Feb, 1903.] BOTANICAL SOCIETY OF EDINBUKGH 281 



the present time and could serve as a standard for compari- 

 sons in future. The north-east counties have been among 

 the less deficient, owing to the labours of local botanists 

 from Forfar to Moray, and to the renown of Clova and 

 Braemar as homes of alpine species. Yet in even this 

 comparatively well-known district I have found it im- 

 possible from published records to gain a true conception 

 of the actual distribution of species, A few localities have 

 been well explored, but from many parishes there is not a 

 species on record, nor are there sufficient indications of 

 relative abundance, of relations to man, and of other points 

 that should be noted. My experience of the need, even 

 in these counties, of widely extended field work with the 

 new queries kept consistently in view, has shown me the 

 value of such work, and the great need of it in all the 

 Scottish counties, though necessarily in some far more than 

 in others. One would hardly anticipate that in 1883, 

 when the second edition of " Topographical Botany " was 

 published, Peebles should have been one of the two 

 counties of Great Britain (out of 112 in all) from which 

 few of the commonest plants could be certified. Though 

 a good many additions have been made to the records for 

 Peebles since then, it is still one of the most poorly 

 represented of all the British counties. In the " Flora 

 of Edinburgh," by Balfour and Sadler, and in that by 

 Sonntag, " Linton " is occasionally given as a locality, 

 I suppose this means West Linton in Peebles. ' Pentland 

 Hills " are also not infrequent for species, some of which 

 must certainly exist in Peebles ; but without fuller in- 

 formation this habitat does not allow of certainty as to 

 the county to which it belongs. Selkirk is also less often 

 noted in the lists than it certainly should be ; and Ptox- 

 burgh is omitted at times when one would expect to find 

 it included, Haddington and Linlithgow both show frequent 

 gaps in the local records, in not a few cases these relating 

 to species that can scarcely be absent from the counties. 

 Edinburgh is one of the richest of all the counties of 

 Scotland in number of species recorded from it, but its 

 critical genera and species {e.g. Rcmunculus acris, Fumaria 

 caprcolata, agg., Rubus, Rosa, Hicracium, Bujyhrasia) require 

 revision. It is unlikely that many additions will be made 



TRAN8. BOT. SOC. EDIX. VOL. XXH. T 



