1864. | Botany and Vegetable Physiology. 667 
of a patch of Heath in Tewksbury, Massachusetts ; adding the remark, 
that “it may have been introduced, unlikely as it seems; or we may 
have to rank this Heath with Scolopendrium officinarum, Subularia 
aquatica, and Marsilea quadrifolia, as species of the Old World so 
sparingly represented in the New, that they are known only at single 
stations—perhaps late-lingerers rather than new-comers.” And when, 
in a subsequent volume of the ‘American Journal of Science and 
Arts,’ Mr. Rand, after exploring the locality, gave a detailed account 
of the case, and of the probabilities that the plant might be truly 
native, we added a note to say that the probability very much depended 
upon the confirmation of the Newfoundland habitat. As to that we 
had been verbally informed, in January, 1839, by the late David Don, 
that he possessed specimens of Calluna collected in Newfoundland by 
an explorer of that island. Our friend, Mr. C. J. Sprague, however, 
after having in vain endeavoured to find in any publication of Pylaie’s 
any mention of this Heath in Newfoundland, and having ascertained 
that no specimen was extant in Pylaie’s herbarium, or elsewhere that 
he could trace, naturally took a sceptical view, and in the ‘ Proceed- 
ings of the Boston Natural History Society’ for February and for 
May, 1862, he argued plausibly, from negative evidence, against the 
idea that any native Heath had ever been found in Newfoundland or 
on the American continent. It is with much interest, therefore, that 
we read the following announcement by Dr. Hewett C. Watson: 
*‘ Specimens of Calluna vulgaris from Newfoundland have very recently 
come into my hands, under circumstances which seem to warrant its 
reception henceforth as a true native of that island. At the late sale 
of the Linnean Society’s collections in London, in November, 1863, 
I bought a parcel of specimens, which was endorsed outside, ‘A 
Collection of Dried Plants from Newfoundland, collected by 
— McCormack, Esq., and presented to Mr. David Don.’ The spe- 
cimens were old, and greatly damaged by insects. Apparently they 
had been left in the rough, as originally received from the collector ; 
being in mingled layers between a scanty supply of paper, and almost 
all of them unlabelled. Among these specimens were two flowerless 
branches of the true Calluna vulgaris, about six inches long, quite 
identical with the common Heath of our British moors. Fortunately, 
a label did accompany these two specimens, which runs thus: ‘ Head 
of St. Mary’s Bay.—Trepassey Bay, also very abundant.—S.E. of 
Newfoundland, considerable tracks of it.’ The name ‘ Hrica vulgaris’ 
has been added on the label in a different handwriting. AIl the other 
species in the parcel (or nearly all) have been recorded from New- 
foundland, so that there appeared no cause for doubt respecting the 
Calluna itself. And, moreover, the collector had seemingly some idea 
that an especial interest would attach to the Calluna, since in this 
instance he gave its special locality, and also added two other localities 
on the label. But there is very likely some mistake in the name of 
the donor to Mr. Don. It is believed by Sir William Hooker that 
he was the same Mr. W. HE. Cormack whose name is frequently cited 
for Newfoundland plants in the ‘ Flora Boreali-Americana.’ This 
gentleman was a merchant in Newfoundland, to which he made several 
