2o6' . Dr. SmithV OhfervatiotJs on 



PediceUi teretes, purpurei, lucidi, glaberrimi. Calyx tubulofo-cam- 

 panulatus rcfinofo-pnnflatus, glaberrimus, dentibus ciliatis, 

 quandoque dorlo hiriutis. Grdla magna, purpurea, glabra, refi- 

 nofo-puuftata. Stamina longitudine varia. 



This is a very difl-in6l fpecies oi Mentha, often cultivated in gardens, 

 where it is lometimes called Heart-mint, or Red-Mint, and found 

 wild in different parts of the kingdom; yet it has never been well 

 underflood by late writers. Linnxus appears not to have known it, 

 for it is not in his herbarium, and he confounds its fynonyms with 

 his M.fativa. Whether Hudfon comprehended this fpecies under 

 ■his rubra^ I know no means of determining. It appears clearly to be 

 what Ray and Dilknius intended in the places above quoted, both 

 from what they have faid upon the fubje6f, and the fpecimens in 

 all the old herbariums. Thofe in the colledtion of Sherard have a 

 number of quotations of the old authors in his hand-writing. Some 

 other hand has added the fynonym of Riviiius, Mentha vcrticillata. 

 Probably this may have been done by Dillenius, for he has firft in- 

 ferted the Mint by that name in the Synopfn ; but I very much doubt 

 its propriety. A loofe ticket, in the hand of Samuel Dale I believe, 

 has the fynonym of C. Bauhin, and " I have found this in three 

 feveral places." On another loofe ticket is written with a jiencil, 

 in a hand I am unacquainted with, " Odor MenthEe hortenfis. 

 Hackney river at the ferry houfe. Sept. init." Hence we learn 

 that the conjefture of Mr. Edward Forfter, of the M.fativa of Lin- 

 naeus being the mint Dillenius had from the Hackney river, fee 

 T-ngU B't. 448, however probable, is not exaftly true. Dillenius 

 indeed ns well as R;iy confounded M.fativa with the mint of the 

 Hackney river; but I fufpe6l they did fo from the report of Bobart 

 and his brother, without comparing fpecimens. My reafons for 



this 



