211 



That miicli cont'usioii has resulted from this uncertainty as to the type 

 feature of Cusouta Americana L. is evidenced by a study of the various 

 large herbaria. 



Thus the C. graveolens H. B. K. (Nov. Gen. et Sp. 3. p. 122. 1818) cau 

 scarcely be a synonym of C. Americana I., if the description there given is 

 at all accurate. 



In the collections at the Kew gardens, 21809 and 21810, Dr. A. Glazier, 

 Brazil, chiefly from Province of Goyaz, 1896, are neither the C. Americana 

 of Linnreus and Engelmaun, nor yet are they Sloane's plant. Herb. 

 Guatemalens, 59. Jan.. 1864, Gust. Bernoulli, and Herb. Guatemalens, 

 1916, Bernoulli and Cairo, with Her)). Mus. Paris 3353, Region de Orizaba, 

 M. Bourgeau, 1865-i86(;. all mounted on same sheet and labeled C. Ameri- 

 cana are C. congesta. 



Ex Plantis Guatemalensibus, quas edidit John Donnell Smith. No. 855, 

 C. Americana L. forma floribus majusculis, Coban, Dept. Alta Verapaz. 

 Altitude 4.300 feet, January, 1886. Legit H. von Tuerckheim, is neither C. 

 Americana nor a variety of it; the long slender, acuminate corolla lobes 

 evidently throwing it in quite a different section of the genus. 



Such a list might be greatly extended, but enough has been indicated 

 to show into what inextricable confusion we have come because of this 

 absence of a recognized type form for this species. 



Personally I am not attempting any decision in the matter; I am 

 simply reciting facts coming under my observation. If Sloane's Jamaica 

 plant is the type of C. Americana L., then the form iu the Linnpean col- 

 lections, so labeled by Linuanis and reatfirmed by our last specialist in the 

 group can not be C. Americana, for it is not the same plant. If the form 

 in the Linntean collection be taken as the type, what is the name of 

 Sloane's plant? How, also cau it be assumed that any other plant than 

 Sloane's was in mind iu view of the references of Gronovius and Linnaeus 

 to it specifically, references continued as late as 1797, when in Liune Sp. 

 PI. Willdenow, edn. IV., vol. 1, page 702, we find at the conclusion of 

 the characterization, "Habitat in VirginiiTi fructibus et at littora maris in 

 herbis Jamaicre (v. s.)"? Gmeliu, also in his Sys. Veg., 1796, vol. 1, p. 

 285, refers to Sloane's plant, as does also Vitman in his Summa Plant, 

 1790, vol. 1, p. 340. 



How the riddle shall be read in view of these facts is left to adepts 

 in nomenclature. It is entirely beyond my powers. 



