I860.] REVIEWS. 249 



List of Devon Flowering Plants and Ferns is a very unassuming 

 publication : it is of moderate size, ninety-four crown octavo pages, 

 very correctly printed, with legible bold type, on good paper. 



As a guide to the plants of this beautiful county, it is quite 

 satisfactory. The localities and authorities for the rariores are 

 numerous, and most of them recent. No botanist who intends 

 to visit this county should go unprovided with this list. 



When a second edition is required, the author will probably 

 have the kindness to get a small map engraved, with the chief 

 botanical stations prominently marked. Another desideratum is 

 an index. Though a small book, an index to the Orders and 

 Genera would render it more useful, and references could be more 

 readily made. 



British botanists who make the distribution of plants a part 

 of their botanical researches, may profitably avail themselves of 

 Mr. Kavenshaw's labours. To the botanists of Devon it is indis- 

 pensable ; and it bears all the appearance of a trust-worthy guide to 

 the planta rariores of this beautiful county ; and it will doubtless 

 have a good circulation in the southern counties of England. 



Dublin Natural History Society. (Reports of, from p. 123 to 



p. 214.) 



A paper by Mr. Andrews, on the specific distinctness of Hy- 

 menophyllum tunbridgense and H. Wilsoni, by some assumed to 

 be identical with H. unilaterale, occupies above twenty-four pages 

 of this number of the Society's Reports. The controversy, as 

 our readers have doubtless heard long ago, is, or has been, if it 

 be now ended, between Dr. Harvey, who defends Mr. Bentham's 

 views that these two forms constitute but one species, and Mr. 

 Andrews, who oppugns this opinion. 



We have room only for the following extract of a letter from 

 Sir W. J. Hooker to the author of this paper. 



. . . " It is true the fronds are very similar, but I find such characters 

 in the involucres, — and they afford the most tangible characters throughout 

 the genus, — that I cannot fancy the one passing into the other — the textui'e 

 of tlie involucres, the form of the valves always firmer, thicker, and more 

 gibbous (almost semi-globose). In H. fTllsoni the du'ection of the invo- 

 lucre is different. In M. tunbridgense it lies in the same plane with the 



N. S, VOL. IV, 2 K 



