VOL. IV,] Wi'iiings of Edivard L. Greene. 85 



usually entirely obscured by the broad hyaline margin of the 

 sepals. It is very common in sandy places in California and 

 runs into many forms, as diverse in the size of petals and the 

 markings of the seeds as any other species. Bentham & 

 Hooker are probably right in considering the numerous species 

 reducible to three or four, and so far at least as California is 

 concerned all our forms are European, and either introduced 

 or common to maritime shores. 



Viola pinetorwn Greene, is reduced by the author to V. pur- 

 purea Kell. It was described as "having truly violet colored 

 petals; all other known species of the group being yellow-flow- 

 ered." In Flora Franciscana, however, he reduces it without 

 explanation to the yellow-flowered V. N'lctiallu'. 



Viola Douglasii S\.Q.\\d. is substituted for V. chrysantha Hook. 

 on account of an older homonym; then as Philippi has named 

 another species (from Chili) V. chrysantha, Mr. Greene furnishes 

 that also with a new name, V. Philippiajia. All this without 

 troubling himself in the slightest degree about the validity of 

 the species involved, and apparently without taking the trouble 

 to notice the previous V. Philippii IvCyb. 



Calyptridium {Spraguea) nudum Greene is a condensed 

 subalpine form of Spraguea lunbellata Torr. 



Clayioyiia nubigena Greene is a common form of C. per- 

 foliata Donn. 



Sidalcea tenella Greene is ,5". Harhvegi Gray. . 



Sidalcea sccundijlora Greene is a variety of S. diploscypha 

 Gray. 



Sidalcea campestris Greene is founded on the sterile (male) 

 plants of, apparently, 5. Orcgana Nutt. 



The perennial species of Sidalcea are certainly not nearly so 

 numerous as has been supposed. lyong suites of specimens from 

 many localities show that the differences relied upon as specific 

 are far from constant. Even the generic type is becoming much 

 weakened by forms in which the double series of anthers is much 

 less evident. It is remarkable that Sidalcea should have been 

 considered beakless when nearly every species is beaked more or 

 less strongly. Mr. Greene, who has probably never seen the 



