A NEW URITTSir FLOWERITSTG PLANT 19 



CalUtrichc. On the bare iruid it was semi-prostrate. Furtlier from 

 the water among the l^olyifunum it was more erect and two or three 

 inches high. 



There does not appear to be any reason why this phmt should not 

 be a true native, as it is in grounds that are seldom visited, and in 

 many seasons it is probably covered by the water, in the same way as 

 the species of Elattne and Subidaria. 



ELISIA, A BOTANICAL KOMANCE. 

 Br W. E. Saffoud, Ph.D. 



In the number of this Journal for last September (pp. 261-204) 

 there appeared an article by Dr. A. B. llendle under the heading 

 '' Elisia — an Overlooked Genus-Name." In this paper Dr. Uendle 

 calls attention to a " Description of a New Genus of the Family Sola- 

 nacese, with Kemarks on its Characters and Properties," published in 

 March, 1847, in vol. iii. of the New Orleans Medical and Sargical 

 Journal and signed " Milano." As the characters and properties of 

 the plants which this paper purports to describe are largely imaginary, it 

 seems fitting to call attention in this Journal to the untrustworthy 

 character of the paper itself. I am further impelled to take notice 

 of this paper on account of the serious consideration given it by 

 Dr. Kendle, who not only calls attention to the generic name EUsia 

 as orne which has hitherto escaped the attention of botanists, but 

 notes its absence from the Index Kewensis and comments upon its 

 omission from my recently published " Synopsis of the Genus 

 Datura " ( Journ, Washington Acad. Sciences, xi. 178-189 ; P)21). 



The plants included under the generic name EUsia were described 

 as very elegant shrubs with large terminal campanulate and pen- 

 dulous flowers having a longitudinally split persistent calyx. It is 

 evident that the author had in mind the group segregated by Persoon 

 in 1805 under the name Bricgmansia. It is equally evident that 

 his descriptions were drawn, not from actual specimens before him, 

 but from memory, or, more probably, from his imagination. Not 

 one of his descriptions applies to any known species, and they are so 

 vague and misleading as to be worthless. 



Dr. Kendle suggests that some of the plants described by Milano 

 may possibly be identified with species included in my recent 

 " Synopsis of the Genus Datura,'''' and that it will be interesting to 

 know just where I place Milano's names, "provided that the descrip- 

 tions are adequate." I can state without hesitation that not one 

 of the descriptions is adequate to identify any plant named by 

 Milano. " EUsia foi-mosissi ma " cannot possibly be the same species 

 as Datura arhorea L., to which the author refers it, since he states 

 that his plant has a subspinose, scabrous, four-valved pericarp, and 

 this description does not apply to the pericarp of D. arburea L., 



c 2 



