396 The Botanical Gazette. 
ward microphylla than Alabamensis. They are as good mi- 
crophylla as many specimens so named by good authority. It 
does not, however, matter very much from my point of view, 
as I consider the two so-called species mere Yorms of one, 
That they do run into each other through almost inseparable 
gradations there can be little question, and Prof. Underwood 
himself appears to doubt their being distinct. 
It is certainly impossible at times to separate specimens 
satisfactorily, and their variations have not only been made 
the basis for several untenable species but the two extreme 
forms have even been put into separate genera. 
Dr. Hooker, however, in Species Filicum expressed the 
opinion that we might ‘‘conceive of C. microphylla having 
reached its extreme northern limits in the C. Alabamensis of 
the southern states.” I coincide with this view and believe 
that we should write: 
Chetlanthes microphylla Swz. 
8. var. Alabamensis (Buckley). (C. Alabamensts Kze.) 
Medford, Mass. 
