. 88 i PITTONIA. 
Type collected by myself in a piece of low moist woodland 
near Austin, Minnesota, 27 June, 1898. Species easily distinct — 
from all other known violets of the group, by the dark-green — 
of its herbage, the peculiar sinuate indentation of the leaf mar- | 
gins, and thirdly, by the attitude of its sepals, these in all forms 
of V. pubescens and scabriuscula radiating away from the base — 
of the capsule in the form of a star. This striking character — 
of those two species may or may not have been adverted to — 
before ; but I recall no mention of it. 
V. opHIOPHILA. Akin to Nurttallii, much larger every way. 
except as to the flowers, these comparatively small: stems — 
weak at base, 5 to 8 inches high, at flowering time exceeded, — 
even in maturity equalled by the extremely long-petioled lower 
leaves: herbage in age wholly glabrous but notably puncticu- 
late, when young very minutely pulverulent or puberulent, this — 
obscure indument appearing on the angles of petioles and pe 
duncles in the form of scattered very short deflexed hairs: — 
largest mature leaves 13 inches long and about as broad, sub- 
cordate-deltoid, tapering very gradually to the long petiole, ob- 
viously cucullate, sinuate-dentate: corollas not seen, all the — 
flowers in the flowering specimens apetalous, succeeded by 2 ~ 
small subglobose pulverulent ovary and capsule, this very few- 
seeded; capsules from earlier and presumably petaliferous 
flowers elongated-oval. 
Steep hillsides at Snake River Landing, eastern Oregon, 30 
May, 1901, W. C. Cusick; erroneously named “ V. atriplicifolia, 
Greene.” 
V. EUCYCLA. V. cyclophylia, Greene, Pitt. iv, 7 (1899), not 
of Gandoger, Fl. Lyon. 53 (1875). This correction is not one 
involying any question of the tenability of specific names issued 
in the Flora Europae of the same author. In the Flore Lyon- 
naise all the new species proposed are diagnosed as fully as in 
the average local floras of botanical authors as they go; and 
that such names as Viola cyclophy//a should be omitted from the 
Kew Index must be attributed either to inexcusable oversight or 
personal prejudice. a 
