1903* Prae^g^r. — Irish Topop'aphical Botany, 37 



judgment may come from viewing the case from a half year's 

 perspective. 



Mr. Colgan's criticism deals mainly with a discussion of the 

 boundaries of the type areas, and the composition of the lists 

 of type plants, but, as I shall show, his conception and 

 definition of my ** types " being different from my own, it natur- 

 ally follows that my lists of species will not fall in with his 

 ideas. As regards the boundaries of the Ultonian, Mumonian, 

 Lagenian, and Connacian types, I give in my paper (p. 34) a 

 sufficiently conspicuous diagram showing the lines which 

 bound them, and say (pp. 33-34) " The central circle and these 

 two intersecting lines, then, define six types of distribution 

 which I believe are founded on the actual range of plants in the 

 country. The names most conveniently employed for the 

 "types" will be 2. Central, 3. Marginal, 4. Ultonian, 5. 

 Mumonian, 6. Lagenian;, 7. Connacian, the last four being 

 named after the four provinces of Ireland, in which each type 

 respectively reaches its maximum." The wide extension thus 

 allowed to each type, and the reason for associating the names 

 of the four provinces with the last four, are thus stated 

 sufficiently clearly. But after heartily approving of these 

 names as thus defined, Mr. Colgan proceeds to express his 

 expectation that each of these four types should be more or 

 less restricted to the province from which the type takes its 

 name : — "We might fairly conclude from this passage [portion 

 of the passage which I quote above] that the area of each 

 type would be roughly co-extensive with the province whose 

 name it bore." I do not see that in the face of my statement 

 we might fairly conclude anything of the sort ; on the 

 contrary, I cannot but think that such a conclusion is not 

 warranted by my definitions. I quote the above as an instance 

 of a tendency to restriction of area and a seeking for hard and 

 fast boundaries which form a dominant note throughout Mr. 

 Colgan's remarks on the "types." The clue to this view of 

 the question is I think given by my critic when he refers to 

 the Introduction of the second edition of Cybele Hiber^iica for 

 lists of the northern, southern, eastern, and western plants of 

 Ireland. Here, under the head of " Topographical Groups" 

 we find lists compiled by the simple process of drawing a line 

 across the map — along a parallel of latitude or longitude, a 

 halfway between two— and listing all plants which occur only 



A 3 



