LINNJEAN SPECIES OF CASSINIACER. 238 
Canada some French plants, and which, by mistake, were added to his 
true Canadian collections, and described as such by Linneus. Torrey 
and Gray mention among their “obscure species of Senecio,” two 
French plants, which are recorded as Canadian on Kalm’s authority, 
Senecio Canadensis, Linn. ! Sp. Pl. ed. i. p. 869. n. 18, which is nothing 
but Senecio artemisiefolius, Pers., De Cand.! Prod. iv. p. 348, n. 39, 
a plant which is a native of Spain and France, and is especially abun- 
dant near Paris. It is easily recognized at the first glance. — Linnzeus 
— places it near to Senecio abrotanifolius, Linn. (Sp. Pl. 
. i. p. 869), as does also De Candolle in the * Prodromus." 
Cineraria Canadensis, Linn. (Sp. Pl. ed. ii. p. 1944, n. 10) — Senecio 
Kalmii, Nutt. (Torr. and Gray, ‘Flora of North America,’ ii. p. 446), 
is nothing else than a form of Senecio Cineraria, De Cand.! (Prod. vi. 
p. 355. n. 74) which is so abundant a plant in the Mediterranean 
area. Linnæus compared his supposed Canadian plant with this 
European species. 
Both plants must be struck from the flora of North America, but it 
will be better to retain for the plants the names by which they are 
now known; for it would be as absurd to name a plant ** Canadensis” 
which never grew in Canada, as to give the designation Composite to 
a family in which there are more than a hundred species with a single- 
flowered capitulum, and which consequently could never be descri 
as having a composite structure. 
I will, at a future time, give the result of my examination of the 
Cassiniacee, in the Linnean Herbarium, but at present I will add only 
another case of error from mistaken habitat. 
Senecio Ep Linn. ! (Sp. Pl. ed. i. p. 871) is Senecio lyratus, 
Linn. fil. (Suppl. p. 369), and consequently a plant from the Cape of 
Good Hope. I i imagine how this confusion came about. De 
Candolle (Prod. vi. p. 345) did not know what to do with the species, 
and referred it with a query to S. Æthensis, Jan. 
\ 
