192 
W. in the case of this grass is remarkable. Babington, when he 
first published his ‘‘ Flora of Bath,” in 1833, impressed by the 
fact of its abundance in Cambridgeshire, seems to have taken for 
granted that it was equally abundant about Bath. He says of 
it—‘‘ Not uncomm6n on waste ground.” He discovered his mis- 
take, however, before issuing his supplement in 1839, in which 
he speaks of it as “‘rare,” giving only a single habitat—“ By the 
river-side at Twerton bridge.” And it isa fact that neither the 
late Mr. Broome nor I, he having explored the botany of the Bath 
neighbourhood for many more years than myself, ever found a 
single specimen. The above given habitat, therefore, is the only 
one, so far as I am aware, at present known for it. It is plenti- 
ful in the churchyard and neighbourhood of Bitton Church, where 
it was found by our vice-president, an excellent botanist, who will 
doubtless have something more to say about it, and from which 
locality I obtained specimens. But Bitton is in Gloucestershire 
and not Somerset, and hardly perhaps ought to be considered as 
within the Bath district. At the same time it is an interesting fact 
in connexion with the subject of the ranges of British plants, and 
I may have occasion to return to it. 
I would next call your attention to the case of the Annual 
Dog’s Mercury (Mercurialis annua). Of course all our plants, no 
less than our animals, came originally from the continent, with 
the exception of a few, such as the Mimulus and Gnothera, which 
have been imported from America. Assuming this, the case of 
the Mercurialis annua is curious, as being just the reverse of that 
of the Hordeum murale. The latter, as mentioned above, is 
ubiquitous in the eastern counties, but very rare about Bath. The 
former, the Dog’s Mercury, is said by Smith in his “English Flora” 
to be not common, whereas here in Bath it is a troublesome weed 
in gardens, and to be found on all waste grounds. In fact, in the 
case of this plant east and west are quite disregarded. More 
might be said upon the subject of these two plants, as also upon 
other plants, remarkable in respect of their locality, but I should 
