SMITH: STUDIES IN THE GENUS LUPINUS 169. 
ularis species primo aspectu corollis luteis verticillatis L. luteum referens; 
notis ates tamen abunde diversa. Calyce singulari ad sequ. accedens, inter utram- 
que collocanda videtu 
4. L. densiflorus shia floribus in spica densa verticillat . bracteis per- 
sistentibus reflexis, corollam aequa ric calycis ebracteolati Gea sup. emarginato, 
ato 
inf. duplo longiore oie las triden 
; densiflorus Benth. Hort. “ane n. ser. v. I p. 409. “Edwards Bot. Register. t. 
1689. 
Hab. E. California reportavit Douglas. Vidi in Hb. Lindl. 
Habitus et fere characteres omnes praecedentis, sed robustior et villo longiore 
praecepue in partibus sndarseisies obsitus. . . n speciminibus, quae coram habeo, 
a ia, insignis; . . chai etiam aliquantulum ats ita ut 
es hic latere, rete aheiats 
ae, treatment, ire because published in a mono- 
graph, was followed by Torrey and Gray in their Flora of North 
America; but Bentham (Pl. Hartweg. 303. 1848), some fifteen 
years after publishing his species, recorded a Monterey specimen 
thus: 
1692 (53). Lupinus densiflorus, Ag. —Torr. & Gr. Fl. N. Amer. 1, p. 371, excl. 
. Benth.—In pascuis spe Monterey.—Planta Douglasiana quam sub nomine L. 
densiflori olim descripsi est L. Menziesii Ag. —Torr. et Gr. Fl. N. Amer. 1, p. 371, 
quam etiam legit cl. Coulter inter San Miguel et Santa Barbara. 
A few years later, Dr. Torrey (Pac. R. R. Report, 1853-4, 
Botany 4: 81. 1856) gave us the following views: 
Dood dennis DENSIFLORUS, Benth. 2 wars eoerenind hey PI. Ps pohi ig p. 303) 
Agardh has founded his & t, which 
i had described as L. densiflorus. All confusion ahint thee synony: suis may be 
avoided, however, for the two species, L. densiflorus and L. Menziesii, Ag., cannot be 
kept ee Both have white flowers (Agardh wrongly attributes yellow corollas 
to his L. Menziesii, but = — eine the sppenrane' in dried specimens is cei? cor- 
rect in thi 
of Agardh’s L. densiflorus are weideuty not available pny a eens Metiastions. "De. 
Bigelow’s specimens, however, correspond in this respect with L. Menziesii. 
In Watson’s review (Proc. Amer. Acad. 8: 538. 1873) the 
species is treated thus: 
. L. pENsiFLorRUs, Benth. Much resembling the last [L. microcarpus], but more 
sparingly villous with shorter hairs; bracts much shorter than the calyx, which is 
smooth or short-pubescent, the upper lip often entire; petals yellow, or a 
white or pink.—From the Sacramento Valley southward. It includes L. 
ziesii, Agh.; and L. succulentus, Koch, is probably but a garden form. 
None of the writers quoted above may be credited with having 
done much field work in California, and it may be well to note here 
a mere gleaning from the writings of a Californian, Dr. Kellogg 
