1869.J LAWSON — ON MYOSOTIS. 399 



ccespUosa, and (with yet more reason) the intermediate var. 

 luxa (if. laxa Lehm.) Wet phices common, especially north- 

 ward." In the fifth edition (1868) M. palustris is still kept in 

 the broad-faced type, but its distribution is thus noted : — 

 " Naturalized from Europe, near Boston, escaping from gardens." 

 This is followed by var. laxa, (M. laxa Lehm.,) briefly described 

 and ranged thus: — "Wet places, northward." In short, Prof. 

 Gray is of opinion that the normal 31. palustris is a European 

 plant, but that we have a variety of it here (^M. laxa) which is 

 indigenous. 



In Wood's " Class Book or Flora of the United States and 

 Canada" (1867) the true M. palustris is not indicated, but 

 merely the so-called M. palustris var. laxa, as perennial and 

 indigenous, with the synonym M. ccespitosa Schultz. 



Professor Torrey, in the " Flora of New York State," describes 

 M. palustris Roth, adding the remark : — '' Our plant difl'ers from 

 the European in its smaller flowers. It seems to be the var. 

 micrantha of Lehmann." 



In Chapman's " Flora of the Southern United States" (1862) 

 the name 31. palustris does not occur at all, but 3£. laxa Lehm. 

 is described as an annual. 



In the " Flora Canadienne " of the Abbe Provancher (1868) 

 there is but one plant described under " 3Iyosotis des marais,'' to 

 which the names M. palustris Hook, 3f. ccespitosa Schultz, and 

 3f. lingulata Lech., are all made to apply equally. 



In Dr Hooker's " Outlines of the Distribution of Arctic 

 Plants" (Linn. Trans, xxiii., pp. 251—348) 3f, palustris is 

 given in his columns for Arctic Europe, North Europe and Asia, 

 and North-East America, while if. ccespitosa is confined to 

 Europe and Asia. 



These citations show an obvious tendency to confusion in the 

 use of names, which arises partly from difference of opinion and 

 partly from a mistake respecting the plants. The plant, which is 

 naturalized from Europe in the United States, is undoubtedly the 

 normal form of if pxlustris ; it appears to be more abundant in 

 the British Provinces, and there is the possibility of its being 

 indigenous with us. 



The plant described by American authors as indigenous, and 

 as a variety of 31. palustris, does not belong to M. palustris at 

 all, but is a form of 3f. ca-spitosa, a species that has long been 

 well known, and was found, in the time of Sir James E. Smith, 



