140 



Farther Remarks on the Second Edition of the ' London Catalogue 

 of British Plants.' 1 By Joseph Sidebotham, Esq. 



Mr. Watson's letter in the last number of the ' Phy tologist ■ (Phy- 

 tol. iii. 83), asking " Is Gentiana acaulis wild in England ?" seems to 

 call for a word of reply from me, inasmuch as it casts a doubt on my 

 former statement. I am sorry that it is not in my power to give any 

 further information on the subject, as Mr. Crozier has been dead 

 some time, and of Mr. Townley I have seen nothing for some years, 

 nor do I know where to find him. There can be no doubt as to the 

 species referred to being the Gentiana acaulis; no one with half an 

 eye could mistake it for any other British gentian ; therefore the only 

 conclusions are, either that Mr. Townley found the plant apparently 

 wild, or that he told a deliberate falsehood ; the latter I cannot be- 

 lieve to be the case, as he could have no motive for practising such a 

 deceit. The only doubt I have is that it had been introduced, as 

 Linaria Cymbalaria was on the rocks in Wales. I am glad Mr. Wat- 

 son has taken up the subject, as no doubt he will tell us what is 

 meant by a naturalized species and one that is imperfectly natural- 

 ized^ and thus explain some of the apparent inconsistencies in the new 

 ' London Catalogue/ so many of which were pointed out when the 

 first edition made its appearance, and of which there was such a 

 meagre attempt at an explanation. 



Mr. W. says that the three other species mentioned in my letter 

 are " certainly introduced, but imperfectly naturalized :" this, of 

 course, calls for his definition of the word naturalized as regards 

 plants. 



Allow me to give my idea of the meaning of the term. When a 

 plant is introduced into another country and establishes itself, so that 

 either by seed or otherwise it propagates, and increases the geogra- 

 phical range of its species, without the interference of man, and does 

 not again disappear in the course of a few years, I should call the 

 plant naturalized. I am much obliged to Mr. Pascoe for his remarks 

 on the subject, especially as regards Oxalis stricta, and quite agree 

 with him as to the difficulty of drawing a line of distinction between 

 the native, naturalized, and imperfectly naturalized species. 



The line which the compilers of the ' London Catalogue ' have 

 drawn appears to have been executed with a very trembling hand, as 

 it is singularly indistinct in some places, and in others exceedingly 

 crooked, and apparently drawn without regard to any rule or guide. 

 By what rule, for instance, should they consider that Cheiranthus 



