Mr. C. C. Babington on some species o/Epilobiuni. 239 



of the stole, together with the stem which has flowered, and 

 from them spring the plants of the following year. 



We may now proceed to the consideration of the species 

 which are usually included under the name of E. tetragonum. 

 Fries appears to have been the first botanist who attempted their 

 separation by a reference to their development ; but that emi- 

 nent writer has been unfortunate in the specimens distributed 

 in illustration of the plants, as will be seen hereafter. Applying 

 those characters to our native plants, it is found that there are 

 at least two species included under the name of E. tetragonum. 

 One of these will retain that name, and another is the E. obscu- 

 rum of Schrcber. The former has the caespitose habit, and pro- 

 duces sessile or subsessile rosettes after the time of flowering : 

 the latter is originally crespitose, its primary stem being erect 

 from the root and branching from its lowest axils, but these 

 lateral branches are prostrate and rooting to some extent ; and 

 in the place of the rosettes of the former it has long rooting 

 stoles. Specimens of this latter plant {E. obscurum) are what I 

 have been accustomed to call E. virgatum whilst totally in igno- 

 rance of the E. obscurum. I hope to be able to show that no 

 great error was committed in doing so. For it is my belief that 

 Fries himself made the same mistake, if indeed it is a mistake, 

 and that his E. virgatum exists as a distinct plant from E. ob- 

 scurum. lie has called various plants by the name of E. vir- 

 gatum at different times. The plant first issued (Herb. Norm, 

 ii. 46) as E. virgatum is very nearly related to E. tetragonum, 

 although perhaps not exactly that species ; for it may be the 

 E. Lamyi (F. Schultz), as Koch supposed it to be. These spe- 

 cimens do not accord with the description given in the ' Novitise' 

 (ed. 2. p. 113) ; but a trust in the accuracy of Fries caused them 

 to be accepted as typical of his plant. The original source of 

 the name is the ' Fl. Hallandica^ (p. 66), and the description to 

 be found there may help us in determining what was the plant 

 really intended by its author. As the book is perhaps not 

 very common, the characters are extracted. They are as fol- 

 lows : — 



*' E. virgatum; foliis lanceolatis sessilibus dentatis opacis 

 caule tetragono pubescentibus, stigmate indiviso." 



To this are added the following remarks : — 



" Verum videtur Chamcenerion obscurum, Schreb. ; sed E. ob- 

 scurum omnium fere auctorum ad prsecedens [_E. tetragonum'] 

 foliis altei-nis, ex. gr. Fl. Dan. t. 1267, pertinet. Radix sub- 

 repens. Caulis e basi tereti adscendenti erectus, 2— 4-pedalis, 

 vage ramosus, 4-angulus, pubescens, deorsum glabratus. Folia 

 distantia, opposita alternave, sessilia, lanceolata, subcoriacea, 

 remote dentata, plus minus pubescentia, constanter opaca. La- 



