siroirc xoTEs 337 



tion, has not yd heen issued. On the outbreak of war, I sent the 

 MS. to Mr. Seton in New York, where he is arranging for its publi- 

 cation. With this volume, Hutchins must have brought some small 

 collections of specimens, including the })lants in question ; for there 

 is, in the Fish Galleries at the Museum, at least one fish (the type- 

 specimen of some well-known species, if I recollect rightlv) ; and, in 

 the Bird Galleries, there are, I believe, several birds of his collecting. 

 Doubtless before Hutchins returned to Hudson Bay he either sold 

 or presented these collections to Banks. In regard to the plants : it 

 would probably be found, if one referred to Hutchin's MS., that all, 

 or most of them, are described in the botanical section thereof. In 

 the editing of this, I was assisted by the late Prof. John Macoun, of 

 Ottawa, who identified, so far as was possible, the species mentioned 

 by Hutchins ; the latter was not in any sense a scientific (scarcely 

 even a popular) botanist. — Milleu CmasTY. 



Orchis elodes Grisebach. After the appearance of Col. God- 

 fery's article (Journ. Bot. 191^1, p. 305), we thought the identity of 

 O. elodes with O. ericefonun Linton, might be finallv tested, if we 

 could procure living specimens from Bourtanger Moor, on the Ems, 

 whence Grisebach's specimens were taken. This attempt failed, as 

 M. Sipkes, of Haarlem, who visited the moor in two separate seasons, 

 tells us that it was drained during the war, and the orchids have 

 disappeared. Dr. Schlechter, of Berlin, sent some dried specimens of 

 O. elodes, which might pass as 0. ericetorum ; but the most con- 

 clusive evidence was a vcrj^ clear photograph of several specimens, 

 which M. Sipkes sent from Holland, that are certainly identical 

 with the British O. ericetorum. We thought this brief note mi"-ht 

 be useful, though we do not wish to pronounce on the question of 

 nomenclature. We note that Mr. A. J. Wilmott, in the Appendix 

 to his addition of Babington's Manual, divides British O. maculata 

 into (a) 0. ericetorum Linton, and (b) O. Fuchsii Druce, verv 

 much as we did in this Journal for May 1921 (pp. 121-''S) — 

 T. & T. A. Stepiiexsox. 



Comma betweex Name and Authoeitt (p. 2G1). I was sur- 

 prised to read Dr. Barnhart's remark that, as far as he was awai-e, 

 the comma in this place had never been used outside the Biitish 

 Empire, except by Asa Gray and those who followed his example. 

 Unfortunately I possess only a very small botanical library at hand 

 but I notice the comma used in two books by authors, "^neither of 

 whom can be accused of British provinciality — Wallroth's Annus 

 Botanicus and Agardh's Si/stema Algarum. From these two examples, 

 which I happen to possess, I cannot help thinking there must be 

 many more. Those of us who advocate the use of the comma may 

 I think fairly claim the many authors who used a full stop or 

 enclosed the authority in brackets as supporters of the view that 

 there should be something to separate the name from the authority, to 

 show that tlie latter is no part of the name. — James Geoyes. 



Toltpella HisPAXiCA Nordst. IN Fraxce. When at Hyeres in 

 May last I found this species, in small quantity, in a shallow muddy 

 ditch in the Presqu' He de Giens. In spite of the cloudy water and 



