69 



required for identification, than the giving of synonymes for those 

 species which stand under a different name in the 'Forfarshire Flora.' 

 Nor are these two kinds the only superfluities which might better have 

 been omitted. 



Among the defects we reckon the want of regular and sufficiently 

 precise notices relating to the range of altitude for the species. Pro- 

 bably the requisite time and care could not be devoted to actual mea- 

 surement with instruments ; but successive zones might have been 

 adopted, after the example of Wahlenberg, Webb, Watson, and many 

 others ; or, failing the power of generalising thus far, the extension of 

 the species inland from the coast, into the glens, and up the moun- 

 tain acclivities, or to their table-lands, might have been readily indi- 

 cated in the form of individual facts. In some instances the alleged 

 time of flowering must have been boiTowed from the general floras ; 

 at least it has been entered not on the author's own observation with- 

 in the county. '-Various localities are cited on the authority of par- 

 ties whose names we have never before met with among those of 

 botanists ; and being thus quite unprepared to estimate the reliance 

 which may be placed upon their knowledge of plants, we greatly miss 

 the needful intimation whether the author of the Flora had, or had 

 not, seen a specimen of the species from the alleged locality for it. 

 In looking at the species enumerated or commented on under certain 

 genera, such as Bromus and Hieracium, we cannot escape a convic- 

 tion that some grave errors have been committed, perhaps attributable 

 to the disadvantages attendant on a provincial residence, far from 

 good botanical libraries and standard herbaria. It is to be regretted 

 also, that the author should not have had the advantage of studying 

 the second editions of Newman's Ferns and Babington's Manual be- 

 fore printing his own volume. The fifth edition of the ' British 

 Flora,' which is Mr. Gardiner's standard for nomenclature and spe- 

 cies, was scarcely brought up to the existing state of botanical know- 

 ledge in Britain at the date of its publication, in 1842; and since 

 that time no inconsiderable progress has been made in correcting er- 

 rors and adding to knowledge on the subject. We regret, also, to see 

 how very little the author of the 'Forfarshire Flora' has been able to 

 effect towards solving the doubts respecting many of Don's plants and 

 localities. Indeed, several of the most dubious county plants are 

 given without a word of doubt or uncertainty, as if their existence 

 there were a point clearly ascertained and admitted. One of the first 

 species concerning which we sought information from the Flora, was 

 Centaurea Jacea. It is enumerated among the Forfarshire plants 



