368 
ON ASTER SALIGNUS. 
feasor was so good as to gather and dry a specimen for me. But . 1 
Z previously received it from Mr. John Sim, the wel -known , ta an, 
„ f U in the year 18... . He alao gathered .tone hank o he 
Tay, where he had known of its existence for some years Not know- 
in, its name, he sent it to me for determination Unfortunately I 
laid the specimen aside and neglected it. In the Trans, of the Ed - 
b „,.gh Bel. Soc. (viii. 359) it is stated that" Professor _Ba fcm «h * « 
(aalicifol 
had found growing in quantity on an island in the Tay ~ *£" 
[near Dunkeld], far from any gardens," at the meetmg of that Society 
Lid Nov. 9th, 1865. Also, in 1864, I received a H^/** 
same plant from Mr. John Brown, a distinguished entomologist oT Cam 
bridge, which he had gathered in the summer of that year, from alarge 
patch of it in Wick*. Fen," in Cambridgeshire. And, finally, rtwas 
also discovered in that same fen, independently, by Mr. * • P. 1 lim , 
M.A., of St. John's College, in August, 1867, and the **"— 
moated by him to the meeting of the British Association at Dundee 
that vear. ,,• i p .i ;,, 
It appears from the above facts that the plant is well established 
Perthshire and in the fens of Cambridgeshire, and we have to detei^ 
mine its claims to be considered as forming a part ot the * lor 
Britain. We learn from Willdenow that it grows on the banks 01 
Elbe and in Hungary. I have a specimen of it from the latter county 
and believe that I possess one from the former, but cannot la mj 
hand upon it. Grenier and Godron record thai it is found near Stras- 
bourg, but unfortunately add that it came originally from Am n- 
This mistake has probably arisen from the confusion between the pU 
once called A. salici/blius in America and the European sum a. - 
named plant of Scholler. De Candolle and Nees von Esenbeck, having 
better information, give our plant as a native of Europe alone ; ai 
appears to be one of the very few species of Aster which are natives 
this continent. , , , w j se 
Its name is involved in much confusion, and we are prooai iy 
in following Willdenow in calling it A. talignns notwithsto , 
the fact that Scholler's name, A. salicifolius, is rather older V' > 
than the similar name given to the American plant by Alton in i 
The difficulty has arisen from very many botanists having eon 
