1 Ki oy rTKici'T,.utiA M;f.r,r.fT.\. 



it would be prudent to examine if U. neglecta was not the plant meant. 

 An ordinary botanipt, acquainted with U. vulgaris, and working 

 merely by the old text-books, if he met with U. neghcia would be 

 puzzled how to name his find, and mif!;ht venture on the name U. 

 intermedia. I sugf^est this as an explanation for several of the records 

 for that plant which I have from time to time noticed from improbable 

 quaiters, and of which there is so far no satisfactory confirmation. 

 One instance comes to my memory as I write. In the supplement to 

 Dr. Dickinson's " Flora of Liverpool," Mr. Shillito records U. inter- 

 media from Thornton Marsh, Cheshire, a very unlikely place for that 

 species, but likely enough for U. neglecta. 



The plant that I now have to mention is the presumed novelty I 

 spoke of as the inciting cause of my troubling the " Journal " with 

 the foregoing notes. It is the U. Bremii of Heer. The name will 

 be familiar to those of our botanists who may, whilst confining them- 

 selves to British plants, have been accustomed to use Prof. Babington's 

 " Manual," from the fact that he has prognosticated its nativity with 

 us in the various editions from ii. to vi., and has accompanied the 

 assertion with a brief diagnosis. The specimens upon which I venture 

 to think this prediction is realised are some that were sent (I believe 

 by Dr. Gordon) to the late Sir "W. J. Hooker, and are preserved 

 in the Herbarium at Kew. The ticket is as follows : — " Utri- 



cularia ; Moss of Inshoch, Nairnshire. I\Ir. Jas. B. Brechan, 



16 Aug., 33." They are fastened on to the same sheet with 

 Continental U. intermedia, but of course have no connection with that 

 plant. What struck me on seeing these specimens was that they 

 differed from minor in being more robust ; my experience of that 

 species being that luxuriance is shown by running to length, the 

 individual retaining throughout its delicate fairy-like appearance ; that 

 the lower lip, though somewhat spoiled in drying, had not the tninor 

 shape ; and that there was a difference in spur development from minor. 

 I accordingly carefully compared the specimens with some German 

 examples of U. Bremii, from lleichenbach fil. and A. Braun, and 

 they seemed to me to agree in all respects. Mr. Baker also kindly 

 looked at the series, and to his eye likewise the whole appeared 

 identical. This is just how the matter rests at present, and I bring 

 it forward simply that it may induce some botanist favourably 

 situated to search in the district whence the specimens were derived, 

 and that others with an additional prospect of it rewarding their 

 search may bear the plant in mind. 



It will, perhaps, come to the recollection of some that there has 

 in the past been confusion about the Nairnshire district Utricularia. 

 Though I cannot turn to the passage, I remember that Mr. "Watson 

 has special!}' referred to this difference of opinion in his writings. Dr. 

 Gordon, in his " Collections for a Flora of Moray " (1839), gives the 

 Inshoch station to U. minor, and of a plant from Loch Spynie, which is 

 entered under the name U. intermedia, he says, "If there be a specific 

 difference betw^een this and U. miiior, the Spynie plant upon closer 

 inspection will probably be found to belong to the latter species." I 

 hold that this discord adds strength to my claim for U. Bremii — that 

 it may have been the stumbling-block. 



The original and full description of U. Bremii will be found in 



