50 PITTONIA. 



r 



too limited to admit of our describing either of tliem. Even 

 the one ilhistration of this difference Avhich I have to offer 

 will be understood only by the very few field botanists who 

 are conversant with the native plants both of the Californian 

 coast, and' of the less traveled and phytograi:>lncally very 

 dissimilar regions of the remote interior along the bases of 

 the Hocky Mountains. If, in the course of an autumnal 

 twiligl^t stroll in some Californian field, I should perceive a 

 certain familiar pungent smell— neither wholly disagreeable 

 nor altogether pleasant^I should thereby recognize infallibly, 

 without attempting to pierce the dusk by eyesight, tlie 

 presence of a certain species of tarweed, Ilemizonia corym- 

 hosa, one of our common Madioid composites. If the same 

 odor should greet my sense after nightfall away upon the 

 plains of the Missouri, the Platte or the Eio Grande, I should 

 know that my foot had bruised the herbage of some PoJanisia 

 or Cleome. It is another case of close analogy in sensible 

 qualities between plants not at all related. But, on the other 

 hand, while such genera as Cleome and Polanisia are closely 

 allied to the Crucifer?e, there is i^robably no species of either 

 genus which may not be recognized as a capparid and not a 

 crucif er, by the smell or taste. And this difference of sensible 

 quality appears to hold good with such j^lants as, morphologi- 

 cally considered, seem intermediate between the two families. 

 NuttalVs genus Sianleya is undoubtedly a crucifer ; yet Pursh, 

 dealing with dried specimens Avas so deceived by its resem- 

 blance to the capparids that he publislied it as a Clcomc.^ 

 Nuttall and his fellow travelers, apparently tempted by the 

 odor and flavor of the fresh herbage, cooked and ate it ; but 

 with after effects again indicative of decidedly capparideous 

 therapeutic qualities, such as the aspect of the plant Avould 

 have given warning of, but which the smell and taste seemed 

 suSicientlv to contradict.^ 



1 Cleome tinnata^ Pnrsll. Fl. ii. 739 



■^ See Nntt. Gen. ii. 72. 



«f<v 



