257 
Fig 8. Salvinia Reusii Ettingsh. 1. c. f. 27. 
Fig. 9. Salvinia aguensis Sap. Ann. Sci. Nat. 7e Ser. Bot. 7: pl. 2, f. 7. 
Fig. 10. Salvinia attenuata Lesq. Tert. Fl. p/. 64, f. 14. 
Fig. 11. Selvinia cyclophylla Lesq. Tert.\Fl. pz. §, f. 10. 
Fig. 12. Salvinia Alleni Lesq. Cret. & Tert. Fl. pf 27, f. rz. 
Fig. 13. Selvinia reticulata (Ettingsh. in part) Heer, Sitzb. K. Akad. Wiss. 
Wien, 11: 27. 4, ts 
Figs. 14, 14@, 15. Salvinia elliptica Newb. (/. r4a=—nat. size 2). 
On a Species of Helianthemum not recognized in our Text-Books. 
By EuGENE P. BICKNELL. 
Although but one species of Helianthemum is recognized in 
the flora of the Eastern States north of New Jersey, I am fully 
Satisfied that two species inhabit the region, closely related species, 
it is true, but, as I shall hope to show, perfectly distinct plants. 
Singularly enough, the more common of these plants is the one 
which has been overlooked, at least the less common plant, as I 
have encountered the two about New York, is unmistakably the 
one mainly intended by our text-books under the name //. Cana- 
dense Michx., though in some descriptions it is evident that the 
two plants have been confused. 
With recent writers the name H. Canadense Michx. has given 
Place to 4. majus (1..), B. S. P., the latter name being clearly 
available under the belief which has all along been entertained 
that there existed but a single Eastern species of the genus. Now, 
however, that a second species presents itself to be reckoned with, 
the question of the availability of the name smajus revives under 
an entirely new aspect. Indeed there would seem to be a fair 
Probability that the name Canadense will be found to hold for the 
Plant of our text-books, and that the name mazus will be available 
for the species here brought forward. This view is perhaps fairly 
inferable from the following considerations: It is, of course, well 
Understood that the apetalous state of a Helianthemum was by ae: 
Vinneeus mistaken for a Leckea and named by him Lechea major. 
is name having priority in “Species Plantarum” over Cistus Con- 
adensis, which it has always been taught was merely the earlier 
flowering stage of the same plant, has been adopted for the sup- _ a 
