1862.] THE LONDON FLORA. 143 



These definitions will contain only such technicalities as are in- 

 dispensable ; and they will be as short as is consistent with per- 

 spicuity ; neither elaborate nor obscure^, being rather distinctive 

 than exhaustive, , . - 



Fourthly. The co-operation of all who take an interest in local 

 botany is hereby requested ; and a few hints are here suggested 

 to show the benevolent the kind of information which will be 

 useful. First, special notices of all additions of rare plants, in 

 those districts which have been the subjects of local Floras, e. y. 

 Harefield, Woodford, Faversham, Reigate, etc., viz. the plants 

 which might have been overlooked hitherto, or have been intro- 

 duced since the publication of these catalogues ; and also lists of 

 those species which have disappeared in the course of agricultural 

 progress by improvements of the laud, by enclosures, buildings, 

 and all the physical mutations consequent thereon. 



A series of queries on these subjects, viz. on the loss of cer- 

 tain plants and the gain of others, will appear from time to time 

 in thcThytologist.' Answers to these queries, or any other original 

 information about the location of rare plants, whether oM or new, 

 will be very useful ; and the donors will have the pleasure of con- 

 tributing to the diffusion of useful knowledge, — a service which 

 will be duly appreciated, by all and especially by metropolitan 

 botanists. 



Fifthly. It may be worth while to state that all the phsenoga- 

 mous species spontaneous in the British Isles, will be appended 

 to the metropolitan plants, and briefly described and located. The 

 work consequently will be a catalogue raisonne of the ' Loudon 

 Flora ' and also of the native phsenogamous productions of Great 

 Britain. , , , . ^ , > ; 



Lastly. The aim or object of the proposed work is the following. 

 In the first place it is intended to supply a very urgent want, viz., 

 that of a guide to the botany of the environs of London. jVIany 

 pf the great cities and towns of England, Scotland, and Ireland 

 l?iiaye works exclusively restricted to their spontaneous products. 

 For example, Manchester has two Floral guides; Liverpool three 

 — or she will soon have three ; Bristol, Nottingham, Bath, Chel- 

 tenham, have their Floras. Beigate, a little town, has a brace 

 of books on its botany. The parishes of Harefield, of Woodford, 

 Askern, etc., are celebrated in the botanical literature of Eng- 

 land. Is it not a reproach to the botanists of London, that they 



