20 15RIT1SH EUPHKASl K 



points of Jordan's description and those of Gremli and Kouy : — 

 •* Corolla3 (hand parva^) tubo ealycino fere superante . . . toliis 

 parvis . . . patulis pube minute saipe glandulitVi-a adspersis ovato 

 oblongis basi in petiolum angustatis profunde dentatis, dentibus 

 utrinque siepius 4 lanceolatis, foliorum superiorum breviter acu- 

 niinatis, caule raniosissimo, ramis tenuibus suharcuato- iJatidis.'''' 

 Jord. rugil. p. 181 (1852); Wetts. Mon. p. 193 (1896); Towns. 

 Mon. p. 40 (1897). Gremli describes it as a variety of E. Roaf- 

 Jcoviana : — " Plant less glandular with shorter hairs, branches more 

 spreadhig and leaves smaller." Gremli, Fl. Switz. Engl, ed. p. 308 

 (1889). Kouy describes it as E. Rostkoriana /3. vampestris 

 Chabert : — " Tige plus raide et plus elancee, rameuse plus haut ; 

 bractees plus courtes et moins larges ; glandes plus courtes ; floraison 

 tardine." Kouy, Fl. France, xi. p. 147 (1909). These descriptions, 

 3-s far as they go, are not inconsistent with each other, but contain 

 no definite statement as to the size of the flowers. Jordan only 

 says " corolla; baud parva?," which may mean anything between 

 large and small, but, as Gremli and Kouy associate the plant with 

 E. Rostkoviami, it may be inferred that they consider the flower 

 to be large. 



Wettstein, as he had not seen the plant living, simply quotes 

 Jordan's description, but it may be gathered from his analytical key 

 (Mon. p. 71) and the remarks on p. 194 that he attributes to it the 

 following characters: — Corolla large, 10-15 mm. long; stem branched 

 jabove the middle or above as well as below it ; bracts small ; glandular 

 hairs short. He distinguishes it from E. Rostkoviana by the stem 

 /)f the latter being branched below the middle, by the longer bracts, 

 Mud long glandular hairs. His figure t. xii. f. 1 of an original 

 specimen represents a tiill bare stem branched at the top, and is 

 not unlike a weak specimen of E. Tholei/roniana. It is also similar 

 to an authentic specimen in Herb. Mus, Brit, of which Mr. E. G. 

 Baker has kindly furnished me with a sketch, and this has large 

 flowers. Wettstein quotes E. Tholeyroniana (spelt E. Tholeyriana) 

 as a synonym of E. campestins, and it is to this that the description 

 given above applies. It is evident that he looks upon this as the 

 type, and makes no mention of a small-flowered form. He may 

 not indeed have seen this, or, considering it as weak or undevelojDed, 

 passed it over as unworthy of notice. 



Tlie exsiccata which Wettstein quotes being represented in 

 Herb. C. Bailey, I am able to give an account of the ditterent forms 

 they contain, which are as follows ; — Billot 3671 E. campestris, 

 Chambery 1861, leg. Paris. This has small flowers and is very 

 near to the British forms, except that it is more densely glandular. — 

 Schultz X. 930. E. campestris Chambery 1861, leg. Paris. This 

 sheet contains the large-flowered E. Tholeyroniana, small-flowered 

 E. campestris, E. stricta or E. nemorosa and E. saliaburyensis. — 

 Schvltz n. s. cent. 1, 930 bis E. campestris, Bourges 1869 leg. 

 Kipart contains E. Tholeyroniana and E. stricta. Baenitz No. — 

 E. Tholeyroniana, Arnas 1873, leg. Gandoger. — Gandoyer 404 

 E. Tholeyroniana Arnas 1874. 



Taking all things into consideration, it a])pears to me that the 



