[ 491 ] 



XXXIII. Extracts from the Minute-Book of the Linnkan SociBTV of 



London. 

 J841. 

 March 16. READ a "Letter from Joseph Woods, Esq., F.L.S.. to Mr. Richard 

 Kippist, on Crepis biennis and Barkhausia taramcifolia." 



Mr. Woods is of opinion that the plant described by Sir James 

 Smith in the ' English Flora' and 'English Botany,' by Sir AN J 

 Hooker in the < British Flora,' by Mr. Babington in the Sodetjfa 

 1 Transactions,' vol. xvii. p. 456, and by Mr. Mackuy in his ' [rish 

 Flora,' as Crepis biennis, is in reality Barkhausia fanuaafnliu, distin- 

 guished especially by the long beak of its achenia, while those of I 

 pis biennis are, in the words of Gaudin, " neutiquam attenuata.' - The 

 stem of Crepis biennis is also less branched and more leafy than that 

 of Barkhausia taramcifolia, the latter rarely producing a leaf except 

 where there is a branch. Mr. Woods adds, that it is almost certain 

 that we have the two species in England, though the difference 

 not been noticed. Crepis biennis grows in Kent and Surrey. 



In a "Note" appended to Mr. Woods's letter, Mr. Kippist Itattt 

 that the authentic Linnean specimens of Crepis biennis from Scania, 

 although too young to have ripe seeds, appear to confirm Mr. H oodi I 

 idea, the pappus being quite sessile even in those most advance, am 

 the stem moderately branched in the upper part, and very leafy be- 

 low. The two specimens in the Smithian herbarium, one from Mr. 

 CroweVgarden and the other from M, Rose's berbanum. have he 

 stem much branched, and the pappus apparently sessde, but the ache- 



nia are immature. 



a are nmmiuic. 



The a.1, devdoped specimen in Mr. Wine, S ^" '>/ 



art f„rd in Kent, and has the pappus very deeded* a • 



Da 

 stem in 



a in n.em, am '., ~„,\ ( ,,,lv ■ few Mattered 



stem mneh branched in the upper part, and only a 

 ,eaves in the lower, a branch bein, produced fro-nt a .. 

 cauline leaf with the exception of one or two of the lowcnno*.. 



