12G THE JOURNAL OF BOTANT 



leaf is missing, is slender, about 30 cm. high. Here specimen and 

 description are in full agreement. From this point of view, Webster 

 and Linton were in error in assuming that the Fuclisii type was true 

 maculata, and if their names stand at all, it can only be as varieties 

 of the small-lobed type ; they have really redescribed the original 

 form. Accordingly we should expect to find that O. ericetorum is 

 common in Northern Europe ; but Col. Grodfery in writing and con- 

 versation has frequently insisted that this is not found on the 

 Continent at all, and that the continental form that comes nearest to 

 it is the subsp. elocles. As to this we have ourselves no means of 

 judging; the description of elodes in Camus does not help much. 

 It states that the plant is slender, with leaves unspotted or only 

 faintly spotted, flowers pure white or tinged with very pale rose, 

 usually unspotted or with few spots, and, as the name suggests, a 

 marsh plant. The lip may be near the ericetorum type, bnt very few 

 British plants would fall within such a description. 



Yet when we start from another side of the question, and consider 

 the continental usage, it appears that the Fuclisii type has been 

 generally accepted as true maculata; when however we come to 

 exact descriptions we do not find it easy to locate the British Fucksii 

 form. The var. trilobata of Brebisson and var. JSIeyeri of Reichen- 

 bach, which Rouy regards as synonyms, refer to a plant which, 

 though markedly trilobed, is described as slender, with slender spurs 

 and small flowers — a description which would not cover by any means 

 all of the British forms; nor does the figure in Reich. Icones, 51(5, 

 suggest the British species at all closely. Klinge (Act. Hort. Petrop. 

 xvii. 192; 1899) speaks of two forms of O. maculata : in one the lip 

 is cuneate and broadest towards the tip, the mid-lobe longer and the 

 spur smaller and slender, whilst in the other the side-lobes are more 

 rounded and the centre-lobe small, not exceeding the side-lobes, 

 and the spur stouter and longer. Here we have the larger and smaller 

 centre-lobe, but the other points do not agree with British forms ; in 

 our trilobed forms the side-lobes are by no means always, or even 

 usually, cuneate, and the spur is not more slender, but the other way. 

 Camus (Journ. de Bot. 1894, 49) distinguishes three races of 

 O. maculata var. a, trilobata, with slender spike, at first conical, 

 flowers small, lip with three deep lobes, the centre-lobe much exceed- 

 ing the side-lobes, the lower leaves oval-suborbicular. It is the form 

 of dry hill-sides. This must be practically the same as Druce's 

 Fuchsii, only that with us it may grow in very damp ground. In 

 var. ft the spike is more cylindrical, flowers rather large, lip with three 

 not deep lobes, lower leaves acuminate. It is found in meadows. In 

 var. y, palustris, the spike as in var. ft, the flowers are rather large, 

 usually bright rose, with acuminate mid-lobes, and large undulate- 

 crenulate side-lobes, the lower leaves acuminate. It grows in peaty 

 marshes. Here it looks as if var. ft might correspond to our 

 ericetorum. 



Other descriptions as cited by Druce are rather vague, and supply 

 at least a fair justification for giving a new name to our very distinct 

 British form. Yet, however baffling some of the descriptions may be, 

 we have seen plates {e.g. that of O. maculata in Correvon's Allium 



