OBSEEVATIONS ON WILLOWS. 307 



minata sent to Ine by Professor Koch is different to the ' English Bo- 

 tany' plant. Mr. Ward: "No. 30 the same as 31, but not so well 

 defined as the true S. holoserlcea, Hook., which I take to be 31. It 

 is nothing like our S. acuminata." 



32,33. "Optirae S. SmitJiiana. Saltern herbarii Smith." Ohs. 

 This may be S. Smithiana, Willd. There is a specimen in Smith's 

 herbarium, marked " 1. Osier ground at Bury," which appears to be 

 S. Smitfiiana, Eng. Bot., but the catkins are short, and thicker than 

 my Essex specimens. 



34. " Ni fallor melius S. cinerece referenda." {Note by Mr. H. G. 

 Watson : " Against another specimen glued on the same sheet, and 

 distributed by Mr. James Ward as S. rugosa, Dr. A. wrote, ' S. acumi- 

 nata, Sm.' I see the same thing in Mr. Ward's rugosa, as No. 34, 

 except that the leaves are longer and more pointed."] Obs. Dr. A. 

 may not have had the true specimen before him. Mr. Ward: "This 

 appears to be the SmitJiiana, Willd., from the stipules, which are more 

 distinctly shown than in any other of the forms. This plant does not 

 at all belong to the cinerea group." 



35. "Proxima Salici holoserlcea, Willd." Obs. This is the S.fer- 

 ruginea of ' English Botany,' but not of G. Anderson, which I see, from 

 the ' Salictum Woburnense,' is altogether different. Mr. Ward : 

 " Must be S. ferruginea, Eng. Bot." 



36. " Valde dubia forma. Multa cum Salice Pontcderana habet com- 

 munia ; foliorum forma iis S. holosericecd, Willd., siinilis. Nil certe 

 de hac enuntiare audeo." Obs. I have always felt uncertain regarding 

 this form, which perhaps is nearest to S. SmitJiiana, Willd. Mr. 

 Ward : " I think S. SmitJiiana, Willd." 



37. " Certissime S. dasgclados, Wimmer (Flora Od. Bot. Zeit. 

 1849), a S. acuminata, Sm. {^S. lanceolata, Fr., et S. Seringiana, Gaud. 

 {8. longifolia, Ser. ; S. canescem, Willd.) optime distincta !" Obs. 

 We have here some valuable synonyms on Dr. Andersson's excellent 

 authority, but I must maintain that this is the acuminata, Sm. Eng. 

 Bot. I have cultivated it for many years, and Mr. Borrer long ago 

 confirmed the name. The acuminata. Sin., does not appear to be 

 known to Continental botanists, and there is some confusion among 

 Smith's own specimens. One, marked " B. biiddleifolia," is acumi- 

 nata, Sm. The specimens 1 and 2, from ]\Ir. Crowe's garden, are the 

 true plant; but other specimens — 1, from Tuck's Wood, and 2, from 



z 2 



