136 PROCEEDINGS OF THE ACADEMY OF 



Zanthoxylum hirwtum Dr. Gray thinks but a variety of Z. carol iniannm. 

 There is a variety I know, and I suppose this is to what Dr. Gray refers. I 

 am very familiar with it. It is abundant in the vicinity of Austin. But this 

 is always small, the largest specimens with a trunk rarely exceeding three 

 inches in diameter. This was a small tree, one foot at least in diameter, and 

 attracted my particular attention by its very peculiar appearance, as I rode 

 horseback in the vicinity of Corpus Christi. Its hairy leaves are a constant 

 and distinctive character. I expect to get specimens again. 



Ampelopsis heptaphylla Dr. Gray says is " a small leaved state of A. quinque- 

 folia, with some of the leaves 6-7 foliate." They are all, or nearly all, 7 foli- 

 ate. If A. quinquefolia were known to be variable in respect of the number of 

 leaflets on the same plant, there might be room to look for a variety with 

 another number of leaflets. But this species is noted for the regularity with 

 which it bears five leaflets only, both in the north and in the south. It grows 

 in the same locality with my A. heptaphylla, constantly with five leaflets only. 

 But this is not all ; my plant not only has 7 leaflets almost constantly, but 

 they arc smaller than A. quinquefolia, and it flowers in cymose panicles at the end 

 of April ; -while A. quinquefolia has compound racemes 3-4 inches in length, 

 and does not open its flowers till the middle or end of June. 



Vitis monticola, he says, is V. rupestris of Schule. In PlantceLindh. 2, p. 1GG, 

 Dr. Gray himself says of V. rupestris, " It does not climb, but the stems are 

 upright, and only two or three feet in height." This is right. I am familiar 

 with it. But my V. monticola does climb, sometimes to the height of 15 feet. 

 But in addition to this there is nearly two months difference in the time of ripen- 

 ing of the fruit. All the inhabitants of this region readily distinguish them 

 as different things. 



Vitis Lincecumii he refers to V. labrusca, and says that "the Louisiana 

 specimen (of Dr. Hale) exactly agrees with what we formerly cultivated in 

 Cambridge Bot. Garden as the Isabella grape." The Isabella grape is well 

 known here, yet this is readily distinguished by the people of Texas, who 

 call it the " Postoak grape." It has larger and less lobed leaves than the 

 Isabella. The Isabella has naturally but one short bunch this is shoul- 

 dered or branching; the berries drop easily from the stems these are strong- 

 ly adherent ; the skin is rather thick and the berries comparatively large, 

 while these are thin-skinned and smaller. The V. labrusca is a rampant spe- 

 cies, this rarely grows 15 feet, and often bears fruit on bush like specimens, 

 3-4 feet high. I have studied both species very closely, both before and 

 since Dr. Gray's criticisms, and can have no doubt of their distinctness. 



Vitis mustangensis Dr. Gray says " is not the mustang grape of Florida, but 

 is the well known V. candicans of Engelman." He asserts further that V. coria- 

 cea, of Shuttleworth, is a thick-leaved form of it, the V. caribma of Cbapman, 

 whether of DeCandolle I am still uncertain." I believe the only description 

 of V. candicans published, before my description of V. mustangensis, is the fol- 

 lowing from Plant. Lindh. 2, p. 166, where Dr. Gray says, "Under the name 

 of V. candicans (N. S.) Engel. ined., I have from Lindheimer, as also from Mr. 

 Wright, Texan specimens of what appears to be a variety of V. californica, 

 Beuth., with the leaves somewhat less dentate, and more densely tomentose 

 underneath." Again, in Plantce Wrightiana, p 32, in a note at the bottom of 

 the page, he states, " Vitis candicans, Engel. ined., which is also the V. coriacea 

 of Shuttleworth, PL Rugel. ex. sic. from southern Florida, is not the same as 

 Vitis californica, Benth., to which I was disposed to refer it in PI. Lindh, 2, p. 

 166. Perhaps it may be V. caribsca of D. C." If this is, as I believe, the only 

 description of V. candicans ever published, is Dr. Gray justified in terming it 

 " well known ?" Surely Dr. Gray does not own to much acquaintance with 

 jt, and makes no allusion whatever to its native name " mustang." 



Dr. Gray "warns the reader that mustang is not the name of a town or 



[Dec 



