1918] Pennell,—The Flower of Agalinis 199 
that I believed it to be the common form (C. lucens) whereas it really 
was part of the type collection of C. bracteata. In my own collection 
this plant is numbered 723 and (503), the latter being a provisional 
number under which a specimen was sent away for determination. 
I was not aware of the importance of numbering plants, until distribu- 
tions had been made for several years and so the numbers were placed 
on the lists only and not on the plant labels. So it happens that 
many of the earlier specimens have or should have two different 
numbers on their labels, one of them in parenthesis. Many speci- 
mens received. no number at once when collected, but years later, 
and for that reason mistakes sometimes occur. Thus the number 
of the plant referred by Mr. Torrey to C. oligosperma var. unijuga, 
although collected in 1881, should be 7238 instead of 723, the latter 
being the proper number of the type collection of C. bracteata. When 
numbering was begun more carefully, it was thought necessary to 
have a separate set of numbers for each state where collections had 
been made. This need not cause doubt or confusion where the fact 
is known. Mistakes cannot always be avoided, but they may be 
corrected sometimes. A clerical error of little or no consequence 
occurs in Mr. Torrey’s article in the name of a county: Skaminia 
should be Skamania. 
BINGEN, WASHINGTON. 
THE FLOWER or AGALINIs — A CORRECTION.— In the description 
of the flowers of Agalinis, on page 135 of the current volume of 
Ruopora, two words should be inserted, so that the statement on 
line 5 shall read: “around and between which lines are almost always 
red-purple spots.” The spotting is confined to the anterior side of 
the corolla, but there frequently, indeed most frequently, lies along 
the two yellow lines. I regret the oversight which permitted such 
an error or partial statement of fact; however, as affecting the con- 
trast with Aureolaria the point is unimportant. Agalinis is still 
to be distinguished by the elaboration of a very definite color-pattern. 
In speaking of the two lines as “yellow,” allusion is made to the 
color pigment present, not to its intensity. Possibly more often 
the word “yellowish” should be preferred in description. Although 
