85 



rection could have been made, without still repeating the error in 

 1848. And I add the dates of the works from which the extracts are 

 taken, to show that some of the counter statements have been long 

 before the botanical public. The Viola hirta is mentioned also in 

 Don's list of Forfarshire plants, but I have not a copy at hand. 



1777. Light/oofs Flora Scotica. — "In the county of Dumfries 

 very frequent, but rare in the Lothians, and the eastern side of Scot- 

 land." 



1807. Thompson's Catalogue of Berwick Plants. — " New Mill 

 Banks." 



1824. Woodf orders Catalogue of Edinburgh Plants. — Localities 

 are here compiled from other sources, in the counties of Edinburgh, 

 Haddington and Fife. 



1847. Watson 's Cybele Britannica. — In this work it is stated that 

 Viola hirta occurs in three of the six Scottish Provinces, namely, in 

 the West Lowlands, East Lowlands, East Highlands ; and that it ex- 

 tends northwards into Forfarshire. 



1848. Gardiner's Flora of Forfarshire. — Three localities are indi- 

 cated in the county of Forfar, under the head of Viola hirta. 



Thus, including Mr. Kerr's added county of Kincardine, this violet 

 has been recorded from seven of the Scottish counties. 



Hewett C. Watson. 



Thames Ditton, 4th March, 1848. 



Reply to Mr. Newman's Queries on the Equisetum fluviatile of the 

 Linnean Herbarium. By Hewett C. Watson, Esq. 



Mr. Newman has addressed to me in the pages of the 'Phytologist' 

 two queries respecting the Equisetum fluviatile of the Linnean her- 

 barium, and has desired to have answers thereto through the same 

 medium (see Phytol. iii. 77). 



First, Mr. Newman intimates that he had sent me specimens of the 

 plant described and figured by himself under name of Equisetum flu- 

 viatile, and inquires whether I consider them to belong to the same 

 species as the specimens so named in the Linnean herbarium ? — I 

 have compared the specimens from Mr. Newman with those in the 

 Linnean herbarium, and do not find the slightest reason to doubt their 

 being "individuals of one and the same species." 



Second, Mr. Newman inquires whether I detect any discrepancy 



