‘Mr. C.C. Babington on British species of Plumbaginacese. 441 
‘much to be wished that some competent botanist would inform 
‘us what is the Statice which grows “upon the chalkie cliffe going 
from the towne of Margate downe to the sea side, upon the left 
hand,” for that is the only place where Gerard found his plant. 
Dillenius (Ray’s Syn. ed. 3. 202) adds Ramsgate and Harwich 
as stations for it. 
It seems clear that the S. spathulata (Desf.) obtamed “ in ru- 
pibus maritimis Barbariz ad la Calle,” of which Boissier has seen 
an authentic specimen, is quite distinct from the S. spathulata of 
British authors (see DeCand. Prod. xii. 649) ; and after a careful 
examination of our plants I am satisfied that Boissier is correct 
in supposing that two species are included under the S. spathu- 
lata of Hooker, and that they are the S. Dodartii (Gir.) and 
S. occidentalis (Lloyd). I have not seen French specimens of 
the former, but can have no doubt of its identity with our plant 
after comparing it carefully with M. de Girard’s elaborate de- 
scription (Ann. Sc. Nat. ser. 2. xvii. 31), although there are a 
few slight discrepancies. I am possessed of a good specimen of 
the S. occidentalis, through the kindness of M. Lenormand of 
Vire, and find it to accord precisely with the other form called 
S. spathulata by us. As also I am possessed of an ‘authentic 
specimen of the S. binervosa (G: EK. Sm.), which is doubtfully 
referred to S. occidentalis by Boissier, I am enabled to state that 
they are undoubtedly the same plant, although no sterile branches 
are represented on the plate in ‘ Eng. Bot. Suppl.’ As that name 
was published in 1830 it has the priority of the one here adopted, 
which dates only from 1844. The high authority deservedly 
awarded to the ‘ Prodromus,’ which will doubtless cause the use 
of Mr. Lloyd’s name universally on the continent, seems a sufli- 
cient reason for not attempting to replace it by one which we 
could scarcely, under the circumstances of the case, expect to be 
adopted out of Britain. I trust therefore that my friend Mr. 
Smith will excuse my not following his nomenclature in this case. 
5. S. caspica (Willd.); foliis obovato- vel lanceolato-spathulatis in 
petiolum attenuatis, scapis a basi ramosissimis granulato-scabris, 
ramis inferioribus capillaceo-multifidis sterilibus : axillis acutangulis, 
spiculis 2—3-floris in spicas ad ramorum extremitatem confertas 
densissime congestis, calycis limbo 5-lobo denticulis intermediis 
nullis : lobis ovatis cuspidatis denticulatis. 
S. caspica, Willd. En. Berol. i. 336; Bieb. Fl. Tauro-Cauc. iii. 253 ; 
Bert. Fl. Ital. iti. 530; Reich. Iconog. ii. t. 194; DeCand. Prod. 
_ xii. 660. 
S. reticulata, Bieb. Fl. Tauro-Cauc. i. 250; Sm. Eng. Bot. t. 328; 
Eng. Fl. ii. 116. not Linn. 
S. bellidifolia, DeCand. Fl. Fr. iii, 421. 
5. dichotoma, Duby, Bot. Gall. i. 388. not Cavan. 
Scape often simple for about an inch from its base, but after- 
