of Mentha exigua. 21 



£t lum perbrevem, cauli per intervalla 7 vel 8 verticillatim pofiti. 

 " Tota planta hirfutiufcula, folia acuta, oblonga, ct manibus com- 

 " prefia odorem fpirant gratiiTimum, Rofae eglanteria?, &c. 



" This is the fined mint to imell to. I found it by the New 

 " River fide near Stoke Newington. I (hewed it your kinfman with 

 " four or five forts more within a furlong of one another. 



" I take this to be Mentha arvenfis veriicillata f folio rotundiore % odorc 

 *' aromaiico, D. Vernon* R. Syn. (ed. 2.) ilj* 



" I want your opinion in this." 



From a comparifon of the above writing with the paffage in the 

 Synopfts relative to the native place of the Mentha No. 2, I think 

 there can be no doubt of mine being the original fpecimen gathered 

 by Buddie in company with Mr. Francis Dale, and fent to the 

 uncle of the latter, Mr. Samuel Dale, author of the Pharmacologia, 

 It is moreover fufliciently like the figures of Tragus, Lobel, and 

 Fuchfuis, and may be the M gent'dh of Linnaeus, as Dr. Stokes con- 

 jectured ; but this point is not to our prefent purpofe. I have only 

 to add, that it has no refemblance to the M. exigua. 



The latter therefore was frill only known from Miller's fpeci- 

 mens ; but every practical botanirt will readily conceive my joy, 

 when in the fummer of 1 793 I found the fame plant growing in 

 the garden of my friend Edward Hafell, Eiq. of Ipfwich, where it 

 was ihewn to me as an unknown mint. It grew in an American 

 border, and was faid to have fprung up fpontaneoufly. As this 

 border had been furnifhed with bog;-earth from the neighbourhood 

 of Ipfwich, it was to be prefumed the roots had been introduced 

 along with it. Here then was Mentha ex igua reftored to our Englifh 

 Flora, and I made hafte to diftribute fpecimens among thofe who 

 were folicitous to poffefs fuch a treafure. The flowers were not ad- 

 vanced enough to determine whether it were really a Mentha ; the 

 3 roc* 



