366 



From the very great difference in appearance of the extreme 

 forms of this plant, I had about come to the conclusion that P. 

 simplex, the large, ascending or erect condition, was actually 

 specifically distinct from the smaller one with prostrate branches. 

 But a study of the plant during the past spring in the vicinity of 

 New York has convinced me that simplex cannot be separated 

 even as a variety, for I found them growing from the same clump. 

 In shaded woodlands the simplex condition prevails, while the 

 other prefers open places, and reaches its extreme degree of de- 

 pression (var. pumilio, T. and G.) in very dry, sterile soil. There 

 is, therefore, no more reason for maintaining varieties in it than 

 in the case of Erigeron Canadense, which varies from an inch in 

 height to ten feet or more. The type of P. Catiadense, L is pre- 

 served in the Linnaean Herbarium, and that of P. simplex, Michx. 

 in the herbarium of Michaux at Paris, and so far as they go, are 

 correctly understood. 



RUBUS MiLLSPAUGHI, n. sp. 



Ascending, wand-like, entirely unarmed or with a very few, 

 weak prickles above, glabrous throughout or the younger shoots 

 scurfy-pubescent. Stems 1)^-4 meters long; leaves long-peti- 

 oled, pedately five-foliolate or some of those on the twigs three- 

 foliolate; leaflets thin, oval, glabrous on both sides, long-acumi- 

 nate at the apex, mostly rounded at the base, 12-15 cm. long, 

 about 5 cm. wide, sharply but not deeply serrate ; stalk of the 

 terminal leaflet 7-10 cm. long; inflorescence loosely racemose; 

 bracts linear-lanceolate; pedicels slender, ascending; sepals 

 lanceolate, acuminate; fruit black, about 10 mm. long. 



In rich woods, Point Mt., West Virginia, at 3,500 ft. altitude 

 (C. F. Millspaugh). Nearest to R. villosus, but evidently a dis- 

 tinct species Curiously enough there is a leaf of this plant glued 

 down on the sheet ot R. Camidensis, L. in Herb. Linn., and it 

 appears to have been included in his description of that species — 

 the specimens furnished by Kalm. 



Agrij/iouia striata, M.\chx. Fl. Bor. Am. i. 287 (1803). 

 A. Eupatoria of most American authors, not of L. 

 A. Eupatoria, v^x. parvijlora, Hook. i. 196 (1832). 



The American plant has certainly been erroneously referred 

 to the European^. Eupatoria, which is very distinct from it, by 

 its larger flowers and fruit, denser inflorescence, much greater 



