ON THE SYNONYMY OF VARIOUS CONIFERS, 207 
We do not quote these parallel passages as reflecting on Mr. Gordon 
for having used Lewis and Clarke’s words, If he had verified them 
we should not inquire too curiously where he got them; but we do 
object to his adopting them without verification. Now, some of the 
above items no one in this country has had an opportunity of verifying, 
for they refer to old trees which no living botanist, so far as we know, 
seen; and others of the items cannot have been verified, for they 
are not consistent with fact. In A. Pattoniana the leaves are any- 
thing but triangular, —they are long linear (see fig. 1) ; the pulvini are 
not triangular pedestals of spongy bark,— they are semicircular; the 
younger growth of the bark is not of а reddish-brown colour, but of а 
pale fawn colour. 
hese discrepancies show how dangerous it is for a naturalist to 
assume anything—still more to assume two individuals to be the same 
species, without full materials for examination ; and most of all, after 
having done so, to mix up together their descriptions taken from books, 
and then to turn them out, not certainly with the positive assertion, 
but at least with the tacit implication, that either he or some previous 
author had actually observed all these details in the species under which 
he has placed them 
We have not time here to inquire what Abies trigona really is. 
Were we to hazard a guess, we should say that it comes пеагег to a 
jumble of two species, one of which was Wellingtonia gigantea, than 
anything else. The name Abies trigona (which was given to the species, 
not by Lewis aud Clarke, but by Rafinesque (Atlantic Journal, 119)), is 
coupled with the English name “gigantic fir," which Mr. Gordon in 
his Supplement transmutes at his own hand—at least, he gives no 
authority for it—into the more romantic title of the “ giant fir of 
California.”  Rafinesque's description is this : —'* Bark and branches 
scaly ; lasts densely scattered, petiolated, trigone, acuminate, and stiff. 
Stated to be the largest tree. in North America: some reaching 300 
feet high, 200 without branches, and 42 feetround.  Petioles trigone 
also; leaves three-fourths of an inch long, one-tenth wide." But, 
although there is some resemblance to Wellingtonia in most of the 
points noticed, we are not going to fall into Mr. Gordon's error and 
pronounce any opinion upon ata. 
Mr. Gordon gives Picea Californica of Carriére as another траву 
of А. Pattoniana. It may be so; the description may answer for it ; 
Carriére, like Endlicher and most Continental authors, uses the sibs 
Abies and Picea in а contrary sense to what we are accustomed to do 
in this country. We have not, however. seen Carriére’s specimens or 
plants, and pcm do t consider ourselves qualified to give an 
ini , if itis so, M. Carriére’s name is (dated May, 
1855) therefore беа and must give way to that of Abies Pattoniana. 
