iqiq] SCHNEIDER— AMERICAN WILLOWS 325 



Mts., Prairie, fork of San Gabriel River, moist ground in a small open flat, alt. 

 1700 m., August 23, 1917, /. M. Johnston (no. 1685 m.;St.); San Bernardino 

 County: San Bernardino, May 15, 1913, alt. 400 m., W. L. Jepson (no. 5591 m., 

 fr.; A.). Orange County: Santa Ana, spring 1902, H. D. Geis (no. 653 vel 553; 

 f., fr.; St.). San Diego County: Oneonta, April 24, 1904, H. P. Chandler (no. 

 51 16, f., fr., m.; N.; porro observanda) ; near Tia Juana, June 1895, 5. G. 

 Stokes (f.; St.; stigmata pl.m. sessilia, forma porro observanda); same place, 

 April 24, 1913,^. Eastwood (no. 2926, m.; A.) ; Tia Juana River, August 1902, 

 A. C. Herre (fr.; St.; ut no. 4632). — Northern Lower California: Causito(?), 

 May 29, 1883, C. R. Orcutt (no. 1180, fr.; M.; ut praecedens, sed amentis duplo 

 brevioribus, ovariis pedicello quam glandula pl.m. sublongiore instructis). 

 Kern County: along the Santa Fe Railroad, in low moist ground about 2 miles 

 west of Bakersfield, April 6, 1905, A. A. Heller (no. 7591, m., f.; A., C, M., St.; 

 looks somewhat like 5. exiguaX^ax. Hindsiana; "shrub 6 or 8 ft. high"). 

 Inyo County: on the old Mitchell Range, resting Spring Valley, alt. 525 m., 

 February 6, 1891, F. V. Coville and F. Funston (no. 263, St.; W.; see preceding 

 remarks). Tulare County: Tule River above Porterville. INIarch 27, 1897, 

 W. R. Dudley (no. 3578, f.; St.; pubescentia foliorum valde juvenilium fere 

 ut in var. Hindsiana, sed ovaria parce pilosa iis 5. Parishianae simillima). 



5. S. ARGOPHYLLA Nutt. N. Am. Sylva 1:71. pi. 20. 1843; 

 Rowlee in Bull. Torr. Bot. Club 27:252. 1900, pro parte; Howell, 

 Fl. Northw. Am. 2:618. 1902, pro parte; Piper and Beattie, Fl. 

 Palouse Reg. Wash. 53. 1901; Piper in Contr. U.S. Nat. Herb., 

 6:213 (Fl. Wash.). 1906, pro parte. — 5. macrostachya Piper, I.e. 214 

 non Nutt.; Henry, Fl. S. Br. Col. 96. 1915.— 5'. sessilifolia Britt. and 

 Shafer, N. Am. Trees ig6. fig. ij6. 1908, pro parte.— This species, 

 in my opinion, has been misunderstood by almost every later author, 

 owing probably to the inaccurate representation in Nuttall's 

 plate. His Latin description runs: 



Salix argophylla, foUis lineari-sublanceolatis acutis sessilibus integerrimis 

 utrinque argenteo-sericeis, stipulis obsoletis, amentis serotinis diandris, capsulis 

 villosis lanceolatis. Besides this he says: "This species becomes a small tree 

 from 12 to 15 ft. in height, as silvery and white as the Leucodendron argenteiim, 

 the branches are brown, but the twigs are hoary with villous hairs. The 

 leaves are very much crowded, soft, with whitish shining silky down, so abun- 

 dant on either side as wholly to hide the veins, and nearly the midrib; they are 

 also nearly without footstalks, entire on the margin, of a narrow linear outline 

 and sharply acute, with a distinct bristly point, i . 5 to 2 inches long, and only 

 about 3 lines wide. Stipules small and linear, seldom seen. The aments come 

 out late with the leaves, and the flower branches produce 4-7 leaves. The male 

 ament is small and narrow, with the scales lanceolate and villous, the female 



