AND ITS VALUE FOJt I'l.ANTlNG IN S(JOTLANl). IT-') 



The A. Albcrtiana, how ever, tlioiigli so closely re.sunil)liii^^' that 

 ami other alhecl species, such us A. Mcrtcimitna, A. l\itluniana, 

 mid more distantly A. Hoohcriana, is, on minute examination, 

 unquestionably a distinct species, althouf^h it is an undoubted fact 

 that quantities of the A. Albniiana have been distril)uted under 

 the synonym of A. Mcrtcnsinna, and also, but less generally, 

 under that of A. hdcrophylla. 



Such confusions of names are often very misleading, and it 

 would be a matter of great satisfaction to botanists if a thorough 

 revisal of the whole catalogue of the more recently introduced 

 coniferfe, and a general consensus of agreement were arrived at, 

 upon only one distinguishing name in each ease. No dou])t many 

 botanists suppose that A. Alhniimm is identical in every par- 

 ticidar with A. Mcrtensiaua . This is, howevei-, erroneous, and 

 although ditfering from so verv eminent an authoritv in matters 

 coniferous as Gordon, we prefer agreeing with the late Mr 

 Andrew Murray in considering the two pines distinct ; and the 

 reasons for the cause of the confusion may be explained when 

 the history of the introduction of the Albcriiaiut is referred to. 



The A. Albertiana seeds were first sent home to this country 

 by Jeffrey in his first Oregon Expediti(jn of 1850. Some of the 

 earliest cones were sown by the late lamented Mr Patton at The 

 (Jairnies, in Perthshire, iuf 1851, and to tliese and their ])rogress 

 reference will be again made in this pa])er. defi'rey, in describ- 

 ing this Californian liendock spruce, in transmitting it home, 

 called it inadvertently A. taxifolia ; but this was at once seen 

 to be a misnomer, and the pine proving to be a distinct species, 

 received the name of Albertiana in deference to the late Prince 

 Consort. A. Mertensiana, about the same time, arrived from the 

 island of Sitka ; and, as a settlement of the difference, botanists 

 generally agreed that, while Ijoth are hendock spruces, as is also 

 the Canadian and older species, the three might be held as 

 distinct representatives of the species in tlieir respective countries 

 and latitudes. In 1861, on the fresh receipt of seeds in Britain, 

 it would appear that the A. Albertiana was again subjected to 

 examination, and these were accordingly (listri])uted under the 

 name of Pongard's A. Mertenmana of Sitka, probably on Gordon's 

 authority for identification, although they were undoul)tedly 

 identical with, and from the very same Californian habitats, and, 

 for aught that is known, probably from the very same trees as 

 the original and first introduction of Jeii'rey ten years previously. 

 Hence the confusion. While A. Canadensis is quite different in 

 habit, being much more bushv and shrubbv in its foliage, and 

 easilv distinguishable, A. Albertiana and A. Mertensiana are 

 more closely allied in appearance, but dilfei' on minute examina- 

 tion in the scales of their cones, which vary in form, and also 

 in the pulvini, — those on Albertiana being small and widely 



