NORTH AMERICAN RANUNCULI. 61 



E. OBTUsiuscuLus, Eaf. in Desf. Jouni. Bot. i. 2"25 (1808) 

 teste A. P. DC. Syst. i. 302 : E. laxicauUs, Darby, S. Flora, 

 201 (1855) : R. amhigens, S. AVats. Bibliogr. InJ. 16 (1878). 

 Aiiierieaii aulliors of the last twelve years who have lielped to 

 give currency to tbe name R amhigens Avill find, upon examin- 

 inw the above references (both omitted from the Index), tliat 

 as a species distinct from R. Flamrmda, it had names enough 

 before 1878. R. amhigens is quite clearly antedated by 

 R. laxicauUs, Darby, judging from Darby's description ; and 

 that, very probably yields to tlie R. Rohini, Eaf. (1817) ;, but 

 again, there can be no doubt that Eafinesque's still earlier 

 R. obhisiusculus is the oldest name for the species. The 

 specific character, though brief, is sufiicient when the habitat 



marshes of New Jersey" is taken into consideration. 

 Certainly no other' Ranunculus Avith lanceolate leaves was 

 ever found in New Jersey but this. And the name ohiusins- 

 cuhis is manifestly taken from the little abrupt blunt tip of 

 the lanceolate acuminate leaves. 



R. OYALis, Eaf. in Desf. Journ. Bot. ii. 268 (1814) ; DC. 

 Syst. i. 302 (1818), Prodr. i. 43 ; Graham, Edinb. Phil. 

 Journ. 1829, p. ISS ; Don. Gen. Syst. 1. 33 (1831) ; Hook. Fl. 

 Bor.-Am. i. 12. t. 6. fig. B. (1833); Walpers, Eep. i. 42 



(1842) ; Lawson, Eevis. Canad. Ean. 52 (1884) : R. rhow- 

 hoideus, Goldie, Edinb. Phil. Journ. vi. 329. t. 11. fig. 1 

 (1822) ; Eichardson, App. Franklin Journ. 13 (1823) ; Hook. 

 1- c; T. & G. Fl. X. Am. i. 18 (1838) ; Gray, Man. ed. i. 9 

 (1848), and Proc. Am. Acad. xxi. 371 (1886) ; Wats., Gray^^ 

 Man. ed. 6. 42 (1890) : R. hrevicaulis, Hook. Fl. i. 13. t. 7. 

 fig. A. (1833) ; T. & G. Fl. i. 18. 



The above bibliography is only quoted, in the main, from 

 Professor Lawson, whose admirable Eevision of Canadmn 

 Raunnculacefe, although doubtless ranking first among all 

 botanical monographs hitherto published in North America 

 in point of careful and thorough elaboration directed by 

 supereminent scholarship, has been strangely ignored b}^ 

 American authors who have subsequently handled the subject 



