1861.] PAVEllSHAM PLANTS. Ill 



•peta is a thousandfold more numerous than C officinalis. The lat- 

 ter grows here and there on banks and on roadsides ; the former, 

 C. Nepeta, covers many acres in several parts of Kent and Essex, 

 "where it is the sole herbage, excluding every other plant except 

 grass. In some places it gives a hue to the fields where it grows, 

 which at a considerable distance look as if full of clover, Cala- 

 mintha Nepeta is gregarious in the counties of Essex and Kent, 

 where we saw it ; and by this habit, as well as by its colour and 

 the smallness of its leaves, it may readily be distinguished from 

 its near relations. In a dried state, or in the herbarium, the 

 three species Calamintha sylvatica, Bromf., C. officinalis, and C. 

 Nepeta, are not very readily distinguished. 



Any botanist accustomed to the comparison of herbarium 

 specimens, and who is well endowed with energy and patience, and 

 could spare the time, might do good service to the science, and 

 might be helpful to the students of our native plants, if he would 

 undertake the imprejudiced examination of the three ill-defined 

 species of Calamintha, C. officinalis, C. Nepeta, and C. sylvatica. 

 He might commence with the largest of the three forms, C. sylva- 

 tica, Bromf., and he should diligently compare with this assumed 

 species the largest forms of C. officinalis which may be in his 

 herbarium. This latter plant pretty well connects the smallest 

 of the three, viz. C. Nepeta, with the largest, C. sylvatica. Pro- 

 bably the examination of a dozen examples of each would decide 

 the question about the specific distinctness or the identity of the 

 three generally received species. If connecting forms be found 

 among the dozen examples of the respective plants or species, of 

 course their specific distinctness must be abandoned ; or if their 

 distinctive characters be so minute as to be observable only by 

 such a close scrutiny of a series of specimens, few botanists, it is 

 to be feared, will have both the time and patience necessary for 

 their satisfactory identification. 



The important question, which of the two practices, viz. the 

 splitting or combining of species, is most conducive to the pro- 

 gress of science, will be answered by the leaders of the two scien- 

 tific sections in conformity with their own peculiar views. Much 

 may be said on both sides, much has been written not always in a 

 courteous way, and it is probable that for the purposes of science, 

 the one mode of procedure may be as beneficial as the other ; 

 but the segregative process will eventually be a cause of much 



