239 
tunity of consulting, is the Florula Cestrica of Dr. Darlington, 
who keeps up the C. rhomboidea (under Arabis) and C. rotun- 
. difolia, and well distinguishes them: yet remarks that Dr. 
Muhlenberg seemed to think that Michaux’s description of 
the latter plant was intended for the former; but declaring 
his own opinion and that of Dr. Torrey to the contrary. The 
question of the identity of Michaux’s plant, however, can 
only be set at rest by a careful examination of the original 
specimen. It will be seen that Richard pronounced Dr. Boott’s 
specimen of C. rhomboidea to be the C. rotundifolia of Mi- 
chaux ; while the equally learned De Candolle, who has, 
in all probability, seen Michaux's original specimens in the 
Herbarium at Paris, considers these latter to be the same 
with his C. rotundifolia. His authority, in this case of doubt, 
it will be safest to follow, especially as his ideas are now 
generally adopted. 
1. Cardamine rhomboidea ; caule simplici erectiusculo, foliis 
simplicibusinferioribus longepetiolatis rotundato-cordatis 
integerrimis vel subsinuatis caulinis superioribus ovali- 
bus sinuato-dentatis supremis lanceolatis sessilibus, 
radice tuberosa. (Tap. CVIIL)— Cardamine rhomboi- 
dea, De Cand. Syst. Veget. v. 9. p. 946. Ejusd. Prodr. 
v. l. p. 149. Spreng. Syst. Veget. v. 2. p. 885. 
Arabis rhomboidea. Pers. Syn. Pl. v. 2. p. 204. P. Fi. 
Am, v. 2. p. 43t. Nutt. Gen. Am. v. 2. p. 10. Elliott, 
Carol. v. 2. p. 149. Bigel. Fl. Bost. — 252. Dar- 
lingt. Florul. Cestrica, p. '14. 
Arabis tuberosa. Pers. Syn. Pl. v. 2. p. 204. 
Arabis bulbosa. “ Muhl. Cat. n. 104.” | 
- Cardamine rotundifolia. Hook. Fl. Bor. dm v p.d 
(excl. syn. prior, Michauxii? Candollii et Purshii) - 
Nesactiom Virginianum Cochlearizefolio flore albo amplior. 
Pluken. Amalth. t. 435. f. 6. : 
“ Arabis folis ovatis dota bis Gron. . Fi. p.997 
