BOTANICAL GAZETTE. 47 



(positive or negative) and any other force — epinasty, hyponasty, 

 positive or negative heliotropism, — it is clear that, geotropism bein^ 

 destroyed by the rotation, the balance cannot be maintained. 11 The 

 experiments, varied in many ways, and with arrangements to elim- 

 inate epinastic and hyponastic tendencies, plainly bring out the 

 conclusion "that the power which leaves have of placing them- 

 selves at right-angles to the incident light is due to a specialized 

 sensitiveness to light, which is able to regulate or govern the action 

 of other external forces, such as gravitation, or of internal forces, 

 s uch as epinasty. 11 — A. G. in Am. Jour. Sci. 



Ranunculus. — I invite attention, thh season, to the various 

 forms which in this country pass under the name of Ranunculus 

 repens, L. I suspect that the European species, one which merits 

 the specific name, is not indigenous to the United States, but is oc- 

 casionally met with as a naturalized plant. The ''third form 11 with 

 "spotted leaves, 11 mentioned in Mr. Ward's new Flora of Washing- 

 ton, would seem to be of this species. Does the low and early-flow- 

 ering form of our common species make runners later in the season ? 

 And do the larger forms of low ground freely produce prostrate 

 shoots and do these take roots? 11 — A. Gray. 



Botanizing on Comanche's Peak, Texas.— This high bluff 

 is one of the most remarkable features of Central Texas. Situated 

 six miles south of Granbury, it towers above the beautiful valley of 

 the Brazos like an immense citadel, its height above the valley be- 

 ing estimated at six hundred feet. It is seen from long distances in 

 every direction and from its top a most extensive view is obtained. 

 Like an isolated sentinel, it seems to be the only remnant of a vast- 

 plateau that has been washed away. Belonging to the Cretaceous 

 Period, its rocks full of interesting marine fossils have characterized 

 one group of that period, bearing the name of Comanche's Peak 

 Group. 



In September, 1881, my wife and I visited the peak on a botan- 

 izing expedition, but the season was not favorable except for a few 

 grasses which I will mention below. The Euphorbia Fendleri and 

 Paronychia Jamesii were the only interesting plants in bloom. On 

 the rocks which had fallen from the top of the peak we noticed some 

 Solidago neinoralis in bud, but most of the species were detected 

 by means of leaves, or dried stems bearing seeds; such as Arenaria 

 Michauxii, Erythrcea Texensis, E. Beyrichii, and Sabbatia campes- 

 tris. We looked eagerly for ferns, but only two were obtained. 

 PeUcea atropurpurea and Nothokena dealbata. of the latter only a 

 small specimen. The pretty Cereus pectinatns is also growing 

 there, being, I think, one of its more northeastern stations. 



The grasses were; 1, a Boutehua much resembling ol/'yostac1iy<i 

 but with culms 2 or 3 feet high and that in poor rocky soil; 2, 

 Leptostachya dubia; 3, Tricuspis (probably mutica of Torrey); 4, 



