364 



partly in view. I have not, hovrever, seen his specimens. His salt 

 marsh localities, doubtless, belong to OE. Lachenalii ; but this may 

 now be easily cleared up. 



I have delayed to speak of the fruit of the three species, thinking it 

 better to present their peculiarities iu juxta-position, as I think it will 

 then clearly appear that from this character also, the species can be 

 accurately discriminated as distinct from each other. 



Fruit cylindrical, sharply ribbed, of nearly equal breadth through- 

 out, the base callous aud incrassated ; styles nearly straight, di- 

 vergent only at the apex, arching at the extremities, as long as 

 the diachenium. — (E. pimpinelloides. 

 Fruit oblong, contracted below, deeply furrowed, the base callous 

 but not enlarged ; styles widely divergent from the very base, 

 and longer than the diachenium. — CE. peucedani folia. 

 Fruit small, inversely conical, with thin prominent ribs, compressed, 

 always narrow at the base but not callous ; styles divergent, 

 rather incrassated, only half the length of the diachenium. — CE. 

 Lachenalii. 

 In all three species the diachenium is crowned with the erect 

 pointed persistent calyx. The length of the styles in (E. pimpinelloi- 

 des and CE. peucedanifolia gives the fruit in those species a peculiar 

 bristly appearance, a character scarcely noticeable in CE. Lachenalii ; 

 and while in pimpinelloides the diachenia are rigidly stiff and erect, 

 closely pressed together, in Lachenalii they are comparatively lax, and 

 by no means closely in contact. Still, the flowers in the umbellules of 

 the latter are so numerous, that pressing in some degree upon each 

 other, the fruit is affected thereby, and thus the diachenium is often 

 narrow and elliptical. It is constantly smaller than in either of the 

 preceding species. The sketches of the finit will show their distin- 

 guishing characters, so that they cannot be mistaken. 



I trust the British botanist will now be able satisfactorily to identify 

 the three species of CEnanthe I have here examined, so that there can 

 be no further dispute or misunderstanding on the subject. I have 

 tested them in all their details, aud their distinctness surely cannot be 

 doubted. There is certainly a general similarity in the foliage of all, 

 but the radical leaves of CE. Lachenalii are very different to those of 

 CE. pimpinelloides. I rely, however, on these three points to prove 

 my case : popularly the time of flowering, so different in each ; prac- 

 tically the shape of the roots, which is always available ; and on the 

 principles of botanical science, the form of the fruit ; — all now ascer- 

 tained facts of distinctiveness, which combined together, must carry 

 conviction to every mind open to receive the truth. 



