110 
Glorw of Buchinghanshire. 
By James BrIvTrEen. 
With aview of keeping before the public my intention of 
publishing at some future period a complete Flora of Buckingham- 
shire, and of at the same time recording the progress made and 
assistance received since my former list was printed, I have pre- 
pared the following catalogue, which may be taken as a fair 
estimate of our knowledge of the botany of the county at the 
present time. 
Five names which appeared in my earlier list are here omitted. 
Ranunculus heterophyllus and Fumaria Borei, for which I am re- 
sponsible, I withdraw for the present, as, although I am not 
certain they do not occur with us, they require further investi- 
gation. Ranunculus Baudotii was originally recorded with a 
query (see Phytologist, vi. 528, N.S.), andis probably not a Bucks 
plant. Pyrola media, of which Ihave before expressed my doubts, 
was certainly entered by mistake in Rai? Synopsis, ed. iii, in the 
New Botanists’ Guide and elsewhere, P. minor being the plant 
intended. I have examined living and dried specimens of P. 
media from the north of England, and compared them with speci- 
mens from most of the Buckinghamshire localities recorded for 
the plant, and find the latter to be in every case P. minor. A 
similar comparison of a dried Buckinghamshire specimen labelled 
Orchis fusca (purpurea), with those in the British herbarium at 
the British Museum, and living plants from Kent, convinces me 
that this, too, was an error. The list might probably be yet 
further reduced by the withdrawal of many plants, which were 
either erroneously recorded or are now extinct, such as Stsym- 
brium Irio, Viola canina, Dianthus deltoides, Erodium moschatum, 
Lathyrus Aphaca, Sanguisorba officinalis, Comarum palustre, Mespilus 
germanica, Tordylium maximum, Seseli Iibanotis (Hudson’s station, 
‘inter S, Alban’s et Stoney Stratford” may be in Bucks), /iJago 
