2M 



comparisons and judge for himself, but standing in wholesome 

 dread of editorial curtailment, let it suffice to say, that when thus 

 arranged two defects appear in the first — the leaves are said to 

 be " obtuse " and the aments " lax." Admitting these inaccura- 

 cies, it may still be confidently claimed that Pursh limits, in no 

 uncertain manner, a valid species. Indeed, for the day in which 

 it was written, and considering the brevity which the author seeks 

 to maintain throughout his work, the description is remarkable, 

 not for its " uncertainties and defects," but on the contrary for the 

 exact truthfulness with which minute characters are given, the 

 importance of which was scarcely so fully recognized then as 

 now. Two things may be said in extenuation of the defects men- 

 tioned above : first, that specimens are often found in which the 

 leaves are all obtuse, or the aments loosely flowered ; second, 

 that such inaccuracies are very apt to occur in descriptions of 

 new species, drawn from meagre and often incomplete specimens. 

 Andersson himself described a Salix Wrightii of our southwest- 

 ern States, as having " amentis brevibus, densifloris, C2trvatis," but 

 it now turns out that every one of these supposed characters rep- 

 resent nothing more than the individual peculiarities of the one 

 tree from which Mr. Wright took his specimens. In its normal 

 development 5. Wrightii has rather long, loosely flowered 

 aments, not at all curled up as they happen to be in No. 1877 



■ight. The remaining objections are without significance 

 but since they have been raised ought not to be passed without 

 comment. 5. Uva t^r.s/ was " described from cultivated speci- 

 mens." But an objection of this sort does not stand in the way 

 of Andersson's accepting S. petiolaris. Smith, which was not only 

 described from cultivated specimens, but all that was known at 

 the time of its origin was that it had been " sent to Mr. Crowe by 

 Mr. Dickson as of British growth." It had gotten into Mr. Dick- 

 son's Salicetum nobody knew whence. Nay more, having united 

 S. petiolaris " described from cultivated specimens," and 5. seri- 

 cea, Marshall, Andersson retained the former name for his aggre- 

 gate species, although 5. sericea, described from the indigenous 



W 



petiolaris 



\ 



The second objection \-. mere talk. Salix Uva Ursi is either a 

 good species, capable of verification, or it is not. It does not 



