112 CUETIS'S 'FLORA LONDINENSTS.' 



altogether. Thongli it has been supposed to be a rather uncommon 

 form in Britain, compared with the type, its distribution is already 

 known to be considerable, and I have seen specimens from the 

 following counties or vice-covxnties : — ^3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 21, 26, 30, 32, 

 85, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 42, 51, 53, 57, 72, 80, 88, 89. I have also 

 seen specimens from Teesdale (in Hb. R. P. Murray) and from 

 Ingleton (in Hb. Borrer), but in neither case was the county 

 determinable. 



Of the distribution of the three forms in Ireland I have scarcely 

 any particulars as yet. 



My notes of the altitude at which these forms are found are 

 very imperfect. A. vulgaris is stated by Mr. P. Ewing, in the 

 Trans. Nat. Hist. Soc. of Glasgow, to occur from sea-level to 

 2000 ft. ; I have it from 2600 ft., and suspect it goes higher. 

 Sir J. D. Hooker (StudenVs Flora) gives 3600 ft. as the greatest 

 altitude for the aggi'egate ; possibly A. alpestris Schmidt is the one 

 that reaches this elevation, but it also descends to such lower levels 

 as "Meadows, Dtilmuir, Dumbartonshire, Mr, L. Watt," and to 

 meadows by Annan Water, a little above Moffat ; the latter spot 

 being under 400 ft. A.fiJicauJis Mr. P. Ewing speaks of, under the 

 name of A. inontana Willd. {I.e.), as occurring "from the sea- 

 shore up to a high elevation on our mountains " ; I have seen it at 

 about 2000 ft. or a trifle higher in Mid-Perth, on the slopes of 

 Craig Magrianich, and nearly at the same elevation on White 

 Coomb, Dumfriesshire, but have traced Id no higher. 



I take the opportunity of acknowledging the great obligation we 

 are under to M. Buser for clearing up the long outstanding un- 

 certainty that hung about the British forms of A. vulgaris L. 



BIBLIOGEAPHICAL NOTES. 

 IX. — CuRTis's 'Flora Londinensis.' 



In this Journal for 1881, p. 309, there is an interesting summary 

 of the result of Mr. R. A. Pryor's investigations made with a view 

 to discover the order in which the plates of this great work were 

 originally issued, but it leaves us with a desire for further in- 

 formation. Acting upon the hints contained in this summary, 

 I have endeavoured to pursue the inquiry, but without much 

 success. The following particulars may, however, be worth 

 recording. 



The Flora, as is well known, contains six fasciculi, sometimes 

 bound in two volumes, but often in three. Each fasciculus contains 

 seventy-two plates, and these were originally issued in parts or 

 "Nos.," as they were called, each No. containing six plates, 

 making a total of 432 plates ; but neither the parts nor the plates 

 were dated, nor were the plates numbered until we reach 101 

 (^Agaricus ovatus). 



As the plates were subsequently bound up and indexed in the 



