212 j Rhodora [DECEMBER 
England occurrence was probably based upon the notation of “ Ver- 
mont, Pringle,” in the Synoptical Flora! (amplified in the recent 
Flora of Vermont to the definite station, Charlotte)? and “Mass.” 
in Watson and Coulter's Edition of Gray's Manual? Michigan ap- 
peared to originate in the new Gray's Manual. The specimen bases 
of these records all probably being still extant at the Gray Herbarium, 
Professor Fernald's interest was evoked, but pleading an unfamiliarity 
with the group, on being pressed for critical opinions on the identities 
of these plants, he enabled me to borrow the material — and to draw 
my own conclusions. 
The bases of the records for Vermont, Massachusetts, and Michigan 
happily were all found preserved in the Gray Herbarium. The first 
is labelled: “Hieracium? Charlotte, Vt. (a casual) June 7th, 1875. 
C. G. Pringle," and the sheet marked twice with Gray's identification, 
“Crepis biennis,” and a small “Syn. Fl. N. Amer." ticket attached. 
There are three good, essentially complete, specimens crowded upon 
the sheet. It is at once evident that this is not a homogeneous series 
representing a single species. One of the plants, with rather few, 
notably large heads, is recognizable as characteristic C. biennis. 
The remaining two, although superficially somewhat similar to C. 
biennis, show inflorescences of more numerous, appreciably smaller 
heads, and, except for the rough pubescence on stems and leaves, 
might readily be taken offhand for C. capillacea. On more critical 
examination they are found to have the inner faces of the involucral 
bracts glabrous, the achenes 10-ribbed, and about 3-3.5 mm. long — 
which conclusively shows that these plants cannot be C. biennis. One 
of them has pinnatifid leaves, similar to those of C. biennis, but the 
other has entire or remotely toothed leaves. "There is also a decided 
difference in pubescence, especially on the inflorescence. They are 
both apparently referable, however, to C. Nicacensis Balb.— the plant 
with the uncut foliage probably representing the form called £. integri- 
folia Lamt. in Rouy's treatment.4 The Massachusetts record is based 
upon two specimens with the label, in the hand of Sereno Watson, 
reading: “Crepis biennis, L. Wianno, Mass., sandy soil, near a 
dwelling. Miss L. M. Hill — June 1887.” These appear.to have the 
! Gray, Syn. FI. i. pt. ii. 430 (1884). 
? Flora of Vermont. Vt. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bull. 187. 253 (1915). 
3 Gray, Man. ed. 6. 300 (1890). : 
* Rouy, FI. Fr. ix. 227 (1905). 
