693 



from Koch, that the anthers of this genus have only one cell, and per- 

 haps ought to be considered as four or five, divided to the base of 

 their filaments. I have always found them two-celled ; and this 

 structure was, on account of the greater size of the floral organs, still 

 more obvious in specimens of C. alternifolium sent me last spring, in 

 a fresh state. The connective is distinctly visible up to the apex of 

 the anther, separating, though not projecting beyond, the cells ; the 

 valves gape widely after dehiscence ; so that a cross section of the 

 burst anther has nearly the figure of the letter x. I have examined a 

 number of British and some foreign writers, all of whom agree in de- 

 scribing the anthers as two-celled, either generally in the ordinal cha- 

 racters, or specially under the genus or species. Amongst these are 

 Grenier and Godron, who, as they have written since the publication 

 of Koch's work, cannot have been ignorant of his statement, or be sup- 

 posed to have made an opposing one without special examination of 

 the plants, as we might perhaps have fancied that older writers had 

 done. The figures in ' English Botany ' and Curtis's ' Flora Londi- 

 nensis' represent the anther two-celled. Can they be variable in this 

 respect, occasionally imitating what is said to occur normally in Lep- 

 tarrhena ? " 



Myosoiis strigulosa. 



The President read the following note, from Mr. C. C. Babingtou, 

 dated August 21, 1852 : — 



" I see that Mr. Watson has formed an opinion that the plant found 

 by Mr. Davies in Cumberland is Myosotis strigulosa, Reich. ; and I 

 have much pleasure in being able to concur with him. Having au- 

 thentic specimens of the plant (Reich. Fl. Exsic. No. 2051), and 

 access to Reichenbach's own plate of it (Sturm's Deutsch. Fl. 42, 3), 

 I have placed Mr. Davies's specimens (for which I am indebted to 

 him) side by side with them, and find that they agree, with the ex- 

 ception of an error in the latter, pointed out by Reichenbach himself, 

 in his Fl. Excursoria. The plant is considered as a distinct species 

 by Reichenbach, Roth, Van den Bosct, and some others ; but I think 

 that it is only a form of M. palustris, as do Koch, &c." 



Veronica palustris. 



The President said that several inquiries had been made as to a 

 plant mentioned by Messrs. Lloyd and M'Ennes under this name at 

 p. 636. He begged of the authors of the paper in question to give 

 the required information. 



