242 Sir J. E. Su1Tn's Botanical History 
This species is, in every part, twice the size of the foregoing, 
of which it has, till now, been considered as a variety, whose 
greater luxuriance, or more dilated habit, was attributed to its 
situation in a more favourable climate. Into this error I have 
been led in the Flora Britannica, where therefore a number, of 
erroneous synonyms are accumulated; but the description be- 
longs precisely to the T. palustris, except perhaps what regards 
the bracteas and fruit. So much are we frequently disposed to 
see with the eyes of others, that it was not before I had compared 
the figure in English Botany with that of Redouté, both cited 
together in Hort. Kew., that I was obliged to correct my opinion. 
After making all imaginable allowance for possible inaccuracy in 
the two artists, however excellent; and for the one plate being 
taken from a wild specimen, the other from a most luxuriant 
garden plant; nothing seemed to justify a conclusion of their 
belonging to one species. A more close examination of the plants - 
themselves immediately removed all uncertainty. Besides the 
difference of size, as above mentioned, the root of what I have 
now named T. alpina is much thicker in proportion, and more 
woody. The stem bears two distant leaves, of which the upper- 
most especially is much smaller than the radical ones, and if si- 
tuated more than half way up the stem, it diminishes in propor- 
tion. But the most satisfactory differences exist in the flowers. 
The inflorescence is a cluster (racemus), from one to two inches 
long, frequently interrupted or scattered. The partial stalks, 
though short and thick, are always distinctly present, having a 
concave permanent solitary bractea, about their own length, at the 
base; and as the fruit advances they become more evident, a 
line or more in length, and curved upward. The calyx is close to` 
the rest of the flower, cup-shaped, unequally and rather slightly 
: three- 
