196 Bibliographical Notices. 



wise admirable book ; what possible connexion the two can have it 

 is difficult to see. It may at once be admitted that the county is 

 not one that lends itself to easy division by the river-basins, now so 

 generally adopted. Where even some modification of this has been 

 attempted in conjunction with other natural features (as in a late 

 ' Flora of Finland ') the result is better than here given. 



Dr. Hind gives the one (and sole"?) reason in its favour — the ease 

 of finding them on any ordinary map. Three of the districts in the 

 east and the other two in the west nearly fall into the E. and W. 

 Suffolk of Mr. H. C. Watson's Topographical Botany, his division of 

 the county being the meridian of Greenwich, not a good one it must 

 be admitted. 



The introductory chapters are very well done, but it is time that 

 under Climate the highest and lowest temperatures if given should 

 be associated with what really affects plant-life, i. e. the aggregate 

 amount of heat in summer and cold in winter, accompanied in the 

 latter with some statistics of the snowfall ; again, early spring tem- 

 peratures are a great factor in plant-life, and especially April varia- 

 tions ; the writer has known Channel-Island plants to survive 25° 

 of frost in February, but succumb to 8° in April &c. 



The author (with his confreres) has consulted or had entrusted to 

 him a large number of local herberia, and, what is better, made 

 good use of them. There seem to be very few improbabilities in the 

 Flora proper ; but under CEaanthe some revision is needed. It may 

 very reasonably be suggested that (E. pimpivelloides should be 

 deleted and its localities in part relegated to (E. Lachenalii and some 

 perhaps to (E. silaifolia ? Sisymbrium irio should surely have been 

 starred as an introduction ; this has probably been accidentally 

 omitted to Sempervivum. Melampyrum sylvaticum can hardly be 

 that species ; probably M. pratense, var. Mans, Druce, is really the 

 plant found. The authority for Galeopsis dubia, Leers, is not good 

 enough to accept it as a Suffolk plant. Henslow and Skepper's 

 record for Lithospermum purpiireo-c&ruleum is not mentioned ; it 

 was, however, hardly likely to have been a native at Bergholt. 



The absences from a flora are always of interest ; but when the 

 county list and that of the adjoining counties is thrown into the 

 tabular form consulting it becomes wearisome and the eye is apt to 

 be misled. If the tabular form must be given, a list added after, of 

 all the wants of the county, with indications of their distribution 

 around, condensed as in Mr. Watson's works, would be of especial 

 use. 



Of the absences (Enanihe crocata may be noted ; this is wanting 

 in Cambridgeshire and a large portion of northern Essex, and, 

 although given as a notable one, is perhaps not so, as on present 

 knowledge it seems absent from Holland, Belgium, and Denmark. 

 Lathyrus montanus, Bernh. (Orobus tuberosus), is a much more 

 remarkable absentee, though wanting in Norfolk ? and Cambridge- 

 shire. 



Potamogeton zosterifolius and P. acutifolius can hardly be really 

 absent, though doubtless they will (if found) be very rare and local. 



