428 STATE HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY. 



Michigan, and published in the Proceedings of the Michigan Pharmaceutical 

 Association in 1877. To a List of Michigan Plants, compiled by Dr. Elmore 

 Palmer, in 1877. 



Our acknowledgments are due to Prof. W. J. Beal, of the Michigan Agri- 

 cultural College, for valuable assistance rendered. To Dr. D. Clark, of Flint, 

 for specimens, and for a list of the plants of his vicinity. To Henry Gillman, 

 Esq., of Detroit, for a list of Lake Superior plants collected by him. To Rev. 

 E. J. Hill, of Engelwood, 111., for lists and specimens from various localities 

 along the east shore of Lake Michigan. To L. H. Bailey, Jr., of South Haven, 

 for lists and specimens of plants growing in the vicinity of Lansing and South 

 Haven. 



More than a passing tribute is due to the little band of indefatigable natural- 

 ists of the past generation, who did so much pioneer work in developing all the 

 resources of our fair State. First among them stands Dr. Douglass Houghton, 

 while around him, among others, may be grouped the botanists, Dr. Zina 

 Pitcher, Dr. Abram Sager, Dr. Dennis Cooley, and Dr. Daniel Clark, of whom 

 alone Dr. Clark remains, full of years and still active in the pursuit of his 

 favorite science. Miss Mary H. Clark, of Ann Arbor, was also well known, 

 especially to the younger botanists of the State, as a life-long worker in this 

 department of natural history, and one whose zeal and enthusiasm burned 

 steadily through advancing years and only went out with her life. 



Others have been connected, more or less, with the botanical interests of the 

 State, either as teachers or collectors, among whom may be mentioned Prof. 

 Geo. Thurber, Prof. A. N. Prentiss, and Prof. J. C. Holmes, of Detroit, all 

 formerly connected with the State Agricultural College ; Prof. M. W. Harring- 

 ton, of the State University; 0. B. Wheeler, Esq., of Detroit; Frank H. 

 Tuthill, of Kalamazoo ; and Rev. J. Shaup, of Hastings, Barry county. 



In connection with the catalogue proper, the following hasty sketch of 

 the main features of our flora may be of some interest. It is offered, however, 

 only as a sketch, and is drawn chiefly from our own field-notes, jotted down 

 during many a delightful ramble. The best part of botany, after all, is 

 not in the books, and to any who find the following pages dry, we commend 

 nature herself — that boundless, outdoor life, whose interest, beauty, and mys- 

 tery is with us from the cradle to the grave, forever stimulating inquiry, and 

 ever richly rewarding patient and loving toil. 



The climate of the Upper Peninsula of Michigan is colder than that of the 

 Lower Peninsula, the surface is considerably broken, especially in the western 

 part, and the flora is in many respects decidedly northern, resembling in 

 part that of British America, and in other respects like that of N". New Eng- 

 land and Canada. Pines, firs, cedar, larch, junipers, elms, poplars, black 

 ash, basswood, maples, and birches, are the principal trees. Pinus strolus, 

 the prevailing species southward, is here largely supplanted by its more north- 

 ern and less valuable congener, P. resinosa, whose tall, slim trunks are, how- 

 ver, in good demand for driving piles. Under-shrubs, like Rulus NutJcaims and 

 Taxus baccata, var. Canadensis, are common, and indicate a tendency toward 

 northern types that we find more strongly developed in the herbaceous plants. 

 Among the latter we note as found rarely, or not at all, in the Lower Penin- 

 sula, but frequently northward, and often having a high northern range, such 

 plants as Anemone parviflora, Viola SelJcirkii, Potentilla frigida, Stellaria lore- 

 alis, Saxifraga Aizoon, S. tricuspidala, Pinguicula vulgaris, Castillea pallida, 

 Halenia dejlexa, Phy salts grandiflora, Tofieldia palusl?'is, Salix adenophylla, 

 Eriophorum alpinum, Aspidium fragrans, etc., etc. 



