VOL. 5] Aquilegia Eximia. 29 
It is always found growing near water along the banks or in 
the beds of rocky streams and blooms at least a month after the 
other species. It is very viscid pubescent throughout, except on 
the flowers. The plants are large and the leaves are mostly 
densely clustered on the short stems which form clumps. The 
flowering stems are sparsely leaved, indeed almost naked, widely 
branching, and rise to a height of 2-3 feet above the leafy base. 
The flowers are broader than long, with sepals reflexed and 
widely spreading, about as long as the spurs. The spurs are 
concave, more than half an inch across at the top and taper to 
the base of the globular nectaries. In the buds the spurs diverge 
instead of conniving as do all the other allied species. The geni- 
talia are as long as the petals, with filaments filiform, anthers 
oblong and styles almost equaling the filaments. ‘The leaves are 
on long petioles about a foot in length and have much coarser 
and larger divisions than the other species. The beautiful figure 
' illustrating the type shows the leaf and a branch having three 
flowers, identical with the specimens from Marin County. It is 
the most showy, elegant and largest flowered of all the red- 
flowered species of Aguilegia. 
In the Herbarium of the California Academy of Sciences there 
is a specimen of this species collected by T. S. Brandegee on Mt. 
Hanna, Lake County, June 27, 1884 (No. 368), and another one 
also from Lake County collected by J. W. Blankinship on the 
North Fork of Caché Creek, July 5, 1893 (No. 367). There isa 
specimen in fruit which I take to be the same species collected by 
the author in San Emidio Cafion, Kern County, October 1, 1894 
(No. 425). 
A. eximia has also been compared with 4. Californica Lindl. 
Gard. Chron. 1854, 836. A drawing of this species is published 
which gives a branch with flower and bud. The bud has conni- 
vent spurs which at once distinguish it from 4. eximia. Besides, 
there is a distinct rounded lamina, more marked than in 4. ¢run- 
cata but not so noticeable as in 4. Jormosa. It however seems 
more closely allied to 4. formosa than to A. truncata. The dis- 
covery of the type may reéstablish this species as distinct, though 
it seems doubtful. 
