BOTANICAL GAZETTE. 265 



Var. coriacea is F. piMaeutfoIia, var. coriacea, Gray. This is certainly go- 

 ing too far altogether. No doubt there is a distinct species, for which the 

 name of F. vehUina, Torr., is the oldest, and that of F. coriacea, Watson, the 

 more appropriate. 



F. pubescens, Lam., well described, and it appears that F. expansa, Willd. 

 Berl. Baum. (1811) belongs to it. But Wenzig adds: 



Var. Berlandieriana, on jF. Berlandieriana, DC. And in a foot note : 

 "F. Berlandieriana DC. samaris apteris est Fr. pubescentis Lam. varietas, non 

 Fr. viridis var. ut cl. Gray vult." This without seeing Berlandier's specimens. 

 We have before us, from' the latter's herbarium, counterparts of the specimens 

 sent to Geneva. The form from Austin, with foliage only, has a developing leaf, 

 which is perfectly glabrous, as are the adult leaves and branehlets. The fruit 

 bearing specimens, from the Nueces, are equally glabrous, with traces of the barb- 

 ellation along the midrib, especially in the axils of the veins, which is common 

 in our F. viridis, of which we take it to be a mere variety. Wenzig has Mex- 

 ican specimens of Sehaffner's collection, as we have also, but not under the- 

 same number. These Ashes from San Luis Potosi, also Monterey, are rather 

 peculiar, but we judge are of this species. 



Var. Lindheimeri, on Lindheimer's No. 653, 1847. We have it also, coll. 

 1848, with forming fruit. Clearly same as the above. 



F. viridis, A. Gray. This, as just stated, is placed in the " Periptene " di- 

 vision, next to F. platyearpa, where it does not at all belong. F. viridis, Michx. f. 

 is referred as synonym to F. Americana, on the strength of Michaux's citation 

 of F.juglandifolia, Lam., and on his description and figure of the fruit. And it 

 seems from another note, that Koch found an original specimen in herb. Jus- 

 sieu, which was F. platyearpa, and also in other herbaria both F. Amencwna and 

 F. pubescens under this name. To all which it is to be said : first, that the foli- 

 age of Michaux's plate can not belong to F. platyearpa, which grows only south 

 of the range in which Michaux observed his Green Ash, while the figure of 

 the fruit is widely different. Michaux's description of the tree and its foliage 

 exactly applies to the Green Ash. He says it is Muhlenberg's F. concolor, and 

 he saw it at the latter's stations on the Susquehanna. He should have adopted 

 this name, and we should have been justified in doing so, perhaps, though only 

 a catalogue name. The perplexities of the case we long ago cleared up, as we 

 still believe, by the hypothesis that in Michaux's Sylva, the fruit of F. Ameri- 

 cana and F. viridis are mismatched on the plate, and consequently the author 

 described the fruit of the Green Ash from the plate or from the specimens 

 figured on the plate. 



So, unless we fall back on the excellent name of F. concolor, Muhl., we must 

 still, for the Green Ash, write F. viridis, Michx. f. (in part), Gray, Man., etc. 

 Yet we may be driven to another alternative, and do with the whole of the 

 Green Ash what Wenzig has done with a part of it, that is, reduce it to a vari- 

 ety of F. pubescens. Undoubtedly the two appear to run together. 



Of the true Peripteroz, viz. F. platycarpa, F. quadrangulata, F. ano- 

 mala, and F. Oregona, there is nothing here to remark. Asa Gray. 



A Revision of the genus Clematis of the United States, by Joseph F. James. 

 From the Jour. Cin. Soc. Nat. Hist. 6, July, 1883. 



This is a paper read by title before the American Association of 1882. 

 The author has "collected the descriptions of all the species of the United 

 States," and has given their geographical range and synonymy. Of course 

 there will p.lways be a difference of opinion as to whether certain forms should 

 rank as species or varieties. For instance, G Scotiii, Porter, is probably only a 

 form of C. Douglasii with broader leaflets; while the author will hardly be fol- 

 lowed in reducing C. Fremontii, Watson, to a variety of C. ochroleuca, Ait., and 

 the same might be said by some of G. coccinea, Engelm, and 0. Pitcheri, T. & G., 

 as varieties of C. Vioma. It is hardly correct to say that "the genus Clematis 



9 



