238 CYNOGLOSSUM SYLVATICUM. [AugUSt, 



lowed. Hull, as above stated, correctly describes C. sylvaticum 

 as a perennial ; and among the local botanists, Dr. Sibthorp and 

 tbe reverend author of ' Flora Bedfordiensis' deserve the praise of 

 having recorded the result of their own experience, as well as the 

 observations, opinions, and facts published by others. But these 

 two learned and reverend botanists do not exactly coincide in 

 their statements about these plants. The Oxford professor, and 

 originator of the famous ' Flora Grseca/ one of the most sump- 

 tuous of botanical works, states that C. sylvaticum is perennial, 

 and that C. officinale is biennial. All the ancient botanists, from 

 Gerard and Parkinson to the illustrious B,ay, describe both forms 

 as of equal duration. Hudson, who first systematically employed 

 signs to indicate duration, enters the sign of a perennial after his 

 description of the var. yS, or virens, our C. sylvaticum, whence it 

 may be inferred that his opinion was that they were both peren- 

 nials. 



It may be stated as a fact that tiU now, with the single excep- 

 tion of Hull, the biennial duration of C. sylvaticum has been un- 

 questioned during the last sixty years. 



These historical and introductory notices of the diversities of 

 opinion about the duration of C. sylvaticum, will prepare the 

 reader for the following statement. I most unhesitatingly as- 

 sert that the duration of C. sylvaticum is longer than biennial ; 

 and I am as positive in maintaining this, as I am in affirming 

 another disputed fact, namely, that it is a true native of Scotland. 

 I now offer the following as evidence of the verity of what I have 

 above stated. 



First, as " seeing is believing," or, in plainer terms^ because 

 few are disposed to place quite as much reliance on another's ob- 

 servations as on their own, I sent some examples of this species to 

 the editor of the ' Phytologist^ sometime during last May, pro- 

 bably about the end of the month. These specimens consisted of 

 the roots and the flowering stems of last summer (1859) ; and 

 near the base of the dead stems of the previous year, vigorous 

 shoots, several inches long, which would have produced flowering 

 stems for this year, were well developed. If this be not the 

 mark of a perennial species, I would humbly beg to ask, what is 

 the distinction between biennial and perennial duration ? 



How could this error have arisen ? — for a mistake it most un- 

 doubtedly is. It is easy to conjecture how the error has spread. 



