86 EOBINSON. 



present no reason, according to the International Rules, to reject 

 E. glandulosum HBK., a name which was amply characterized and 

 put forward in all good faith. The plant of von Jelski, however, pos- 

 sesses a round-ovate instead of triangular-ovate leaf, and the indumen- 

 tum, which Hieronymus finds similar, appears to the writer very differ- 

 ent. In E. glandulosum the hairs are short, dense, and gland-tipped, 

 in the von Jelski plant on the other hand they are flaccid, slender, 

 jointed, and for the most part not gland-tipped. From the sterile 

 fragment, kindly supplied to the writer at the Royal Gardens in Berlin 

 during his visit in 1905, it would appear that the plant is certainly 

 distinct from the Mexican E. glandulosum HBK. {E. adcnophorum 

 Spreng.), but until fertile specimens are available it is quite impos- 

 sible to give the plant definite disposition. 



E. AROMATICUM L., a species of Atlantic North America, extending 

 from Massachusetts to Florida, was recorded as also from Peru by 

 Lamarck, Encyc. ii. 406 (1786), on the basis of a specimen from Joseph 

 de Jussieu. The plant was stated to be smaller than the North Ameri- 

 can and to have shorter petioles as well as other minor differences. 

 Just what species Lamarck thus identified has not been ascertained, 

 but there is no likelihood of its having been conspecific with the 

 North American plant. 



E. CANNABINUM L., the well-known European species, and the medic- 

 inal E. TRIPLINERVE Vahl (under the later name of E. AyapanaYent.) 

 were reported by Martinet, Enum. Jard. Med. Lima, 352 (1873), as 

 cultivated in the Botanic Garden of the Medical Faculty at Lima; 

 but there is little likelihood and certainly no evidence that either 

 has at any time escaped or become established in Peru. 



E. GLUTiNosuM Lam. Encyc. ii. 408 (1786); Robinson, Proc. Am. 

 Acad. liv. 349 (1918). Described from a specimen in the Peruvian 

 herbarium of Joseph de Jussieu, this species has been traditionally 

 attributed to that country, though all its subsequent collections appear 

 to have been in northern-central Ecuador. It is to be remembered 

 that the boundaries of Peru in the middle of the 18th Century included 

 what is now Ecuador and Bolivia, so it is pertinent to inquire where 

 Joseph de Jussieu collected. According to Lasegue, Mus. Bot. Deles- 

 sert, 484 (1845), Joseph de Jussieu went to South America as a bota- 

 nist accompanying an astronomical expedition, which reached Quito 

 in 1756 by way of Guayaquil. Thus de Jussieu must have been in 

 the very region of Ecuador where E. glutinosum is now known to be 

 frec^uent. It is true that he later traveled both in Peru proper and 

 in what is now Bolivia, but the fact that he was also in the Ecuadorian 



