarcely more definite- 
ness than A. Eupatoria hirsuta, Muhl. 
2. A. BRITTONIANA, Bicknell, l.c. 510. Suspecting from an exam- 
ination of authentic material of Mr. Bicknell's new species that it was 
identical with the plant of Central Europe which has for many years , 
figured as A. pilosa, Ledeb., I forwarded some specimens of the 
American plant to Berlin, where it was subjected at the Royal Botani- 
cal Museum to a critical comparison by Mr. J. M. Greenman, who 
pronounces it in all respects identical with the material there repre- 
senting Ledebour's species. I have not had an opportunity to have 
the plant compared with Ledebour's type, but have no reason to doubt 
the accuracy of the German specimens, especially as Russian speci- 
mens of A. pilosa, determined by no less an authority than Maximo- 
wicz, are clearly the same. Mr. Bicknell says of his species. “4A. 
Brittoniana is in fact very distinctivé from any American species 
while nearly related to certain Asiatic forms — 4. vzseidu/a Bge., A. 
pilosa Ledeb., and A. Dahurica Willd., plants which have been vari- 
ously confused together by authors, and all of which have finally 
been referred to 4. Eupatoria L.” This is certainly a high-handed way 
of disposing of a species like 4. 57/052, which is not only well repre- 
sented in the larger herbaria, but recognized in such standard works 
as Nyman's Conspectus, several editions of Garcke's Deutschlands 
Flora, Thomé's Flora von Deutschland, etc. It is also rather incon- 
sistent with other parts of Mr. Bicknell's work. Surely various names 
for the American Agrimonies have been much confused, and most of 
them were referred to 4. Eupatoria, yet Mr. Bicknell has not hesitated 
to take them up even when their status, as in 4. Eupatoria hirsuta, is 
most vague. 
However, there is still an earlier name for Mr. Bicknell’s 4. Brit- 
toniana, as this is just what Michaux described as A. striata, a fact 
suggested to me by Michaux’ rather characteristic description, and 
recently confirmed by a personal examination of the well-preserved 
type of A. striata at the Jardin des Plantes in Paris. The Michaux spec- 
imen is in every way a close match for Mr. Fernald’s plant from St. 
Francis, Maine, the latter being Mr. Bicknell’s first-mentioned type 
of A. Brittoniana. As a corollary of these observations, attention 
may be called to the identity of 4. pilosa, Ledeb., as now interpreted 
in Germany and Russia, with A. striata, Michx., which, as the earlier 
