286 Mr. Anperson’s Monograph of the Genus Pæonia. 
Kewensis, 2d edit. in this species is only to the var. B, as if that 
alone was noticed therein; whereas P. albiflora of the Hortus Kew- 
ensis is referable to the species itself; and the variety figured in 
the Par. Lond. is the second variety B. of P. albiflora in the Hor- 
tus Kewensis. M. De Candolle has no references to the figures in 
the Botanical Magazine or the Botanical Register ; and I conjec- 
ture that he is not acquainted with more than the one double va- 
riety, P. albiflora B. Whitleji, to the figure of which in Andr. Bot. 
Repos. he refers. | 
Our two species P. anomala and P. tenuifolia agree with those 
of M. De Candolle; but he has kept as a distinct species P. hy- 
brida, adding to the statements of Pallas, the authority of Dr. 
Fischer, who in his correspondence has assured him he found it 
growing on the northern side of Mount Caucasus, and that it was 
not an hybrid plant, but a genuine species. Being fully satis- 
fied that Pallas's plant, figured and described in the F. "lora Rossica, 
and which was from a cultivated specimen, is only P. tenuifolia in 
a state it sometimes assumes, but different from what it usually 
puts on, I must still continue my opinion of their identity. In 
Dr. Fischer's Catalogue of the Garden at Gorinki near Moscow, 
printed in 1808, he does not enumerate P. hybrida. Should this 
plant, however, after more investigation, prove distinct from 
P. tenuifolia, I shall rejoice in the circumstance, as our list of spe- 
cies of this charming genus will thereby be increased; but if 
P. hybrida be distinct, it cannot be set down as one now culti- 
vated in this country. 
P. officinalis, on the authority of several French authors, has 
been considered hitherto a native of different parts of France: it 
seems from the personal observation of M. De Candolle, most 
probable that other species have been mistaken for this; and I 
should not be surprised, if subsequent examination of specimens 
from 
