851 



produce plants which bear the characters of another species, we may 

 safely enough give our verdict against the specific distinctness. But 

 as many varieties, even very trifling varieties, are repeated from ge- 

 neration to generation, the simple fact of seeds reproducing only the 

 parent form, is by itself an insufl5cient evidence of specijlc distinct- 

 ness in that form. We have above instanced the case of Cerastium 

 nigrescens {Edmondstoii), which the author of the Manual now con- 

 siders a variety of C. latifolium, although this latter species or form 

 has not yet (that we know of) been produced from the seeds of C. 

 nigrescens, nor the C. nigrescens from seeds of latifolium. 



Anthemis anglica (<S)?r.) is stated to have been re-discovered at 

 Sunderland, by Mr. James Backhouse, in 1844. But Mr, W. 

 Wilson's locality of Bearhaven, Ireland, is passed over to Anacyclus 

 radiatus {Lois.), which is not adopted as a true British, or rather Hi- 

 bernian species. 



The Gnaphalium supinum of the Highland mountains was re- 

 named " G. pusillum {Hcenkey^ in the first edition ; the former name 

 being still retained for some supposed other species. In the present 

 edition the old name is resumed for the well-known Scottish plant, 

 and the supposed second species cashiered into something unknown. 

 We have seen Mr. Shuttleworth's Swiss plant, to which that expe- 

 rienced botanist applies the name of G. supinum. It is not quite 

 like any of our Scottish specimens ; but we fail to distinguish it 

 therefrom as a species. Differences of age and luxuriance appear to 

 account sufficiently well for the alleged distinctive characters. 



Our author appears inclined, with other botanists, to degrade Car- 

 duus Forsteri from specific rank on the ground of hybridity. Its 

 extreme scarcity, and non-production of fertile seeds, both favour 

 this view ; but, if so, what are the parent species ? The puzzling Car- 

 duus found at Saffron Walden, by Mr. Gibson, is placed as a variety 

 of C. acaulis, and the synonym of C. dubius (Willd. Flo. Berol.) cited 

 for it. 



But we find our notes on the species running out to a length which 

 suggests the propriety of arresting their course awhile. Should space 

 allow, they may perhaps be resumed and concluded in the next or 

 following No. 



C. 



