Spiranthes aestivalis var. gracilis Torr. mss. 
S. gracilis Beck 
Neottia gracilis Bigelow fl. bost. ed. 2. 
This hardly differs specifically from S. aestivalis. The 
common variety not infrequently bears a small ovate radical leaf, 
Massachusetts. 
Mr. Summerhayes has also made for me a camera- 
lucida drawing of the lip of this Massachusetts plant. 
There can be no doubt about its being typical S. gracilis. 
Indeed, when Asa Gray described SS. simplex in 1867, in 
the fifth edition of ‘*The Manual,’’ he was familiar with 
Lindley’s type of S. Becki and referred the latter species 
to S. gracilis, ‘‘at least as to the northern plant.’* This 
reference to the northern plant was made because the 
type sheet of S. Becki also carried the specimens from 
Louisiana, 
In our discussions of the components of Lindley’s 
illegitimate S. Bechii we must give close attention to 
these Louisiana collections made by Drummond in 1832 
near New Orleans, especially so since Asa Gray believed 
Drummond’s 382 to represent plants that were different 
from the northern SS. gracilis. In the Gray Herbarium 
there is a duplicate of Drummond’s collection annotated 
by Gray as S. Becki. In 1904, | accepted this Drum- 
mond plant as being referable not only to S§. Bechii 
Lindl., but as being conspecific with S. Grayi Ames (S. 
simplex Gray, not Grisebach). More recent studies have 
proved that S. Gray? is a distinct species. I am indebted 
to V.S. Summerhayes again for his great kindness in 
sending me a carefully executed camera-lucida drawing 
of the lip of Drummond’s 882 in the Lindley Herbarium. 
The Kew plant is identical with the duplicate in the Gray 
Herbarium and is clearly the same as the rather common 
southern Spiranthes recently recognized as S. gracilis 
var. floridana (Wherry) Correll. 
Fernald has annotated the Drummond plants and sev- 
[ 19 ] 
