188G.] THE GIANT ARBOR-VITyE. 741 



ill the following notes nothing will be adduced that we are not well 



prepared to substantiate, few English estates being able to boast 

 of possessing either larger individual specimens or a greater number 

 than may be seen at Tenrliyn. 



Perhaps no tree has been, and indeed is at present, surrounded 

 by so much confusion of nomenclature as the subject of this paper, 

 for in this country alone it has been sent out under no less than 

 four distinct specific names, and indeed the confusion is by no means 

 diminishing, but rather becoming worse confounded. Even as 

 regards tlie honour and date of introduction, arboriculturists are 

 still at " loggerheads," Veitch in their Manual of Conifera stating 

 that it was introduced to this country by them, through their 

 collector, William Lobb, in 1853, — a statement, however, that justly 

 receives but little credence from our Edinburgh friends ; for in the 

 Transactions and Proceedings of the Botaniecd Society of Edinhurf/h, 

 1873, Mr. James M'Nab, than whom few knew better, tells us that 

 " A Tlivia, raised from seed, and proved to be the true Tliuia 

 (jigantea (Yellow Cypress), is another acquisition first sent by Jeffrey. 

 At first the seedlings resembled Thiiia occidental is, and little atten- 

 tion for a time was paid to them." This statement, which was 

 portion of a rather lengthy paper written by Mr. M'Xab for the sole 

 purpose of giving the name of Jeffrey credit for work that the man 

 Jeffrey had actually performed, is to some extent substantiated, 

 certainly rendered all the more probable, as specimens taken from 

 three of the veiy trees raised from seed sent by Jeffrey to the 

 Oregon Association of Edinburgh, and now growing in the Botanic 

 Gardens there, were, less than two years ago, recognised by some of 

 the Kew authorities as " forms of the true Tkuia gigantca ; " the 

 \wov(\. forms in this particular sense meaning a great deal to those 

 who know how variable seedlings of T. gigantea, tlie offspring of 

 even one tree, Tisually appear. It is also well to bear in mind that 

 both T. gigantra and the nearly allied T. 2-)licata are growing side 

 by side in their native wilds, which, coupled witli the fact of at 

 least two more of Jeffrey's seedlings being recognised by the above- 

 mentioned authorities as T. iMcata, also goes far in substantiating 

 Mr. M'Nab's remarks. When sending the above specimens to Kew 

 for examination, the Curator of the Edinburgh Botanic Gardens 

 seems to have stated that they w ere taken from plants " raised from 

 seeds sent to Edinburgh by Jeffrey in 1851." This is well known 

 to be correct, which with the plants' recognition as forms of the 

 true T. gigantea and by so high an authority gives Jeffrey's chaim at 

 least two years' priority of right over that of Lobb. 



Now as regards the confusion of nomenclature (but it may be 

 well here to point out that the subject of this article has also been 



3 B 



