376 



ing from different parts one above another, are either horizontal, or 

 vertical, or variously inclined. Sometimes there is but one branch, 

 sometimes there are four, of which two are occasinally opposite. They 

 generally, but not always, bear catkins, and that more abundantly than 

 those of the other two varieties. The general length of the branches 

 is from three to seven inches ; sometimes it is a foot or upwards. 



E. variegatum, as already observed, naturally branches from the 

 base, and, it may be added, from all parts of the stem. Its branches 

 vary in length from one to fifteen inches. I know not whether the 

 following description be worth notice, but it may perhaps illustrate 

 the mode of growth frequently adopted by the plant, and the difficulty 

 of distinguishing between stems and branches. On part of an as- 

 cending root five inches long, growing at the side of a large stone al- 

 most in the water, I found eight distinct ramifications. The four low- 

 est were simple and perfect, the other four broken, or decayed, and 

 branched. The lowest of the latter had three undivided branches j 

 the next, which rose from a branch of the root, had seven branches, 

 two of which had each a branchlet : the next had one divided branch, 

 and the highest had three branches, one of which was divided. Be- 

 sides all these it threw out another root, which bore the remainder of 

 a branched stem. A piece of the stem which formed a continuation 

 of the primary root remained in a decayed state, and also appeared to 

 have been branched. None of the ramifications exceeded a few inches 

 in length. 



Mr. Newman has kindly furnished me with specimens of the Dublin 

 Canal plant, which he considers a variety distinct from that which 

 grows in the Dee. To me they appear identical ; that from Dublin 

 being not more luxuriant than many specimens I have gathered here. 



Some of the remarks now made may appear unimportant, and even 

 puerile ; but in so far as they contain facts, they must possess at least 

 some value, and perhaps there is not too much presumption in the 

 hope that they be the means of leading others to institute similar in- 

 vestigations. To myself the particulars above so minutely detailed 

 are valuable on two accounts ; first, because they have served to con- 

 vince me more of the distinctness of the plants in question as species; 

 and secondly, because I am of opinion that the advance of botanical 

 science, as well as of all other sciences, dejDends more upon the parti- 

 cular inquiries made by individuals than upon the general knowledge 

 acquired without much investigation by the generality. I may be al- 

 lowed to add, that although I have come to a different conclusion from 

 Ml*. Newman's, with regard to the plants I have attempted to describe, 



