E 
64 Rhodora [Marcu 
many other species and good varieties, presumably because they are 
not recognized in the Illustrated Flora, throws an unfortunate shadow 
of uncertainty over any conclusions which may be drawn from the 
floristic data. The same obedient acceptance of only such species 
as are registered in the Illustrated Flora gives us anomalies like the. 
following. On pages 265 and 266, Salix squamata Rydb. is numbered 
and entered regularly as a sound species, but with the comment, 
“distribution and specific status . . . . not fully understood,” which is a 
delicate way of quoting Britton’s “probably a state of the preceding 
species [S. discolor|"; but on page 283, Urtica Lyallii Watson *'is 
omitted from the list because its specific and distributional status are 
open to question." 
A flora of so large an area, and especially one upon which many 
scattered notes have been published, is necessarily difficult to cover 
with completeness, and it is natural that some perfectly good records 
have been overlooked. We do not find Juncus conglomeratus in the 
Catalogue, although it is geographically one of the most interesting 
plants of the flora covered (see Fernald & Wiegand, Ruopona, xii. 
85, 86; Bissell, Ruopona xiii. 31; Fernald, ibid., 140; Stone, Pl. so. 
N. J. 330). Equisetum scirpoides, a member of the Canadian flora 
which extends southward into Litchfield County, Connecticut, is not 
definitely admitted to the Catalogue but called a “waif,” thus throw- 
ing this indigenous woodland plant into the limbo with the rubbish- 
heap Cycloloma, Beta, and Spinacea! Luzula campestris, var. echinata 
(Juncoides echinatum Small) occurs in New Jersey and Pennsylvania 
(see RHODORA, xv. 42), and Scirpus Peckii is found in Connecticut 
(see RHODORA, xv. 98). 
One of the most valuable services a compiler of a local catalogue 
can render is finally to dispose of old and somewhat doubtful records, 
or at least to take note of and indicate the present knowledge of such 
cases. Mr. Taylor has performed this service in several instances: 
Triglochin palustris, Aletris aurea, Smilax Bona-nox, etc.; but we 
miss from the list of such accountings a number of species formerly 
reported from the area. For instance, Phorodendrom flavescens, 
reported from Staten Island (see Britton, Bull. Torr. Bot. Cl. xi. 76); 
a cultivated fern, thought to be an Asplenium, reported by Dr. 
Britton in 1897 as a notable case of “naturalization” (see Bull. Torr. 
Bot. Cl. xxiv. 588); Pteris tremula and Dryopteris patens, reported in 
1897 as “naturalized” in New York City (Fern Bull. vi. 10); and 
Polypodium polypodioides, reported in 1898 as found on Staten Island 
in 1896 (Fern Bull. vi. 54). 
In reading the Introduction to the book, which is, after all, quite 
as important as the Catalogue proper, for in it are the generalizations, 
it is impossible to avoid the impression that the author is floundering 
in water too deep for him. A thoroughly satisfactory correlation of 
the present distribution of our flora with the geological history of the 
continent is something to strive for, but it involves so intimate a 
