Robinson: Further Notes on the Agrimonies 297 



I recently looked up some herbarium notes made in Paris. It 

 is a rather poor fragment representing the small-flowered species 

 with thickened roots which has been passing as A. striata. It 

 bears two labels. The first and apparently original one bears 

 a curious mixture of Latin and French and reads Agrimonia 

 an species nova ? Sitas fruits sont globidaires innominata, while 

 the other runs Agrimonia striata Chic out oume Dodecand. 2-gynic, 

 it- 2. Not knowing at the time the location of the little In- 

 dian village Chicoutoume (or as it is now written Chicoutimi) I 

 did not recognize the geographical significance of this specimen 

 and it soon passed out of mind in the pressure of other matters 

 of interest, which naturally crowd upon an American botanist 

 examining the herbarium of Michaux. Fortunately I preserved 

 notes and a transcription of the labels. While this specimen may 

 account for Dr. Gray's determination, which is, however, as I have 

 stated, recorded against the other specimen, it cannot have formed 

 any part of the type since Michaux himself had noted that the 



i 



fruit was globulaire, nor are the fruits significantly striate or re- 

 flexed. The history of the specimen seems clear. Michaux hav- 

 ing noted its globular fruit and probably its different foliage, re- 

 garded it at first as a new species. For some reason, however, 

 probably from the fragmentary nature of the specimen, it was 

 "lumped" with A. striata rather than characterized as a separate 

 plant. But I feel sure that anyone who will read with attention 

 the original description of A. striata will see that this second 

 specimen with hemispherical or subglobular neither conspicuously 

 striate nor markedly reflexed fruit can have had nothing to do 

 with the characters given. Its locality, however, is highly inter- 

 esting since, if there has been no confusion of labels, it extends 

 the known range of the small-fruited species from southern Con- 

 necticut to the upper part of the Saguenay. 



From the facts here stated there can surely be no doubt that 

 A. Brittoniana should hereafter be called A. striata Michaux, a 

 species intelligibly characterized by the original author and clearly 

 shown by a well-preserved and unmistakable type, labeled in the 

 hand of Michaux and bearing out in all details but the color of 

 the petals the published description. This also appears to be the 

 species which Ledebour characterized in 1823 as A. pilosa* At 



