28 THE JOURNAL OF BOTANY 



subject, although it would be interesting to find still older proofs. 

 If, however, box-wood was sold in 1608 for £50, it is clear that the 

 woods must have been in existence in 1500, at which time there can 

 hardly have been intentional planting of woods in England [?] . 



"It is much to be desired that either you or some younger 

 London botanist should write a paper on the woods of Dorking, with 

 a map showing the extent and distribution of the existing tracts of 

 box. For one does not know how far these stretch westwards. 

 It would be a subject of the greatest interest in plant geography, 

 and one which can only be worked out by an Englishman who can 

 go over the ground on foot and talk to the various land-owners. 

 The general distribution of the plant, which in Europe is, broadly 

 speaking, Mediterranean, should be noticed. I no longer doubt 

 that Biixus belongs to the pal^otropical forms, which have outlived 

 the ice age, and have once more penetrated to the north-west — 

 as Sticta aurata to Brittany ; HymenophyUum tunhridgense, Isoetes 

 Hystrix to Guernsey ; Lagurus ovata, Erica vagans, &c. Of these 

 the greater part of the Mediterranean things are of course not 

 palaeotropical, but Sticta aurata and Hymenophijllum may be 

 reckoned in the category. Such a work would be therefore well 

 worth doing ; and I must say I am surprised that no one, knowing 

 the wonderful woods of Box Hill and their flora, which must of 

 course be taken into account, should have taken up the subject. 

 It is evident that on your side of the Channel you hardly realize 

 the botanical marvels you possess in your woods." 



Looking further quite casually into Manning and Bray's History, 

 I could not lielp being struck by the occurrence of old personal 

 names, such as Peter de Boxstead (p. 90), Nicholas Box well (p. 341), 

 William Box (vol. ii. p. 584), and at vol. ii. p. 656, a " Mr. Boxall 

 sold 500 Yews at three guineas each." These names are strictly 

 local, and Boxley in Kent and Boxgrave in Sussex occur to me as 

 place names, as I write. 



I find in Messrs. Hanbury and Marshall's Flora of Kent, p. 310, 

 under Buxus — 



"Boxley — Ray in Camden 262. Mr. Reeves doubted its being 

 truly indigenous here ; but the fact of the village being apparently 

 named after it is a strong argument in favour of its genuine wild- 

 ness. It seems to have been more plentiful there formerly than at 

 the present time 



First Record 1695. "Buxus I find in the notes of my learned 

 friend Mr. John Aubrey that at Boxley (in Kent) there be woods of 

 them. — Ray I. c." 



In Mr. Druce's Flora of Berkshire, p. 439, I find the following 

 note under Buxus : — 



" The last remains of Boxgrove in Sulham parish near Reading, 

 whence the country probably took its name, were grubbed up about 

 forty years ago." — Gough's Camden, 155, 1789. 



" Prof. C. C. Babington, Jan. 28, 1853, sent a note to the 

 Phytologist Club as follows : — * Mr. Watson, in his Cyhele, ii. 

 366, appears very much inclined to consider the Box-tree as not 

 originally a native of England. The following extract from the 



