230 Mr. Arzeriuss Hifory of 
All thefe five authors Haller has quoted in his Stirp. Helv. 
p- 586, under var. @, flore albo of Trifol. pratenfe. But in his Hif- 
tory, tom. i. p. 164, he has only cited Morifon and Ray under var. 4, 
. flore ochroleuco, of the fame Trefoil, Of this aft; Linnaeus alfo 
in the beginning confidered the plant of Pontedera to. be a variety, 
as appears from his Flora: Lapponica and Hortus Cliffortianus ; 
. but afterwards he juftly omitted this quotation. tise 3 
That Merrett’s Trifolium is the ochroleucum, is very. probable from 
its being a native of Sie ; and that Bes meant the fame, is 
evident beyond doubt from: his defcription :. but with refpeét to. 
Morifon, the hatter à is not fo sind ; for ere his defcription, in 
which occur the terms folia acuta, and his figure, which reprefents 
the leaves narrow, lanceolate, and pointed inftead of rounded at 
the ends, appear rather to indicate the Jrifol. pannonicum, though 
the fpecimen in Bobart's collection at Oxford is Trifol. ochroleucum. 
It is far more difficult to make out what Pontedera aimed at; for, — 
from his prolix defcription, nothing further can be concluded, 
than that the leaves, principally in the margin, as well as the whole 
calyx, are. hairy; the flowers white and De and that 
the feed-veffels generally ‘contain one feeds »ws, how- 
ever, that his plant can neither be "m repens nor montanum: 
and, independent of thefe two, I can think of no other capable of 
being called in queftion, except the Trifol. ochroleucum and pannoni- 
cum. But, as the above-mentioned characters are equally applica- 
ble to both of them, and as thefe two laft-mentioned plants them- 
felves are fo nearly related as to be fcarcely diftinguifhable but by 
their fize, and the fhape of their leaves, it 1s impofhble to determine 
which ofthem Pontedera had in view. The plant of Vaillant is 
till more difficult to afcertain, for ie has given no defcription at 
all. . : 
4. Tri- 
