NOTES ON BRITISH EUPHRASIAS 171 



of the corolla distinctly longer than the upper one. On seeino- 

 Mr. Salmon's original siDecimen several years ago, and those placed by 

 Mr. Hiern in Herb. Mus. Brit., I at once dissented from the identifi- 

 cation, quite failing to recognize in them the Swiss plant with which 

 1 was familiar, or to understand Wettstein's reasons for such a deter- 

 mination if he was furnished with adequate specimens. A recent 

 examination of the abundant and well-dried material contributed by 

 the Rev. E. S. Marshall to the Exchange Club has confirmed me in 

 this view, and I find that a similar opinion is held by Mr. H. Stuart 

 Thompson, who is familiar with the Alpine E. minima and remarked 

 in 1912 in Suhalpine Plants (p. 233) that Exmoor was an unlikely 

 spot for E. minima and that the British Museum specimen was not 

 very typical. I indeed fail to see any real resemblance to E. minima 

 in a well-grown individual of our British plant, excepting its small 

 yellow corollas and emarginate capsules ; and the opinion of Townsend 

 and that of the unnamed authority referred to by Miss Saunders, who 

 suggested the name ** E. curta var. glahrescens^'''' seem to be more 

 in accord with the plant's affinities than the determination of 

 Wettstein. 



If it be admitted that this Exmoor plant cannot be regarded as 

 conspecific with E. minima Jacq., as seems impossible if a standard 

 of species approaching that of Wettstein and Townsend is followed, it 

 becomes necessary to reconsider its position in the genus. It is 

 evidentl}" a well-defined form, growing over a considerable area, and is 

 remarkable as the only yellow-flowered Euphrasia found in Britain. 

 The features that differentiate it from E. minima do so almost equally 

 from E. scotica Wettst., which has lately been suggested with some 

 show of reason to be inseparable specifically from E. minima. The 

 slender stems and narrow leaves of the Exmoor plant recall E. gracilis 

 Er., but this differs widel}^ in its strict habit, with suberect, central 

 branching, and also in its differently coloured corolla and narrow, 

 subtruncate fruit. E. nemorosa Mart, and E. curta Wettst., especially 

 the latter, show somewhat similar branching, but both of them are 

 much robuster plants, with stout stems, larger and broader leaves, 

 white or bluish flowers, and narrower and less emarginate fruits. The 

 only remaining British Euphrasias -with which a comparison is 

 necessary are E. horealis Towns, and E. occidentalis Wettst. Both 

 of these are robust forms, the former with large, broad leaves, and 

 white or more rarely blue flowers in a dense spike, and the latter 

 a dwarf plant, much branched, with short stems, broader and partly 

 glandular foliage, and small, white corollas. The Exmoor plant thus 

 seems separable from all other known British forms. 



Furthermore, none of the foreign species described in Wettstein's 

 Monograph or elsewhere, so far as is traceable, can be considered 

 identical with our plant. The closest resemblance is seen in E. varia- 

 hilis Freyn (Sched. Fl. Austro-Hungaricse, iv. p. 55 (1886)), w^hich, 

 when dry, is not readily separable from small individuals, with simple 

 stems, of the Exmoor plant. But E. variabilis does not become 

 much branched when well developed, and the lips of its yellow corolla 

 are subequal as in E. mini7na. in which it is merged by Wettstein. 

 E. exigua Renter and E. pumila Kerner are also somewhat similar, 



o2 



