264 TKE JOURNAI OF BOTASTY 



of tin' original species name. He did not appreciate that a name is a 

 mere label which, if regarded as descriptive, may he misleading 01 

 even ridiculous — as Professor Flahault happily expressed it at Vienna 

 in 190-"> — " we have a daughter and we name her Blanche ; she grows 

 up and has black hair but we do not change her name ! " 



In his synopsis of Datura, Dr. Safford describes several new 

 species and suggests some new combinations in the section Brug- 

 mansia. It wili be intei'esting to know just where he places Milano's 

 names ; provided that the descriptions are adequate. I have been 

 unable to trace "Datura bicolor Mor." (Persoon has Brugmansia 

 bicolor); Milano's description suggests the plant named by Safford 

 D. versicolor; if this is correct, mutahilis might have to take prece- 

 dence as the trivial. 



SHORT NOTES. 



Rtjscus aculeattts L. During the last twelve years I have had 

 a plant of the Butcher's Broom under observation, as it was fre- 

 quently examined and shoots cut off for class- work on cladodes. 

 The plant is a pistillate one; no staminate flowers have been noticed 

 and fruit has not been produced till this year, when a single berry 

 was observed. There are no staminate plants in the neighbourhood*; 

 in fact, the specimen examined is the only one known in the near 

 vicinity. A probable theory to account for the production of this 

 single berry is that stamens had been formed on the pistillate plant. 

 Near_ Dartmouth the pistillate plants are often full of berries, but 

 staminate plants are always present when this abundance of fruit has 

 been noted. The rarity of fruit on pistillate plants when staminate 

 ones are absent shows that the plant is normally dioecious, and that 

 its subdiuecious character is very slight, — W. Watson. 



[See p. 85 and Mr. Linton's note on the plant in this Journal 

 for 1916, p. 66.— Ed. Journ. Bot.] 



Impatiexs glandulifera Royle. Since writing my note on 

 the white-flowered form of the plant (Journ. Bot, 1920, 201), I find 

 that it was figured and described by Lindley (Bot. Reg. xxvii. t. 20; 

 1841) as I. Candida, which is placed by J. JD. Hooker (Fl. Brit. lnd. 

 i. 409; 1872) under I.Boylei Walp. (= glandulifera Royle) as 

 var. Candida. For the first time since I have grown it, some speci- 

 mens have this year departed from the pure white blossoms which have 

 hitherto characterised the plant. In these the flowers are pale lilac; 

 closely resembling those of the figure in Bot. Mag. (1899) 7647, there 

 described by J. D. Hooker as I. Boylei var. pall id '{flora (he writes 

 of the flowers as " pale rose "). The flowers however are destitute of 

 the red speckles which are mentioned in Lindlev's description and 

 shown in thefigures cited. Whether the plant be'entitled to varietal 

 rank is, I think, very doubtful ; in any case the name Candida must 

 replace alba, proposed by me in the note referred to above. I may 

 add that the drought this year has affected my plants very unfavour- 

 ably ; they are comparatively short and generally unhealthy, and are 

 perfecting little seed. A similar variation in colour is observable in 



