A FEW WORDS ON INDIGENOUS BARBARE®. 327 
at page 46 of the fifth volume of the Old Series of the ‘ Phytolo- 
gist,’ under the name of the “variety intermedia of Buxton, im 
the Manchester Botanical Guide,” as presenting ‘‘ some remark- 
able differences.” This is most likely the variety sylvestris of 
Wahlenberg and Fries, and perhaps also B. intermedia of Boreau 
and B. angustana of Boissier ; for there cannot be much doubt 
that the suggestion of Godron, to the effect that some of the 
supposed species which he has retained, “‘out of respect for the 
distinguished botanists who have published them,” are mere 
varieties, is perfectly accurate. I have not been able to see any 
authenticated examples; but some of my Yorkshire specimens 
agree very well with the descriptions of tiermedia in the ‘ Flore 
du Centre’ and the ‘Flore de la France.’ The three forms 
which have been enumerated all agree in having their stem- 
leaves deeply incised below, and the lateral lobes of their lower 
leaves considerably more fully developed than in B. stricta. But 
B. vulgaris intermedia may be very readily mistaken for this 
latter by a botanist who is not properly acquainted with the true 
plant ; and it is principally for this reason that I have wished to 
draw attention to it. 
B. stricta grows plentifully in several of the low districts of 
Yorkshire (not, so far as has. been ascertained, ascending into 
any of the dales), and has been reported also from Northamp- 
tonshire, Herefordshire, and Dumfriesshire. It affects precisely 
similar situations to B. vulgaris, and there can be no reasonable 
doubt (vide Suppl. Fl. Yorksh.) of its bemg equally “a genuine 
native.’ The specific name stricta was applied by Fries to the 
plant (vide Summ. vol. 1. p. 146) as early as 1819. Nine years 
later, in the editio altera of the ‘Novitize Flore Suecice,’ he 
proposed to change the name to parvifiora, in order to lessen the 
risk of its bemg confounded with the form of vulgaris with rigid 
adpressed pods,* the “ variety intermedia” mentioned above. But 
in the meantime “ stricta” had been adopted by Andrzejovski 
and others, and in the ‘Summa’ Fries has consented to return 
to it again; for, indeed, the principle that it is allowable to 
change names which have been once imposed, even if more cha- 
* “Per plures annos sub B. stricta servavi (Bot. Zeit., 1822), sed cum alia 
adest B. vulgaris stricta, parviflore nomen magis characteristicum visum fuit.”— 
Noyit. Flo. Suec., edit. alt., p. 207. 
