62 TRANSACTIONS OF THE [Sess. ixxrv. 
able, but Melander in the “ Botaniska Notiser,” 175, 1887, 
reports a U. litoralis= U. ochroleuwca x intermedia. 
I have good specimens of the Swedish plant, gathered by 
R. Hartmann himself, “e loco classico,’ sent me by Dr. O. 
Nordstedt. 
Others I would refer here are from: Isle of Harris, O. 
Hebrides, 7, 1889, Mrs. Dunean. 
No. 5. U. minor, Linn., “ Sp. PL,” Ist ed. (1753), 18.—Dr. 
Williams, /.c.,records that Zabel has recently (1907) described 
a land-form of U. minor. This I found on Woking Heath, 
Surrey, July 17, 1880. Hundreds of plants were growing 
among moss, and in full flower. 
A very delicate form gathered by Mr. A. Croall, on 
Flinders Moss, near Stirling, 9/7/1880, has the flowers 
fully expanded, and excellently dried. The flower-stalks 
are only 2 inches high, and the whole plant with very 
finely divided and small leaves. Recorded from thirty-two 
Scottish counties, forty-four English, and thirty-nine Irish. 
No. 6. U. Bremii, Heer ex Kolliker, “ V.P.G. Zurich,” 142, 
1839, and Hegetschweiler and Heer, “ Fl. d. Schweitz,” 984, 
1846. U. pulchella, C. B. Lehm ex Koch, “Syn. Fl. Germ. 
et Helv.,” 2. 666,1844. U. minor, L., y Bremii, Druce, “ List 
Brit. Pl.,” p. 55, sub. No. 1978 (1908). 
This plant was first noticed in British books by Mr. 
Webb! (as Bremii), where he gives a very interesting 
account of its history. But there is no doubt the plant 
was first gathered by the Rev. J. B. Brichan of Banchory, 
who found it flowering abundantly in the moss of Inshoch, 
Nairnshire, 16th August 1833.2 He there speaks of having 
received specimens named intermedia from the Loch of 
Spynie in Morayshire, and he refers to the “Collectiana 
for a Flora of Moray,” p. 2, 1839, by the Rev. G. Gordon :— 
“Observed to flower annually since 1830 in some holes 
whence turf seems to have been cut. If there be a specific 
ditterence between this and U. minor, the Spynie plant, 
upon closer inspection, will probably be found to belong to 
the latter species.” Hence the doubt which species to refer 
it to: and it seems now there can be no doubt the plant 
was U. Bremii. 
1 “Journ. of Botany,” 1876, p. 142. 
2 See “ Phytologist,” i. p. 259, 1842, 
