340 Bibliographical Notices, 



may appear, but only such as prove themselves to belong to that class 

 which is likely to promote the advancement of true botanical science 

 in this country. Fifty-eight numbers of the 'Florigraphia' have now 

 been published, of which the earlier half can only be considered as a 

 collection of moderately good and cheap figures of British plants, ac- 

 companied by descriptions, which, although apparently original, do 

 not show much if any acquaintance with the writings of the more 

 modern and eminent continental authors ; shortly afterwards, how- 

 ever, proofs may be discovered that the author had become acquainted 

 with several of them. Probably the first indication of this occurs in 

 No. 28, where the name of Verhascum floccosum (W. and K.) is given, 

 we believe for the first time by an English author, to the plant which 

 has been usually considered as identical with the V. pulverulentum of 

 Villars. Here we find what is probably to be considered as evidence 

 that the author's health had already driven him to a warmer climate, 

 in which it is understood that he has found it advisable to remain, 

 thus unfortunately depriving his book of the benefit of his personal 

 revision during its progress through the press, and causing the oc- 

 currence of misprints in some of the names of authors, places, &c. 

 We refer to the fact, that although the name of V. floccosum (W. and 

 K.) is placed at the head, still V. pulverulentum (Vill.) is continued 

 as a synonym, and some portions of the description appear intended 

 to refer to that plant ; the specific character also, we suspect, was pre- 

 pared before the author became acquainted with the true nomencla- 

 ture ; and here we must protest against the introduction into our na- 

 tive flora of the true V. pulverulentum (Vill.) which immediately fol- 

 lows, accompanied by its correct specific character, for we cannot 

 look upon the var. /3 nigro -pulverulentum of Smith's ' Flora' as that 

 plant, since he expressly states that his plant has a violet-coloured 

 fringe to the filaments, whilst in the real V. pulverulentum the same 

 part is white. Smith states that his variety lies between his pulve- 

 rulentum (^floccosum) and nigrum, whilst the plant of Villars takes its 

 place hetweeii floccosum and Lychnitis. In justice to Dr. Deakin we 

 must however state, that he refers (apparently on his own authority) 

 to Yarmouth as a station for his V. pulverulentum, and should there 

 have been no mistake, we may really prove to be possessed of both 

 these plants in England. 



In succeeding numbers we find occasional references to Koch, 

 Reichenbach, Wallroth and other distinguished German botanists, 

 as well as frequent remarks which show an acquaintance with the 

 plants of the South of Europe. At p. 479, Omithogalum pyrenaicum 

 is correctly referred to 0. Narbonense ; but we must be allowed to 

 express our doubt of those plants being distinct species. Epilobium 

 virgatum (Fries) appears for the first time as a British plant at p. 548 

 and fig. 624, having been found by the author in " marshy places 

 about Lincoln ;" it may be distinguished from E. tetragonum, its 

 nearest ally, by having its stem- leaves rounded at the base and not 

 at all decurrent. We have long expected that this plant would be 

 found in Britain, and have searched diligently for it in many parts 

 of England, Scotland and Ireland, but without success ; and it gives 



