The Scottish Naturalist. 69 



" During the winter of 18 jo, when walking in some woods in 

 the neighbourhood of Forfar, composed of Scotch fir, for the 

 purpose of collecting mosses and lichens, my attention was 

 drawn from these humble tribes by observing the very dissimilar 

 appearances of different trees of what botanists consider as one 

 species of Pinus, the Pinus sylvestris. 



" After examining a great number of trees, I became satisfied 

 that it is possible to distinguish in our plantations at least four 

 varieties ; and one of these, indeed, is of so fixed and marked 

 a character that it may probably be entitled to rank as a 

 species. 



" It may here be proper to state that lately, while observing 

 the cutting down of a fir plantation near Forfar, I was not a 

 little surprised at the great difference in the size, and conse- 

 quently in the value, of some of the trees in comparison with 

 others of the same species — the difference in value being not 

 less than four times that of others, and in some individual trees 

 exceeding six times. I was at a loss to account for this fact, 

 as the trees were growing promiscuously in the same soil and 

 situation, and had been equally thinned. On more minutely 

 examining those that far exceeded the others in size, I perceived 

 that they were all of that variety which I have suggested as pro- 

 bably entitled to rank as a species. 



" About a month ago I re-examined the varieties of the Pinus 

 sylvestris, in order to collect some cones of each variety for seed, 

 and I was then led to examine them with considerable care." 



He then goes on to describe the different varieties, begin- 

 ning with the common variety, which he calls variety 1, marked 

 by its branches forming a pyramidal head ; leaves marginated, 

 of a dark or full green colour, and but little glaucous under- 

 neath ; cones considerably elongated and tapering to the point ; 

 the bark of the trunk very rugged. This variety seems to be 

 but short-lived, becoming soon stunted in appearance, and alto- 

 gether a very inferior tree to variety 2 or 3. I shall now append 

 his description of variety 2 : — 



" This strongly-marked and permanent variety is distinguished 

 from the former by the disposition of its branches, which are 

 remarkable for their horizontal direction and for a tendency to 

 bend downward close to the trunk. The leaves are broader 

 than in variety 1, and serrulated, not marginated as in variety 1. 

 From that circumstance alone I should at once pronounce them 

 distinct. The leaves are distinguished at a distance by their 



