513 
Notes on Some Southern Cassias, 
By CHARLES Louts PoLtaRD,. 
(PLATES 250-252.) 
The Chamaecristoid Cassias have always been recognized as a 
group of great perplexity within a genus of otherwise clear delimi- 
tations. Even Bentham, whose careful monographic work is still 
our standard authority on this genus, admits that his treatment of 
the Chamaecristae verae is far from satisfactory.* The difficulty 
is due to the close relationship which the species exhibit, and to 
the consequent fact that specific distinctions throughout the group 
are hardly obvious in a superficial examination. I am convinced, 
however, that differences in the periods of flowering and fruiting, 
as well as in geographical range, will afford characters by which 
our American species may be satisfactorily separated. The recent 
collections of Messrs. A. H. Curtiss and G. V. Nash, in Florida, 
have contributed much toward a clearer comprehension of this es- 
sentially Southern group. 
The Chamaecristae verae fall naturally into two divisions: 
those with small or minute, and those with relatively large flow- 
ers; and the general tendency among American botanists has been 
to refer all plants belonging to the first division to C. wictitans, 
while all large-flowering forms were unhesitatingly classed with C 
Chamaccrista. Muhlenberg was probably the first to recognize 
that the South contained more than two species and he accordingly 
named the hirsute plant which grows in dry fields in Florida 
Cassia aspera.+ This was reduced by Torrey and Grayf, but 
has been quite generally recognized in recent years as a perfectly 
valid species. Twenty years before this Michaux had described 
what he took to be a new Cassia, under the name of C: fasciculata,|| 
but this was referred by Bentham, who had access to Michaux’s 
type in Paris, to C. Chamaecrista, and it probably belongs there. 
After a critical study of numerous specimens I have reached 
the conclusion that the true C. nictitans of the North does not ex- 
tend into Florida; a theory that seems to be confirmed by nu- 
Merous field observations kindly communicated to me by Mr. 
*Trans, Linn. Soc. London, 27: 536. 1871. + Ell. Bot. S. Car. & Georg. 1: 474. 
1821. + Torr & Gray. Fl. N. Am. 396. 1838. | Fl. Bor. Am. 1: 262. 1803. 
