297 
thalloid development in ferns than in the Ophioglossaceae and a 
difference in the evolution of the spores. He would, therefore, place 
the Ophioglossaceae in an order of equivalent value with the Fi/ices, 
but in advance of them in a system of classification, inasmuch as 
they are in some respects more highly differentiated than the latter. 
—The Library Journal for November contains an article by 
Prof. Ezra Abbot, of Harvard University, showing to what 
extent many of our standard works of reference continue to 
perpetuate the old and erroneous view as to the papyrus 
(Papyrus antiquorum. ) For instance in “‘Adam’s Roman 
Antiquities ” we read that this plant was “ abut ten cubits high, and 
had several coats or skins above one another, like an onion, Ge." a 
Smith’s “ Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities,’ under the 
article Zzber, the writer says: “The papyrus-tree grows in swamps, 
&c.,” and that “ paper was prepared from the ‘hin coats or pellicles 
which surround the plant.” Liddell and Scott’s Greek Lexicon 
defines AifAos as “the inner bark of the papyrus.” A similar 
account is given in the Lexicon of Jacobitz and Seiler, Pape, and Rost 
and Palm’s edition of reas under BiPXros and manxvUpos; so also 
in many encyclopaedias. e. g., the “ Encyclopaedia Britannica,” and 
others. This common error riot speaking of the papyrus as if it were 
an exogenous plant (and even a ¢ree/) has originated from ignor- 
ance or forgetfulness of the elements of botany, and the consequent 
misinterpretation of the passage in Pliny (/77s¢. Wa?. xiii. 11-13, al. 
21-27), which is our chief source of information about the ancient 
manufacture of paper from this plant. One of the words Pliny uses 
to describe the thin strips into which the cellular substance of the 
stem was sliced in making the paper is pXzi/yra, which strictly denotes 
the inner bark of the Linden tree ( 77/ia), also used as a writing 
material. Hence the papyrus has been conceived of by the eminent 
authorities above cited as an exogen, with its inner and outer bark! 
W:: Ry Gi 
$ 300. Epigaea repens, L.—I found specimens of this plant in 
full bloom at Princes Bay, S. I., on Saturday, Mch. rst. I do not 
know that it has ever been found earlier in this locality. aes 
§ 301. Anychia dichotoma, Mchx., not dichotomous.—I do not 
know whether attention has already been called to the fact, that the 
specific name of this plant i is really a misnomer, if we take the term, 
“ dichotomy,” in its strict scientific signification. 
If we examine younger specimens of our Anychia, we invariably 
find every axis terminated by a flower, with a branch on each side 
from /ateral buds below the apex. Hence this is a plain case of 
cymose, not of dichotomous ramification. In older specimens, say 
toward the end of July or in August, when many of these terminal 
flowers have fallen off, the main stem and many branches appear 
bifurcated. But I need not repeat that this cannot be called 
dichotomy, which only occurs when some axis, at tts very apex, is 
“cut into two” branches, which may — be divided in the same 
manner, and so on. — 
he. La el I — agree ithe those who believe in the 
